How many "nerds" are actually autistic

Post Reply New Topic

Growing up I was the opposite of a nerd but that was simply because I didn't give a [] about society, school or pretty much anything for that matter. I didn't know I was interested in science back then but I used to like talking to the nerds in the school about making bombs and drugs and electronic devices and all that kinda stuff because my friends weren't really interested in the actual science behind all this stuff. Later down the line I realized I was interested in science and now I've turned into a complete nerd. Honestly I share ALL the traits of nerds. I'm wondering how many nerds are actually on the autism spectrum and this is why they are so predisposed to being interested in science, computers, technology, maths and other fields that people get labelled nerds for being interested in. I'm amazed by how "nerds" get this stigma attached to them as kids. When they get older they become scientists and become well respected but on their way to becoming scientists they get nothing but disrespect. They usually have terrible social skills which is probably the main reason behind the lack of respect they recieve.

This nerd was.

The argument has been made that autism is a result of the interaction of a constellation of genes, not just one. This seems likely. Probably many nerdly traits are coded for by the same, or related, genetic information. Probably the spectrum is "continuous". You are not simply "autistic or not". You are *more autistic*, or *less autistic*. So even if my nerdly friends are not on the spectrum, they may be "closer".

These days, though, we prefer the term Geek.


GEEK POWER! (raises fist in air, clutching calculator).

I always felt - and this just seemed to be a sort of instinctual thing - that geeks and nerds share some essential DNA (which I now believe are ASD traits), but are separate sub-types within the HFA end of the 'spectrum'.

I was interested in Science, but I was an artist at heart, a creative writer, had more basic fashion sense than the pocket-protector nerds. I was bullied by the Jocks and the Neanderthals, but the 'cool' cliquish kids seemed okay with me, they just never invited me into their groups - but they didn't make fun of me the way they did the nerds with the tape on their glasses. I was the intermediary who spoke up to say "Hey, cut it out and leave them alone." Not that anyone was listening.

Mostly I sat in the back of the class with my head down, hiding under my hair and drawing or reading a book. When I did socialize, it was with the nerds, because they were the only people smart enough to understand the things I considered worth talking about, but I wasn't one of them, either.

So I've always thought of myself as a Geek - I am most definitely a social misfit - but I never felt I quite qualified as a stereotypical Nerd, either.

This nerd is not on the spectrum.

Generally, a Geek is someone with an intense interest in one thing, a dork is someone with no social skills, and a nerd is someone with a broad range of intellectual interests.

A person with all three, "Outcast Genius."

I know what you mean about intelligent people getting no respect especially when younger. I was adopted into a "non-nerd" family at 3 months, so I grew up knowing I was different. I had to learn martial arts to keep from being picked on, and was still mocked for my intelligence. Even now, at age 40, when I say something that goes over someone's head, someone will say a snickering-wise-a$$ed comment, but one of the things that age and experience gives us it the ability to look in that person's face and say "Me use small words so Bingo the Monkey can understand. Bingo want banana???"

Heh heh.

LMAO. The best is when you say something like that and they say, "HUH?" and you get to say, "Exactly."

Anyway, I agree with your def of the terms here. I want to add though that "dork" can also mean "goofy". For instance I often use the term in a loving way with people if they make a corny joke or do something otherwise goofy.

I also consider myself a geek(not so much a nerd), I was really into Humanities (philosophy, art, Literature, History, Music for instance) but could NOT seem to pass math. I only passed science classes because I did so well in the experiments- the theoretical stuff really confuses me. Or maybe it's just that I dislike it so much I can't be bothered to learn it. I have only recently realized that I am a Kinesthetic and tactile learner. I could bust through a chem experiment without having to look much at the directions and get an A, but I couldn't get through a basic algebra problem (I had to take it 3x in college just to barely pass). I hate studying unless it's a subject I love. I have specific interests and I like to "geek out" on them. The other subjects I don't care if I fail. So I wouldn't really be in the category of people with "broad range" intellectual interests. I happen to be on the spectrum. But I've had friends, geek and nerd, who clearly weren't.

Most of the nerds I know are NT (supposedly; we just all call ourselves weird ). I'd say aspies & auties are somewhere in every group (but they are probably the awkward ones in most cases).

Nerds are interested in science because they have to to be nerds.
If they are extremely interested in music they would no longer be nerds.
Unless, perhaps they simply regurgitate information about music.

Some nerds are. Most aren't. But I wouldn't be surprised if a significant number are "broader autism phenotype"--you know, the people with autistic traits, but who can't be diagnosed because they were never impaired by said traits. I do know that nerds have always been the people with whom I communicate best--that, and people with other sorts of weird brains, like bipolar, dyslexic, ADHD, etc. My best guess is that NTs are used to communicating only with the brain type that's closest to theirs, but neurodiverse people are always having to communicate with different brain types, so they get lots of practice.

I also find that I am extremely uninterested in stories involving normal people.
I would much rather watch someone with autism or anti-social personality disorder do anything.
It very much interests me.

I'm going with this. I have always been a nerd but am not autistic. Sometimes when I post in a thread, people reply "I knew before I even clicked on your profile that you are NT just by what you said". But in other threads people say, "I was surprised to see that you are NT when I clicked on your profile. I would have guessed AS based on your post". I take this to mean that I am in some sort of in-betweener zone called Broader Autism Phenotype. I can chime in "me too" in some threads, such as one about dyscalcula. But dyscalcula does not equal autism (and when I was a kid it was just called "bad at math") so while it can be somewhat disabling (less so because calculators exist), it is not something that would ever have gotten me an autism diagnosis. I am decidedly nerdy and have a nerdy husband who is also not autistic. When we meet with the other parents who also have autistic children, nerdiness is the norm. So there is clearly something genetic going on.

I thought it was mainly:

Nerd: Incredibly studious person
Geek: Very techy/sciency person
Dork: Socially unskilled/awkward person who tries to be sociable.

I would say I am a dork with a bit of nerd thrown in.

And good for you! And I think people more listen as we get older.

I guess I'm somewhere between a geek and a nerd. I can also be considered near the middle of the spectrum.

It is something of a chicken or the egg question, isn't it?

And this is where we can build a political movement, or a humanistic movement, or just what society is supposed to be---that people are appreciated for who they are, and we draw forth the talents people have, and we accept a person for who he or she is.

And not out of some dry self-imposed obligation, but rather as a sense of possibility. For example, try out a volunteer activity, and plead a busy schedule so you're only able to commit to one time. If it's merely so-so, try another activity. But if it's good, try it a second time, a third time. And you might find that it's something you're looking forward to and something that enriches and adds to your life.

And, with matter-of-fact confidence, we should insist on inclusion from those more 'skilled' than us in some areas, i.e. as people with Asperger's, we should insist on full societal inclusion. And at the same time, we should lobby for and accept those who are in some ways 'lower functioning' than ourselves. Again, not as an obligation, but as a sense of possibility.

And nothing wrong with studying a little bit of the Civil Rights Movement. I also got a lot out of Dave Dellinger's More power than we know: the people's movement toward democracy (mid-1970s), as well as Joseph Shapiro's No Pity: People with Disability, Forgiving a New Civil Rights Movements, (around 1998).

And nothing works all the time. Whereas Martin Luther King, Jr. certainly did have his successes, he also had his dicier campaigns like Albany, St. Augustine, and Chicago. Nothing works in some automatic fashion, it's about feel and texture and repertoire, and esp. it's about keep trying.