WreckerChick Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Here's something that would help to think about. Do you enjoy going to parties/bars//public gatherings? Sure, intellectual depth isn't a pre-requisite for social dominance, but do you enjoy the energy socially dominant people give off? I feel like the most common human brain is designed to have a neurological reward system when interest/attention is garnered from these high ranked individuals. Think of Mean Girls with Regina (head-honcho) complimenting others, how much they cared. How do aces relate to this? No, I don't like going to parties/bars/public gatherings. No, I do not enjoy the energy socially dominant people give off. I don't think I possess the common human brain that is designed to feel rewarded when popular people talk to me. I don't appreciate the concept of hierarchy. No one is better than me, just like I'm not better than anyone else. If a popular person were to sincerely compliment me on something tangible, like my accomplishments in school or my abilities as a soldier, I would feel the same as if anyone else complimented me. If a popular person were to compliment me on something abstract that seemed specifically geared towards enciting this reward system you talk about, like the way I wear my hair or the clothes I have on, I actually get pissed off and go on the defensive. I don't need their approval of my appearance and how dare they presume to be in a position to make that judgement! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Cimmerian Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 After reading through all these posts I sense 2 main things: 1. For whatever reason, many asexual people don't seem to rank themselves highly in the social "hierarchy". Which is strange to me. Think about all those guys that mock up the courage to talk to a beautiful girl, and are so obviously nervous externally and turn her off. It's as if asexual people (unlike aspergers) can very well be socially astute, and maintain this zen mind frame from not being nervous/reactive to sexuality. The irony to me is it's apparent on some level that asexuals would have an advantage socially (from not being phased by dominance), yet here you guys sound like you don't think highly of/enjoy social hierarchy/games. Which is alien to me, as I view it as a beautiful thing. It's evolution but instead of being the strongest monkey, it's whoever has the strongest mind frame. Which brings me to #2... 2. I think my writing has given this misunderstood image of social dominance as some jock/neanderthal-esque character, which is simply not the case. Jesus was very socially dominant, so was Ghandi, and many other kind hearted celebrities. In fact, being a jerk is reactive, as it is the desire to inflict negativity on someone else. It makes someone less socially dominant. Think of gay men, who woman deeply wish were straight, and enjoy their energy because they can be the life of the party! They aren't jerks, but they are very confident, and aren't constantly worried about what others think - akin to a jerk. (3) Here's something that would help to think about. Do you enjoy going to parties/bars//public gatherings? Sure, intellectual depth isn't a pre-requisite for social dominance, but do you enjoy the energy socially dominant people give off? I feel like the most common human brain is designed to have a neurological reward system when interest/attention is garnered from these high ranked individuals. Think of Mean Girls with Regina (head-honcho) complimenting others, how much they cared. How do aces relate to this? 1. I think you're mistaking sexuality with general attraction to another person, there's no reason we're going to be calmer approaching someone we find aesthetically or otherwise attractive than someone who reacts to her "sexual" status or whatnot. And it sounds like the majority of us are uninterested in playing games with people to gain status, so why would we want to approach someone others consider high in the social hierarchy? It does nothing for us.... Also, we ranked ourselves "low" on the social hierarchy? I can't speak for the others but I never felt I was really in the hierarchy to begin with... Social hierarchy is a joke to me. There's nothing "fun" about it for me and other than the possibility of a connection it might have in say, women going for more successful men, I see nothing that is has to do with mind frames. I often feel that people at the top of a social hierarchy are simply the best at manipulating people who agree to play the "social hierarchy game" but enjoy the "worshiped" feeling. 2. The examples you listed originally you said to use a "high" social dominant such as the captain of the football team... i.e. a jock. I don't think most of the answers took it to be neanderthal exactly but the characteristics that often came with an individual (i.e. football captain) who had "social dominance" but didn't necessarily have anything substantial to back it up with outside of simply having a position that some people envy. As for your examples here.... just... what? o.o I have nothing to say about the Jesus listing... seems out of place, really. I don't see kind hearted celebrities as "socially dominant", and Ghandi, while certainly admired and influential for some, I might also say the same of. 3. Erm, you're on the internet with a lot of introverts... in general the many of us that are introverts are probably not going to enjoy the large, loud gatherings you mentioned. I certainly don't enjoy those situations in general, if I like the "energy" of the area it's because of the atmosphere itself not the "dominant" people you're saying would be there. Also, a question for you, why do you assume socially dominant people are going to be at these kind of situations in large numbers? So... you think we misunderstood by using a high-school "jerk" but then you offer us another high-school jerk to ask how we'd feel if complimented by said jerk? Okay... I don't relate to that at all then. I feel like the status you keep seeing as socially dominant is false status it's unearned, it's made from abusing power, or simply from people who demand attention not those who are given it naturally, or who attract it based on who they really are (personality, air about them...) I think everything would be a lot easier if people thought about value like that. Of course it wouldn't make sense if they did because it is actually less common for a dominant person to behave like this. But as I've said before, these negative traits people are identifying in dominant people are actually reactive/submissive. In other words, the traits you don't like are actually the submissive traits (reacting/getting mad/too much self-worth). Which leaves me to wonder if you dislike that, do you like the dominant traits (kindness/altruism, not phased by popularity nor actively seeking it/treats everyone equally)? But again, I must emphasize that they are also well liked by the popular group, but they don't care for that. They value every equally regardless of status. Would this be a sexual thing for you? Where are you finding this division between "dominant" and "submissive" traits? o.o I've quite perplexed by your separation between the two so far... it's seems as though you are seeing "dominant" as synonymous with an ideal of a social butterfly, and I have no clue why you're equating negative traits as "submissive" when I often find those in "socially dominant" individuals (not to say they are without positive traits). Quote Link to post Share on other sites
WreckerChick Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 And it sounds like the majority of us are uninterested in playing games with people to gain status, so why would we want to approach someone others consider high in the social hierarchy? It does nothing for us.... Also, we ranked ourselves "low" on the social hierarchy? I can't speak for the others but I never felt I was really in the hierarchy to begin with... Social hierarchy is a joke to me. There's nothing "fun" about it for me and other than the possibility of a connection it might have in say, women going for more successful men, I see nothing that is has to do with mind frames. I often feel that people at the top of a social hierarchy are simply the best at manipulating people who agree to play the "social hierarchy game" but enjoy the "worshiped" feeling. Exactly Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.