Why Wallflowers Don't Make Friends
nymag.com
nymag.com
If you go to a place where you're by yourself and aren't talking to people you aren't a wallflower, you just didn't prepare.
Additionally, and primarily, I was so stressed and not feeling good about myself, that I felt awkward in conversations. The questions about immediate life; well, my answers -- and I've always had trouble dissembling -- were not "good" and "cheerful."
This all becomes more and more of a Catch 22. You're not doing well. Your social life dwindles. You feel worse for the lack of a social life and engagement.
And, those social engagements you do have, can take on too much meaning. Too much import. And you choke.
So... Look at sources of (negative) stress in your life. And minimize them where you can't eliminate them. This isn't some mantra to "feel better" (in the face of reality). This is an action plan. Not always an easy one, but where you can identify problems and -- hopefully -- solutions.
My best wishes to everyone who faces this.
It placed all the burden on me, to accommodate the stressors.
This is an anti-pattern. That is my point.
Work through and past and away from the negative stress. You have a right -- and responsibility -- to do so. And you'll feel less uncomfortable around other people, when you feel like you're taking care of yourself.
(This isn't to say that resilient patterns can't help you engage with potentially stressful situations OR help you get in, chop wood, and move through tasks that aren't easily automated... just that "there will always be stress/tasks/entropy/hunger/fill-in-the-blank" doesn't seem to be a compelling reason to avoid efforts to mitigate any of them.)
Also you form actual friendships from time to time.
I don't want to drink or do other recreational drugs (even if they are legal). Going and not doing also seems to be not an option, you're clearly the black sheep.
I've found two things that really made it easy to go to parties and things and not drink:
- Don't make a big deal about it, just politely decline when someone offers you a drink. "Can I get you a drink?" "I'm good, thanks" or "no thanks" is all it takes. If you say "no, I don't drink" to someone who's been drinking, that's way more likely to turn into an awkward situation. Alternatively, "I've got to drive" works too.
- Don't make it obvious that you haven't been drinking. If people are cheering and being loud, participate! You're at a party! When I first cut back, I often tried to talk about whatever it was I was thinking about at the time and was often met with "Dude, why are you thinking about that right now? We're on a pub crawl!" Time and place.
Now when I go out to a party, I'll hang out, do whatever's going on, and usually offer a few people a ride home whenever I'm getting ready to leave. Still gives me a chance to socialize for a while, catch up with old friends/meet new ones, and then I get to wake up and feel great the next morning.
Edit: re: being the "black sheep"... if you're otherwise just going with the flow of conversation and energy in the room, the only person who will really notice whether or not you're drinking is you. Hell, I sometimes even play drinking games (e.g. sociables) with a glass of water. Some people know that I'm just drinking water, some don't, but no one cares because I'm in there having fun with everyone else.
Also, if you're at a party with red solo cups, water is pretty much indistinguishable from any other drink, and if you're really feeling self-conscious about it, some Sprite or Coke or whatever with a few ice cubes is visually identical to a mixed drink. Beer might be trickier.
- Pair up with random guy at a school hackathon because we're both without a project (+1). Meet a friend of his (+1).
- Meet him months later for birthday drinks. Introduced to his friend, we end up starting a band with 3 of his friends. (+4)
- Meet countless people through the music scene (+?)
- Go to another hackathon together with first guy, join another pair (+2), win, catch a recruiter's (+1) attention and get an internship.
- Meet countless people over the summer during the internship (+?)
- [...]
That's the very short version. Most of my network can be traced back to like, 4 people that started as strangers. There were a lot of dead-ends initially, sure. But it really does just take one person to build or reshape your entire social circle, change your career, etc. The first set is the hardest imo, but there's no excuse* for not going out and trying to find it.
*excepting, of course, any affliction which might make social interaction difficult. "i'd rather stay home" is not an afflication
I've now moved a couple of times in my adult life. I find that it takes about six months to find a group of people to hang out with occasionally, and two years to acquire a small group of friends that I feel comfortable with. It seems to get harder as you get older, too.
If your interests are not of a social nature, maybe try something that is. I climb a ton and that sport has resulted in so many new and valuable friendships I couldn't even list them here. Also, figure out who you jive with at work, if they have time to hang out and if there are overlapping interests. Invite colleagues to lunch.
Making friends take energy, it is like dating really, where you attempt to determine if there's a match. It might involve getting a beer or doing activities and generally being outside of ones comfort zone. You'll either fail or you'll get to a point where you can both relax comfortably. But it is going to be work for a while.
Personal anecdote:
I was in NY for 3 months for work and my luck was that my primary hobby, climbing, is a very social activity and walking up to strangers is sort of welcomed. I spent the first month never turning down an invitation from colleagues and making an effort of talking to people at the gym. The first month was rather gruelling, and I sometimes felt like I was intruding on people's good will and perhaps their pity of me being alone in a new city. But after the initial brutality, my coworkers became comfortable around me and started inviting me to things they went to and I became a part of a small group of regulars at the climbing gym. I made a bunch of friends for life and I miss them dearly now that I am back again.
The truth is: many of the "most likeable" people - young or old - spend most of their time alone. Alone at their desk, alone at home, alone in the car. It seems society is just an actual society at School and University, afterwards people become loners. As a matter of fact many people even die more or less alone, no matter if the career was successful or not.
Open ended questions usually fail. You're better off making interesting statements than you are actually asking questions. For instance: You look like you're from someplace very far away. vs. Where are you from?
Open ended questions are pretty garbage unless someone is already attracted to you, and used to being conversational. Interrogations aren't fun.
I was unnaturally afraid of having to build up my network of friends from scratch. This held me back from moving across the country early on to build my career.
I could have used some kind of mentor for social interactions or something.
The only trap is that once you get good, you'll be addicted to doing something that doesn't scale. Fame scales, meeting people one at a time pretty much does not.
Edit: Just to clarify why I feel that way - you make it sound like there's a one size fits all model of what it means to be social, where the loud guy with good hair wins and all the dweebs lose. Maybe that's your niche, but you should know there's a bigger world out there.
Better to have traveled out of the country a few times so you can relate.
Best advice is to talk about doing something. This art museum, this meetup, this new great restaurant. "Oh join me and my other friends. Or let's go explore together." You can kind of bluff your way through this even if you have no other friends (go find them!).
It usually invites them to talk about being from somewhere else without getting "Kansas, asshole" responses from, eg, Asian Americans.
It also gives them a chance to talk about an interesting experience, even if they're from somewhere boring. Almost everyone has been on one cool trip.
Yes, but they may internally feel quite embarrassed saying they went to Rancho San Antonio when others are harping about snorkeling in the Great Barrier Reef and wrestling bears and seeing the Northern Lights.
Generally, I try to avoid comments on a person's appearance unless I'm pretty good friends with that person, even if it's something relatively benign like "you like my friend, Pat" or "you like $celebrity".
Edit: of course, "where are you from?" could be perceived as a patronizing way to point out that the other person looks different. Socializing is hard.
If they are, and you are, hey, you're both natives! Where did you go to high school?
If they aren't, and you are, hey, what do you like about it? How long have you been here? What brought you here?
If they are, and you aren't, hey, you're a native, I moved here x years ago, do you know restaurant X? It's my favorite.
If they aren't, and you aren't, mix and match, any of the above.
> He asks what many have asked before: “Where are you from?” I tell him Miami. He laughs and says, “No, but really. Where are you from from?” He mentions something about my features, my thin nose, and then trails off. I tell him my family is from Eritrea, a country in the Horn of Africa, next to Ethiopia. He looks relieved. “I knew it,” he says. “You’re not black.” I say that of course I am. “None more black,” I weakly joke. “Not really,” he says. “You’re African, not black-black. Blacks don’t hike.”
https://www.outsideonline.com/2170266/solo-hiking-appalachia...
It seems like there's a lot of evidence that people like talking about themselves. Also, questions invite engagement where 'interesting statements' don't, necessarily.
I think 'interesting questions' are a good route to go. Knowing a bit of philosophy helps here. E.g. "In a brain transplant would you rather be the donor or the recipient?" or "Should child-sized sex robots be legal?" Because regardless of the answer it invites follow ups like "Why?" and "What about you? How would you answer the question?"
I'm not an expert in this field, but it seems like bringing up the subject of pedophilia (even in the abstract) in your first conversation with someone is ill-advised.
But yeah, it wouldn't be my first question.
"Where are you from?" is the exact opposite of an open ended question.
That's not to say that there isn't some truth to those sentiments, but I'm much more interested in evidence or at least a stronger theory behind the alleged correlations. As written, the original comment at face value is nothing more than one person's opinion based on, who knows what?
Rather, I think it sets up the potential to be susceptible to them. TRP, for example, does a great job of channeling the (understandable) anxiety and frustration of unloved young men into negativity and hate.
The other political groups being implicitly white is a mere correlation (not causality) in the same vein as Hitler drank water, Trump drinks water, therefore we have proven Trump is Hitler.
If you are heading out for a social event, take your good clothes to the gym, workout, shower and change there, then go straight to the event while you are feeling peppy and confident!
As a wallflower I wish people would start conversations with socially inept people like me and help them ease in public outings
(Ultimately there has to be a reason they are at a social gathering; if it's not because somebody else made them go, then they want to socialize).
As someone who has to fight my natural introversion I've noticed it is very hard to talk to someone who is literally standing by a wall. There's no way to approach them except deliberately, and.. well why would anyone try talking to someone who is hard to talk to when there are easier options.
Instead, have a plan. And your plan includes at least one conversation map, which gets you through at least 2 minutes of conversation.
Feel free to steal mine: Go and get a drink (it doesn't have to be alcoholic) and then say this to the person next to you:
"Excuse me, I'm XXX. Do you know anyone here?". Their answer is either "Yes.. this is YYYY". Then you go "Hi! What do you do?". Or else they go "No, I don't know anyone either." Then you go: "Oh, I hate coming to this kind of thing when I don't know anyone. So what do you do?"
The next level of this is to bring a third person in. Wait until you see someone looking lost (remember, you are near the food/drink, so people are walking past you) and go "Hi, I'm XXXX and this is YYYY. YYYY is a blah blah blah", and now you know at least 2 people, and are at the core of a group of people talking.
Those kinds of fears are generally unfounded, but it's difficult to prove to yourself that they're unfounded without actually interacting with people. But for those willing to interact with the wallflowers, they can be somewhat fearful of approaching someone with such a standoffish attitude, so it becomes a self-fulfilling feedback cycle.
Even just a little courage can go a long way. Walking across an open space can make you more approachable; for example, walking from somewhere on the edge of an activity like a dance to wherever beverages are being served can give others an opportunity to intercept you or approach you. It's not hard, it just takes some practice and the realization that the possibilities for negative consequences are much lower than the possibilities for positive outcomes.
Honestly, that may be the case for some, but I suspect that the majority of the time it's much simpler: Afraid to be in a small-talk situation, and not know what to say after a couple of words. In short, it's a phobia of the feeling of awkwardness. Easier to avoid.
Like any phobia, the best way to treat it is by exposure -- putting yourself in awkward situations as much as possible and witnessing that you can handle it/ get out of it. But also like any phobia, that's much, much easier said than done.
That's plain false, and quite frankly a mean assessment. Being somewhere by yourself and not interacting can be a choice and can make for an enjoyable time out. Your broad-sweeping statement is unfounded and offensive.
If I go to a music show or a coffee shop or on a walk it doesn't mean I left my kitchen for the exclusive purpose of finding a dating partner.
Alot of girls actually prefer places where they can be in public and be left alone and not shamed for it or assumed to be advertising themselves, or otherwise prone to mental disease or emotional inadequacies because they don't want to socialize.
In fact places like bars, gyms and other places where women go for the same reasons men go, to enjoy a stiff drink or get in a good workout, pride and advertise themselves for being safe havens with no tolerance for making women feel like they are out of place for existing alone outside of the home.
Not wanting to be approached doesn't mean not wanting to observe others interactions at the event.
Using military terminology is kind of brutally honest, yet clarifies the situation, if I've been trying to run a stealthy recon mission to observe intel to prep for possible later missions (or not...), a sudden sneak attack by an outnumbering flanking welcome wagon force is can be panic inducing, defensive fire and run for emergency evac.
More prosaic its like walking into a new store trying to soak up the vibe and feel of the theme and product lines and style and other customers, then getting pounced on by a salesdroid demanding full attention so they can close a sale to me on whatever gives them the best commission, not cool man, that's why internet shopping is crushing brick and mortar.
There's the fear of not being able to keep going with smalltalk and such, but also the conflicting desire for interaction.
Now, how many of the people the wallflowers aren't talking to do actually seek any new friends? For one thing, many people want to enjoy a given event with their friends (and only their friends) whom they've brought to the event. That's often the case at concerts or clubs, in my experience. For another thing, people today are highly mobile and - thanks to their smartphone - in constant contact with their "old" friends so that the set of people they really care about doesn't change much anymore after school. After classes at my uni, for example, many fellow students would drive up to 100km home to live with their partners or to hang out with pre-uni friends. Among the rest, "friendships" existed mostly for learning and partying and thus didn't evolve to something deeper.
It is a little like co-working space. Yeah, I could work at home but there is a lot more energy being at a location full of people being busy even if they aren't my "friends".
1. wallflowers do make friends
and
2. being awkward is not, as the psychologist in the article claims, awesome.
but
3. wallflowers make friends in spite of being awkward
but finally
4. people with social anxiety don't live as full or enjoyable lives as everyone else, which sucks
Not everyone has social anxiety just like not everyone who is a bit sad has depression. Social anxiety makes you perform badly on meetings, when talking with your kids teachers, when talking with colleges and in all kinds of situations where it actually matters.
Not having social anxiety is not the same as not doing silly things while drunk. Plenty of extroverted highly social people don't do cool stupid things while drunk.
> There’s a moment in your book that I love, when you give advice to awkward people looking for social shortcuts, and you tell them not to be literal wallflowers.
The anecdotal clarification there is that people in dormitories should ensure they are near the entrance -- precise details not provided.
The author is trying to distinguish between "wallflower" the "socially awkward person" and "wallflower" the "person who stands near a wall". They are using a slightly more literal definition, but not the most literal (i.e. the plant).
The justification is that "being near the wall" =/= "being in a high-traffic area".
Re-read the quote I have in my comment and remove the word 'literal'. Does that sentence have more, less, or the same meaning / power to you?
With 'literal': don't stand by the wall
> There’s a moment in your book that I love, when you give advice to awkward people looking for social shortcuts, and you tell them not to be literal wallflowers.
and
> There’s a moment in your book that I love, when you give advice to awkward people looking for social shortcuts, and you tell them not to be wallflowers.
alternative
There is a non-trivial difference in connotation between the two sentences.
In vernacular conversation "wallflower" can be used as a term to connote (strong) shyness or to indicate generalized presence on the periphery of an event. In the sentence from the article, "literal" helps to shift emphasis away from the "shy" connotation. Without it, or some other way to emphasize connotation, the sentence is easier to misinterpret as follows:
"..., and you tell them not to be too shy."
"4. in effect; in substance; very nearly; virtually: I literally died when she walked out on stage in that costume."
I'm a long-term fan of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (and accept that it's not without dispute).
"I literally died laughing" doesn't mean the same thing as "I died laughing", either. "Literally" functions as an intensifier here, and therefore the former sentence is stronger.
Would you be happy with 'I died laughing ...' when people describe something especially funny? (I would, for the record.)
And/or do you think 'I literally died laughing ...' (when people didn't actually die from laughing) to be more emphatic / compelling a commendation?
If someone said 'I literally died twice from laughter ...' would that be doublepluscompelling?
Then you would already be OK with something analogous to using "literally" as an intensifier.
Since, of course, "died" also means something specific that's unrelated to laughing, and the person uttering the phrase doesn't imply that they actually died.
>If someone said 'I literally died twice from laughter ...' would that be doublepluscompelling?
No, that's why people don't say it. It's the historical evolution of language that dictates what's "doublepluscompelling" or not, not some a priori rules.
like
In Vulcan it's usually frowned upon, but human languages often use nuance, play, context, and (gasp) more than one word for the same notion.
Moreover, the value of a word is not in its definition, but in its use. Even if "literally" (in this usage scenario) means the same as "figuratively" they both have very different connotations and impact on the listener.