This description seems very British and I’m not quite clear on some of it. For instance, I had no idea what a strop is. Urban Dictionary defines it as sulking, being angry, or being in a bad mood.
Some of the other things seem like they would only make sense with more cultural context, specifically the emphasis on bantering and making witty remarks.
I wouldn’t say that this guy has great social skills, given his getting drunk and stealing food, slamming doors and walking around naked, and so forth. Pretty much the opposite, in fact.
As to why he got kicked out, I guess people finally got tired of the way he acted, or this group of people was less tolerant of it.
By social skills I meant what people with Aspergers lack naturally. Magnetism/charisma, etc. It is hard to get that across in a textual description. People with poor social skills here know not to get drunk and wander around naked, but can’t charm the pants off a pretty girl. The point of the story is that having charisma is in itself not a get out of jail free card that is sometimes described here.
Sorry for the british-ness. It is hard to talk about social situations without thinking in my native idiom. I’ll try and translate it tomorrow.
By social skills I meant what people with Aspergers lack naturally. Magnetism/charisma, etc. It is hard to get that across in a textual description. People with poor social skills here know not to get drunk and wander around naked, but can’t charm the pants off a pretty girl.
You’re conflating a few different things here. There’s seduction ability, which is its own unique set of skills (it’s very possible to be good at seduction but poor at social skills; some of the PUA gurus fall in this category). There’s the ability to pick up social nuances in real-time, which is what people with Aspergers tend to learn slower than others (though no one has this “naturally”; it has to be learned through experience). There’s knowledge of specific rules, like “don’t wander around naked”. And charisma or magnetism is essentially confidence and acting ability. These skillsets are all independent: you can be good at some and poor at others.
The point of the story is that having charisma is in itself not a get out of jail free card that is sometimes described here.
Well, of course not. For instance, if you punch someone in the face, they’ll get upset regardless of your social skills in other situations. What this guy did was similar (though perhaps less extreme).
It is hard to talk about social situations without thinking in my native idiom.
Understood, and thanks for writing that story; it was really interesting. The whole British way of thinking is foreign to this clueless American, and I’m curious about it. (I’m also confused by the suggestion that being Facebook friends is a measure of intimacy.)
You’re conflating a few different things here. There’s seduction ability, which is its own unique set of skills (it’s very possible to be good at seduction but poor at social skills; some of the PUA gurus fall in this category). There’s the ability to pick up social nuances in real-time, which is what people with Aspergers tend to learn slower than others (though no one has this “naturally”; it has to be learned through experience). There’s knowledge of specific rules, like “don’t wander around naked”. And charisma or magnetism is essentially confidence and acting ability. These skillsets are all independent: you can be good at some and poor at others.
Interesting, I wouldn’t have said that they were as independent as you make out. I’d say it is unusual to be confidant with good acting ability and not be able to read social nuances (how do you know how you should act?). And confidance is definately part of the PUA skillset. Apart from that I’d agree, there are different levels of skill.
When sober he was fairly good at everything. He would steer the conversations where he wanted, generally organise the flat to his liking and not do anything stupid like going around naked. If you looked at our interactions as a group, he would have appeared the Alpha.
His excuse for wandering around naked was that he thought he was alone and that he should have the right to go into the kitchen naked if he wanted to. I.e. he tried to brazen it out. That might give you some idea of his attitude, what he expected to get away with and that he had probably gotten away with it in the past.
Apart from the lack of common sense (when very drunk), I think his main problem was underestimating people or at least not being able to read them. He was too reliant on his feeling of being the Alpha to realise his position was tenuous. No one was relying upon the flat as their main social group, so no one cared about him being Alpha of that group.
Well, of course not. For instance, if you punch someone in the face, they’ll get upset regardless of your social skills in other situations. What this guy did was similar (though perhaps less extreme).
You might get upset but still not be able to do anything against the Guy. See Highschool.
(I’m also confused by the suggestion that being Facebook friends is a measure of intimacy.)
People use Facebook in a myriad of different ways. Some people friend everyone they come across, which means their friends lists gives little information. Mine is to keep an eye on the doings of people I care about. People I don’t care about just add noise. So mine is more informative than most. Mr S. is very promiscuous with over 700 friends, I’m not sure about the other two.
I just assumed that for the sake of brevity he covered the other aspects under “etc”. I would add in “intuitive aptitude for Machiavellian social politics”.
This description seems very British and I’m not quite clear on some of it. For instance, I had no idea what a strop is. Urban Dictionary defines it as sulking, being angry, or being in a bad mood.
Some of the other things seem like they would only make sense with more cultural context, specifically the emphasis on bantering and making witty remarks.
I wouldn’t say that this guy has great social skills, given his getting drunk and stealing food, slamming doors and walking around naked, and so forth. Pretty much the opposite, in fact.
As to why he got kicked out, I guess people finally got tired of the way he acted, or this group of people was less tolerant of it.
By social skills I meant what people with Aspergers lack naturally. Magnetism/charisma, etc. It is hard to get that across in a textual description. People with poor social skills here know not to get drunk and wander around naked, but can’t charm the pants off a pretty girl. The point of the story is that having charisma is in itself not a get out of jail free card that is sometimes described here.
Sorry for the british-ness. It is hard to talk about social situations without thinking in my native idiom. I’ll try and translate it tomorrow.
You’re conflating a few different things here. There’s seduction ability, which is its own unique set of skills (it’s very possible to be good at seduction but poor at social skills; some of the PUA gurus fall in this category). There’s the ability to pick up social nuances in real-time, which is what people with Aspergers tend to learn slower than others (though no one has this “naturally”; it has to be learned through experience). There’s knowledge of specific rules, like “don’t wander around naked”. And charisma or magnetism is essentially confidence and acting ability. These skillsets are all independent: you can be good at some and poor at others.
Well, of course not. For instance, if you punch someone in the face, they’ll get upset regardless of your social skills in other situations. What this guy did was similar (though perhaps less extreme).
Understood, and thanks for writing that story; it was really interesting. The whole British way of thinking is foreign to this clueless American, and I’m curious about it. (I’m also confused by the suggestion that being Facebook friends is a measure of intimacy.)
Interesting, I wouldn’t have said that they were as independent as you make out. I’d say it is unusual to be confidant with good acting ability and not be able to read social nuances (how do you know how you should act?). And confidance is definately part of the PUA skillset. Apart from that I’d agree, there are different levels of skill.
When sober he was fairly good at everything. He would steer the conversations where he wanted, generally organise the flat to his liking and not do anything stupid like going around naked. If you looked at our interactions as a group, he would have appeared the Alpha.
His excuse for wandering around naked was that he thought he was alone and that he should have the right to go into the kitchen naked if he wanted to. I.e. he tried to brazen it out. That might give you some idea of his attitude, what he expected to get away with and that he had probably gotten away with it in the past.
Apart from the lack of common sense (when very drunk), I think his main problem was underestimating people or at least not being able to read them. He was too reliant on his feeling of being the Alpha to realise his position was tenuous. No one was relying upon the flat as their main social group, so no one cared about him being Alpha of that group.
You might get upset but still not be able to do anything against the Guy. See Highschool.
People use Facebook in a myriad of different ways. Some people friend everyone they come across, which means their friends lists gives little information. Mine is to keep an eye on the doings of people I care about. People I don’t care about just add noise. So mine is more informative than most. Mr S. is very promiscuous with over 700 friends, I’m not sure about the other two.
I just assumed that for the sake of brevity he covered the other aspects under “etc”. I would add in “intuitive aptitude for Machiavellian social politics”.