The Difference Between Nerds, Geeks and Dorks

"One of the most frightening things about your true nerd, for many people, is not that he's socially inept- because everybody's been there- but rather his complete lack of embarassment about it."
~Neal Stephenson

Labels are a sign of a mentally weak mind, but as a society, we're simply brainwashed into thinking it's an acceptable process. While I'd like to present something here that would help to make people think twice about the usage of labels upon others, I realize the futility of such an act. Instead, I'm going to address a pet peeve of mine- the constant incorrect use of these terms, often interchangeably- and that is a crime of the language!

What we're going to tackle are the three labels known as:

• Nerd
• Geek
• Dork

Everyone's certainly heard and/or used these terms (shame on you and I) but there's actually a trend in today's world of claiming one of these titles for yourself. Let's find out more about what the actual truth of each one is, so you know what to call yourself- if you so wish to claim one of these roles in society.

The nerd is a book-smart, socially inept type of person. Nerds are never capable of understanding or caring about how to properly fit into society in a "normal" manner, and this is most apparent in their inability to dress themselves in a societally proper way. You've certainly seen the stereotype picture of the nerd- dark, broken glass held together by tape, pocket protector in shirt and so-on, so forth. As with all stereotypes, many nerds buck some of these trends, but ultimately to be a nerd there must be some level of social ineptitude- a disconnect with how the rest of us act within society. However, at some level within us all, we have a trace of nerd- so don't get too high and mighty in picking on nerds... you are one yourself, in some way or another.

A geek is anyone who is passionate about a particular topic (or multiple topics). You can be a computer geek (like me), a Lost TV show geek (like me), a Prince geek (like me)... if it exists, and you are beyond passionate about it to the point your knowledge puts you into territory that other people don't normally hold, you're a geek. Unlike nerds, though, geeks do not have the element of social ineptitude. The most stylish dresser amongst us may in fact be a geek concerning something they hold interest in- you won't identify a geek by looks, but rather by passionate discussion or actions.

Lastly, we have the label of dork. This is commonly misused as another term for nerd, but that is incorrect. Anyone, at any time, can be a dork- but only for a limited time. You cannot be a dork permanently- it is a temporary state. One does or says something dorky, then reverts back to their normal state of being. Therefore, it's incorrect to say "he's such a dork"- it's only correct to say "he's being such a dork".

Now you have a better idea of how these labels are properly applied, so if you wish to use them you'll have a correct approach to the matter. Again, if you wish to be a wise and enlightened person, you'll learn that people always tend to break out of predefined labels- often in ways that will surprise you- so you'll try to learn to break you societal brainwashing and not use such terms. But, in the meantime, if you so choose you now know how to correctly use these terms properly- and if you're so inclined, you can choose one for yourself.

I only bring this up because my inner nerd demanded it. You see, I'm an English language geek, so I really had to get this off my chest. I guess in the end I'm just being a dork for bringing this up!

Where's the U.S. Spirit of Creativity Gone?

We're in the middle of a very vicious political season here in the United States the outcome of which will have extreme consequences for not only the country but the entire world. This being the case, it's really important to keep up to date on what's being discussed- this is one election that we can't let slide by without caring about.

The current topic of the day as everyone in the country should know is the "energy crisis"- gas is up to around $4.00 per gallon based on where you live and this is putting a major crunch on everyone's budget. Unlike Europe, which has a sound mass transit system, in the United States you really need a car to function unless you're in Chicago or New York, for instance. Trying to equate the prices between the U.S. and Europe simply doesn't make sense- it's apples to oranges.

The current solution rallying cry led by the conservative right wing is "drill for more oil, now, off the coasts (and everywhere else possible)". And the majority of the country has signed on to the spin- nearly 70 percent want offshore drilling to take place, even though it has been shown that in the best of cases, the earliest we'd get any of the oil in use is at least five years from now, probably eight to ten. Yet, the price may dip some in the immediate short term just for announcing our plan to drill.

So our nation, concerned over paying the difference between $3.00 and $4.00, is willing to continue down the path of oil reliance that is destroying us. Time out- I did not say a single word about global warming or climate change. That's a debate for another time, but global warming is not necessary to bring up in order to say that being an oil-based society is destroying us. It is a fact how much pollution our cars, factories and other oil-burning endeavors emit. Pollution that is causing cancers, shortening life spans, and destroying the environment (again- not discussing the notion of global warming, just the obvious damage pollution does to nature). Why is it that a large majority of the people in this nation are so willing to continue down a damaging path, rather than strive for something better- even if it will be a challenge?

How is it that in the 60's, our president could turn to America and tell us we'd land on the moon by the end of the decade- an impossible task- and we banded together and accomplished it? Yet now Bush aims for a manned flight to Mars or Gore pushes for us to eliminate our dependence on oil in ten years, and not only are they lambasted with vitriol, hatred and name-calling- but the general mood of the people is "eh, we can't do that."

This is why America is quickly slipping from its singular world-power status- given another decade or two or this creative death, China, India and other rapidly progressing nations will easily overtake our superiority. Not military superiority, but the most important superiority of all- the burning spirit and passion to excel in all things that we had just a few decades ago.

How about you? Where's your desire gone? Are you hurting matters, by looking to continue to harm us and the environment to save a dollar on gas per gallon? Or are you helping by standing up and saying "There's no reason we can't be a green-powered nation in ten years!" or "We have to be the first to land men on Mars- it wouldn't be right if America didn't do it first!" Do you truly believe in ten years not one of our think-tanks or brilliant scientists could create a valid alternative energy source that's affordable and easily mass produced for our vehicles to run on? Of course they can- but it's not about spirit and ingenuity currently, or doing the right thing, it's about money and only money. The oil business will not let us kill it off. Do you mean to tell me you feel right letting it stay this way for weak excuses? "Well, even if we change here in the United States, we can't stop them from using oil in China." So what? If we lead the way, and the way is better- others WILL follow, period.

We used to have the strongest spirit. Now we're simply wallowing in a divisive swamp of lethargy and sloth, as we ruin our present and our kids' futures.

You may not like him or be voting for him- but as an American, we should ALL be embracing Obama's campaign slogan...

"Yes, we can!"

Because we always used to be able to in the past. Why not now- and the future?

Gaming- The Maligned Hobby

"It is in games that many men discover their paradise."
~Robert Lynd

Consider all of the potential activities each individual can engage in for entertainment. Imagine the millions of different types of fun, each fitting into different categories, aligning themselves with the unique personalities of each individual. Now ask yourself, if someone was talking about your friend's personal choice of hobby and said, "Joe? Oh, he'll grow out of that hobby." What is the first activity you think of in which Joe might be participating, that his age or maturity should cause him to cease enjoying at some arbitrary point?

Gaming- particularly computer gaming- is the only mainstream hobby where people (even some gamers themselves) feel others should arbitrarily stop doing due to age. Even in today's technologically advanced society, there's still the misconception that games are for kids, and when one "matures", they will "grow out" of gaming and move on to more "appropriate" hobbies.

Where does this flawed mindset stem from?

In large part, it's a relic of the stereotypes of the past. While most people in touch with modern trends are aware of the diversity of gamers (we come in all shapes, ages and sizes), there is a large portion of the population still relying on 20 year old stereotypes of gamers being nerdy, male, socially inept booksmart types living in mom's basement, dreaming of their first chance to touch a real woman someday!

Are all gamers socially inept virgins incapable of adult thought and activity? Of course not. As with all stereotypes, they are terribly flawed generalizations that false more often than true.

Gaming is an intellectual and creative hobby that stimulates the brain, sharpens reaction times, improves vocabulary and reading skills and can be (based on the game type) highly social in nature. But that is entirely not what the stereotype says! After all, Joe is going to "grow out" of gaming, right? How come no one goes around asking those in their 60's when they're going to "grow out" of watching television? After all, it's a hobby that was born and came into its own as that generation grew into adulthood! Should they not have moved on to more age-appropriate activities? Should they not "grow out" of watching television and go outdoors and do something "better" with their time? Obviously, that is a silly notion, just as it is when applied to gamers and gaming.

Anti-gamers will have you believe gaming is a mindless, thoughtless activity that causes anti-social behavior and once you're out of your teens, you should be "grown up" enough to move on to "better" things.

I ask anti-gamers: define "better". Is gardening "better"? Customizing cars? Riding a bike?

Yes, someone will surely say... if you're riding a bike, you're getting exercise, you're outdoors, it's healthier for you!

Who has determined these things are "better"? No one has the authority to judge what activities are better than others. Who says being outdoors is "better" than being indoors? You can provide just as many studies indicating you're healthiest indoors as you can outdoors. This is simply an artifact of old-fashioned thinking, as those who had no indoor activities are now parents and grandparents. When they were kids, they had to go outdoors. So of course, to these types, it seems unhealthy that people spend so much free time indoors in front of the TV or computer screen playing games.

No one hobby is capable of being labeled "better" than any other hobby. Each person chooses a hobby based on what fits them best- customizing cars might be "manly" to some... but to others, it is a colossal waste of money and energy. Judging another person's hobby to be better or worse for them is an improper activity.

The bad news for the anti-gamer crowd- the folks constantly seeking to purge, penalize or otherwise ruin the gaming industry- is that the average age of gamers continues to rise each year. Currently, the average age is around 34. Notice that is not a teenage year? And if the average is 34- that means people are gaming well into their 60's! This trend is only going to continue- on a more rapid pace. Those who have grown up as gamers, such as myself, will continue to game until we die. And with the introduction of more powerful gaming consoles, as well as casual-gamer friendly systems like the Wii, more and more people will jump into gaming, only to be hooked for life. The average gamer age is likely to be 40 or 45 within a scant few years.

Eventually the stereotypes of yesteryear will fade away, and no one in their right mind would insinuate that someone will "grow out" of gaming, just as they wouldn't think of presuming they know of another hobby to be "superior" to gaming. Gaming will not be considered any different than jogging, going sailing, reading books, mixed martial arts, or watching television. In fact, the truth that gaming is an active, rather than passive, activity, will become common knowledge.

For now, though, gamers are stuck with the burden of putting up with outdated and inaccurate stereotypes. Those who continue to perpetuate the fallacies of these stereotypes, keep in mind- the gamers you're maligning aren't kids. We're everyone you know- younger and older, male and female... and we're tired of your smug judgment. You enjoy your hobbies- we enjoy ours. Keep your opinions on our fun-time to yourself, because...

We're proud to be known as gamers.