How Social Isolation Is Killing Us(nytimes.com)
nytimes.com
How Social Isolation Is Killing Us
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/upshot/how-social-isolation-is-killing-us.html
242 comments
Right. It's not an issue of technology, for the most part, but it's the way American cities are designed. Instead of mixed-use walkable neighborhoods where people with a variety of incomes and backgrounds live, and stay put, we have suburban fortresses where people live in a box, never talk to their neighbors, drive a box to work, work in a box, then do it all over again.
The national highway system was great for a nation on the brink of all-out war. We needed to move troops, tanks, people, supplies quickly and efficiently. This system ended up being used to separate black people from working class whites. Naturally we have drug and violence problems in those communities that were segregated from the more educated and affluent white population.
Terrible. I wish I could be governor or something and make sure that we stop this. It makes me sad.
The national highway system was great for a nation on the brink of all-out war. We needed to move troops, tanks, people, supplies quickly and efficiently. This system ended up being used to separate black people from working class whites. Naturally we have drug and violence problems in those communities that were segregated from the more educated and affluent white population.
Terrible. I wish I could be governor or something and make sure that we stop this. It makes me sad.
This is an extremely poor argument. Try starting a conversation on a Manhattan subway. The lack of boxes between you and your fellow commuters does not make it remotely acceptable to interact with them, nor should it.
It is much harder to meet friends who are separated by 5 miles of bus ride than 5 miles of freeway. It is much harder to actually hear each other at a crowded bar than someone's home, but only the very rich (or the suburban) can afford homes large enough to host gatherings. Economic circumstances may coerce interaction with roommates, but living with someone is more likely to destroy your friendship than strengthen it.
I think this is a cultural/attitude thing, not really a manifestation of urban planning.
It is much harder to meet friends who are separated by 5 miles of bus ride than 5 miles of freeway. It is much harder to actually hear each other at a crowded bar than someone's home, but only the very rich (or the suburban) can afford homes large enough to host gatherings. Economic circumstances may coerce interaction with roommates, but living with someone is more likely to destroy your friendship than strengthen it.
I think this is a cultural/attitude thing, not really a manifestation of urban planning.
Your argument is poor, too. I see people starting conversations in subways all the time, and occasionally start them myself. I've never regretted it. Driving back from work in a bunch of cars, it's of course impossible, and it's amazing how easy it is to get angry with other drivers.
It's easier to meet people in a city, where the 5 miles of a bus ride can cover a neighborhood of a hundred thousand people and hundreds of venues to meet them, while the freeway ride in a suburb will cover less than ten thousand. And what does living with someone have to do with it? We're talking about interacting with people outside your house. I think US urban planning has certainly sucked, and the sprawl will hurt us socially as well as economically.
It's easier to meet people in a city, where the 5 miles of a bus ride can cover a neighborhood of a hundred thousand people and hundreds of venues to meet them, while the freeway ride in a suburb will cover less than ten thousand. And what does living with someone have to do with it? We're talking about interacting with people outside your house. I think US urban planning has certainly sucked, and the sprawl will hurt us socially as well as economically.
>I see people starting conversations in subways all the time
Where? In New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, the only people who do that are begging, preaching, or rambling incoherently. The sense of community I'll observe on a public transit vehicle is when something has gone wrong, or when everyone shares a look of relief after someone who was trying to start unwanted interactions has left. Granted there are some magical moments like the sax battle [0] that could never happen on a freeway, but did any of those people exchange contact information or form any lasting connection?
There are people who will sit down next to you and start talking. Groups of friends traveling together will "rescue" each other from these interactions. People traveling solo will just get off and move to another car, or wait for the next train. The mood afterword is "can you believe that creep?" not "wow aren't we so connected!"
> It's easier to meet people in a city,
From a pure numbers perspective, there are more people to meet per unit area. But are there more people to meet per travel minute by fastest viable means? I doubt it. If we accept 50 minutes (time for a walk to bus to train journey from mid south side to near north side Chicago by CTA), well, that is 50 miles at 60mph.
If my friend lives in a distant suburb it is not a problem, I can drive to his home in 10 minutes. If my friend lives in a distant urban neighborhood, I'm looking at a 50-minute 3-segment public transit journey.
You also have less free time living in a public-transit-oriented city. A New Yorker whose primary mode is the subway spends 90 minutes per day commuting [1]. A national average car commuter spends just 51 [2]. What would you do with an extra 3 hours per week? I'd see friends more often.
> And what does living with someone have to do with it?
Parent claims it is a problem that people live in separate boxes. Density does prevent this, in that real estate contention means relatively few people can afford their own box, but I claim that roommates of economic necessity don't actually strengthen social ties that well, and may weaken them.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_9IMZcbKHQ
[1] http://origin-states.politico.com.s3-website-us-east-1.amazo...
[2] https://project.wnyc.org/commute-times-us/embed.html#5.00/42...
Where? In New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, the only people who do that are begging, preaching, or rambling incoherently. The sense of community I'll observe on a public transit vehicle is when something has gone wrong, or when everyone shares a look of relief after someone who was trying to start unwanted interactions has left. Granted there are some magical moments like the sax battle [0] that could never happen on a freeway, but did any of those people exchange contact information or form any lasting connection?
There are people who will sit down next to you and start talking. Groups of friends traveling together will "rescue" each other from these interactions. People traveling solo will just get off and move to another car, or wait for the next train. The mood afterword is "can you believe that creep?" not "wow aren't we so connected!"
> It's easier to meet people in a city,
From a pure numbers perspective, there are more people to meet per unit area. But are there more people to meet per travel minute by fastest viable means? I doubt it. If we accept 50 minutes (time for a walk to bus to train journey from mid south side to near north side Chicago by CTA), well, that is 50 miles at 60mph.
If my friend lives in a distant suburb it is not a problem, I can drive to his home in 10 minutes. If my friend lives in a distant urban neighborhood, I'm looking at a 50-minute 3-segment public transit journey.
You also have less free time living in a public-transit-oriented city. A New Yorker whose primary mode is the subway spends 90 minutes per day commuting [1]. A national average car commuter spends just 51 [2]. What would you do with an extra 3 hours per week? I'd see friends more often.
> And what does living with someone have to do with it?
Parent claims it is a problem that people live in separate boxes. Density does prevent this, in that real estate contention means relatively few people can afford their own box, but I claim that roommates of economic necessity don't actually strengthen social ties that well, and may weaken them.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_9IMZcbKHQ
[1] http://origin-states.politico.com.s3-website-us-east-1.amazo...
[2] https://project.wnyc.org/commute-times-us/embed.html#5.00/42...
If you're the type of person who thinks it's creepy for a random stranger to start a conversation with you, a random stranger (who's not a creep) will never start a conversation with you.
> Where? In New York, Chicago, and San Francisco, the only people who do that are begging, preaching, or rambling incoherently.
Agree with the other replies to you; I've had lovely chats with people on the subway in literally all three of the cities when I've visited. Also at the laundromat, or at a bar, at a museum, and other places.
> ...did any of those people exchange contact information or form any lasting connection?
I never made a lifelong friend from these conversations (though I have received business cards or other contact info), but I got a sense that I mattered to a stranger, even if only for a little bit. That's certainly part of what the article is talking about.
> The mood afterword is "can you believe that creep?" not "wow aren't we so connected!"
I can genuinely tell you that many conversations I've had did not end with either side thinking the other was creepy.
Of course, I've avoided conversations with people who I felt were creepy. Typically, these conversations happen when the person is speaking to me and I've given pretty clear body and vocal language that I am not interested in speaking.
I do my best to initiate chatting only with people who show interest in talking. Having an idea of who's interested in that takes practice, and some other identification skill I have a hard time describing, but which would likely fit the definition of "emotional intelligence."
# # #
Here's a little chestnut similar to what btmorex mentioned:
A young couple moved to a new town, and upon driving up to their new home for the first time, saw their neighbors outside. After a few pleasantries, the young couple asked, "So, we're wondering, what are the people like around here? Is it a good place to live?"
The neighbor paused, then said, "What were your neighbors like at your last town?"
The young couple agreed, "they were great!"
The neighbor, audibly relieved, said, "well they'll be great here, too."
# # #
What you look for and expect from others will greatly color your experiences. I figure most people are generally friendly, and I tend to be able to recognize when someone wants to chat... and they likely see my desire for a friendly chat, too.
Agree with the other replies to you; I've had lovely chats with people on the subway in literally all three of the cities when I've visited. Also at the laundromat, or at a bar, at a museum, and other places.
> ...did any of those people exchange contact information or form any lasting connection?
I never made a lifelong friend from these conversations (though I have received business cards or other contact info), but I got a sense that I mattered to a stranger, even if only for a little bit. That's certainly part of what the article is talking about.
> The mood afterword is "can you believe that creep?" not "wow aren't we so connected!"
I can genuinely tell you that many conversations I've had did not end with either side thinking the other was creepy.
Of course, I've avoided conversations with people who I felt were creepy. Typically, these conversations happen when the person is speaking to me and I've given pretty clear body and vocal language that I am not interested in speaking.
I do my best to initiate chatting only with people who show interest in talking. Having an idea of who's interested in that takes practice, and some other identification skill I have a hard time describing, but which would likely fit the definition of "emotional intelligence."
# # #
Here's a little chestnut similar to what btmorex mentioned:
A young couple moved to a new town, and upon driving up to their new home for the first time, saw their neighbors outside. After a few pleasantries, the young couple asked, "So, we're wondering, what are the people like around here? Is it a good place to live?"
The neighbor paused, then said, "What were your neighbors like at your last town?"
The young couple agreed, "they were great!"
The neighbor, audibly relieved, said, "well they'll be great here, too."
# # #
What you look for and expect from others will greatly color your experiences. I figure most people are generally friendly, and I tend to be able to recognize when someone wants to chat... and they likely see my desire for a friendly chat, too.
Just chiming in as another New Yorker who has spent lots of time on the subway and seen/overheard plenty of random interactions and conversations between strangers that aren't at all 'creepy' or one-sided. It's not that common, but definitely happens occasionally if you take the train a lot.
[deleted]
Even if conversations with strangers isn't a normal thing, it does happen - I have multiple friends who've dated people they met in subway cars.
The point is that crossing paths is naturally going to lead to more spontaneous interactions. All else equal, driving alone and living in silo'd suburban houses means less interactions with strangers compared to living in an apartment in NYC.
I grew up in the suburbs and now live in Manhattan. I meet a lot more people in Manhattan than I ever did in the suburbs, and this is the main reason why I have no intention of moving back to the suburbs.
I'll also add that I spent my youth living in both suburban America and rural Japan. I made a lot more friends and had a lot more fun in Japan largely because I could get anywhere via walking or biking. In America I was dependent on adults driving me everywhere, so I spent way more time alone playing videogames in my house.
The point is that crossing paths is naturally going to lead to more spontaneous interactions. All else equal, driving alone and living in silo'd suburban houses means less interactions with strangers compared to living in an apartment in NYC.
I grew up in the suburbs and now live in Manhattan. I meet a lot more people in Manhattan than I ever did in the suburbs, and this is the main reason why I have no intention of moving back to the suburbs.
I'll also add that I spent my youth living in both suburban America and rural Japan. I made a lot more friends and had a lot more fun in Japan largely because I could get anywhere via walking or biking. In America I was dependent on adults driving me everywhere, so I spent way more time alone playing videogames in my house.
Your last paragraph struck home for me. I had a very similar experience, except it was rural central Africa and suburban America. The only friends I have in America are from college where (guess what?) there were a lot of people my age living within walking/biking distances.
Many people who live in small apartments can and do host social gatherings. In my experience, how frequently someone hosts gatherings has more to do with their personality than the size of their living space.
Can confirm, I've been to many social gatherings hosted in Manhattan studios.
Having your own studio in Manhattan puts you so far into stratospheric income (or a family heirloom rent controlled lease) that we may as well be talking about the problems of private jet owners.
I'm talking about the kind of people who have to choose between part of a shared apartment in a conveniently transit-connected part of SF/Manhattan, or their own studio/1-bedroom somewhere with low density and poor transit. Y'know, software engineers making $100k.
I'm talking about the kind of people who have to choose between part of a shared apartment in a conveniently transit-connected part of SF/Manhattan, or their own studio/1-bedroom somewhere with low density and poor transit. Y'know, software engineers making $100k.
Ehhhhh... What? All my NYC friends are below average in income. None are software engineers and of course they all rent. Their housing costs are probably a very significant part of their income as well, but I've seen a lot of higher income people do the same with McMansions. A few ended up moving to Brooklyn too for cheaper rent.
I don't live in the NY metro area but I visit several times a year since I got friends there. I always crash on the couch.
I vary rarely socialize with people with high income because, one, I grew up poor so most of my childhood friends are still below average in income but more importantly I find it very difficult to relate to people who grew up well off. Sometimes I hear my co-workers talk and I feel I am living on a different planet.
As far as shared housing, yes, 99% of college kids live in shared housing and the vast majority of them still socialize.
I don't live in the NY metro area but I visit several times a year since I got friends there. I always crash on the couch.
I vary rarely socialize with people with high income because, one, I grew up poor so most of my childhood friends are still below average in income but more importantly I find it very difficult to relate to people who grew up well off. Sometimes I hear my co-workers talk and I feel I am living on a different planet.
As far as shared housing, yes, 99% of college kids live in shared housing and the vast majority of them still socialize.
Owning maybe, but you can totally rent a studio in Manhattan on a software engineer's salary.
[0]http://streeteasy.com/for-rent/manhattan/price:-2500%7Cbeds%...
[deleted]
Sometimes it's even more fun and cozy in a tiny apartment.
In a big house, the party often naturally squeezes into the kitchen, leaving the handful of introverts to sit quietly in the living room.
In a big house, the party often naturally squeezes into the kitchen, leaving the handful of introverts to sit quietly in the living room.
I've hosted plenty of social gatherings in my shit apartment in Provo. it doesn't have to be fancy to be fun.
i speak with strangers in bars all the time, seriously. I thought it's one of the reasons bars exists. Even most tinder-dates start in bars, because if it's not going anywhere there other people to talk to. You just might not get laid.
Can confirm, I met my spouse in a bar.
I also became good friends with a bartender who I met when she was serving me. She no longer bartends now that she's out of school but we still see each other all the time.
A lot of my friends now usually prefer to meet out rather than have someone come over. It takes the pressure off to be a host.
I also became good friends with a bartender who I met when she was serving me. She no longer bartends now that she's out of school but we still see each other all the time.
A lot of my friends now usually prefer to meet out rather than have someone come over. It takes the pressure off to be a host.
I must be going to the wrong bars. Everyone I go regularly has people minding their own business.
> I must be going to the wrong bars.
Very likely. There are bars where people go to be alone; bars were people go in a group to stay purely within their group; bars where people go to meet between regulars and are closed to newcomers; bars where people are opened to anyone, regulars or 5-minute newcomer; etc.
The most classy, and also often the most hyped ones are the coldest ones. The most popular are often the warmest... providing that you manage to get into the 'family' circle if it is a matter of regulars/locals; or that you belong to the same scene if it is a subculture oriented place.
And it also depends also on you. And not necessarily as you expect. I am amongst the most introverted, shy, less talkative persons ever, and yet bartenders and regulars generally great me by calling my name on my 2nd or 3rd visit in a bar while some mates who've been coming to the same place dozens of times in are given the cold shoulder (I have plenty of examples like this, it was quite funny sometimes to see how upset by the situation my mate was :-).
Very likely. There are bars where people go to be alone; bars were people go in a group to stay purely within their group; bars where people go to meet between regulars and are closed to newcomers; bars where people are opened to anyone, regulars or 5-minute newcomer; etc.
The most classy, and also often the most hyped ones are the coldest ones. The most popular are often the warmest... providing that you manage to get into the 'family' circle if it is a matter of regulars/locals; or that you belong to the same scene if it is a subculture oriented place.
And it also depends also on you. And not necessarily as you expect. I am amongst the most introverted, shy, less talkative persons ever, and yet bartenders and regulars generally great me by calling my name on my 2nd or 3rd visit in a bar while some mates who've been coming to the same place dozens of times in are given the cold shoulder (I have plenty of examples like this, it was quite funny sometimes to see how upset by the situation my mate was :-).
I would also add, if getting-to-know-you conversation is difficult for you, memorize a list of about 10 basic questions (do you have any siblings, did you grow up here, what's something you really enjoyed about the last year, etc). Ask people these and be ready to share your answers, and it'll become pretty clear when someone wants to be your friend.
I too have made friends with strangers I've met in bars, as well as with servers and bartenders at places I've been a regular.
I too have made friends with strangers I've met in bars, as well as with servers and bartenders at places I've been a regular.
How would you explain your good luck? Do you think it will work for other people?
I don't know the parent commenter, but I am confident he or she would not characterize that as luck.
Here's a book that can help you stop thinking it has anything to do with luck:
How to Talk to Anyone: 92 Little Tricks for Big Success in Relationships [1]
[1] https://amazon.com/How-Talk-Anyone-Success-Relationships/dp/...
Here's a book that can help you stop thinking it has anything to do with luck:
How to Talk to Anyone: 92 Little Tricks for Big Success in Relationships [1]
[1] https://amazon.com/How-Talk-Anyone-Success-Relationships/dp/...
This makes me sad because I don't go to bars. Not sure what to do when I don't drink. Shy as fuck too, sucks.
You don't have to drink alcohol at bar. I have plenty of friends who don't consume alcohol, but have no problems going out and order non-alcoholic cocktail, juice, tea etc. Sure, it depends on a place a lot -- there are places where people go to chat and meet new people and there are places where people go to drink until passing out, so find the one that suits you..
I don't often drink, maybe twice a year and I've been given the advice you just gave the previous poster. The truth is drunk people are insufferable while sober I don't recommend anyone do this.
Well, as I said, it depends on a place. I usually go to places where people are going to play board games, pool, foosball etc. while getting few beers, not drink themselves unconsciously.
To each their own of course, but I find even mildly impaired people annoying. You don't realize how much an effect a few beers can have alcohol is deceptive that way, that's why you see people down a bottle of vodka and get behind the wheel. They honestly believe that they are fine to drive.
A tip if you do decide to try this advice, don't let anyone know you aren't drinking. Not only will you often get accosted "Come on buddy just one!", but at the end of the night you will often be pressured to become some sort of unpaid Uber.
A tip if you do decide to try this advice, don't let anyone know you aren't drinking. Not only will you often get accosted "Come on buddy just one!", but at the end of the night you will often be pressured to become some sort of unpaid Uber.
I actually usually don't mind being a DD, only because keeping drunk drivers off the road is a net benefit to society. I usually don't have to go much out of my way either as nobody lives very far away. Of course, if I were expected to do this all the time I'd be annoyed.
For sure some people are extremely obnoxious when they drink, especially heavily, myself included (which is a reason I don't like getting drunk - I try to stay mildly buzzed if I do drink, but usually I don't at socal gatherings, unless they are major social gatherings, and I even usually only drink water at bars) but the vast majority of people are fine after a couple brews. Most people stop getting blasted at around 25 or so anyways.
Your attitude indicates to me that if your perception of someone changes when they've had a beer, just because they've had a beer, rather than their actual behavior. I don't mean to be rude when I say that - I can understand. I used to not be able to stand being around people when they were drinking. I avoided anywhere where I thought there may be alcohol... but that was because I grew up with an abusive alcoholic father and I was projecting my hatred of my father onto other people. It wasn't until years later I learned to be comfortable around social drinking. I learned to realize that my father did the things he did because he is a bad person, not because alcohol somehow forced him to.
As I said in another post, I actually ended up meeting the person I ended up marrying in a bar!
(I also did start drinking myself later on.)
To be clear I don't want to put you down or anything, just sharing my perspective.
For sure some people are extremely obnoxious when they drink, especially heavily, myself included (which is a reason I don't like getting drunk - I try to stay mildly buzzed if I do drink, but usually I don't at socal gatherings, unless they are major social gatherings, and I even usually only drink water at bars) but the vast majority of people are fine after a couple brews. Most people stop getting blasted at around 25 or so anyways.
Your attitude indicates to me that if your perception of someone changes when they've had a beer, just because they've had a beer, rather than their actual behavior. I don't mean to be rude when I say that - I can understand. I used to not be able to stand being around people when they were drinking. I avoided anywhere where I thought there may be alcohol... but that was because I grew up with an abusive alcoholic father and I was projecting my hatred of my father onto other people. It wasn't until years later I learned to be comfortable around social drinking. I learned to realize that my father did the things he did because he is a bad person, not because alcohol somehow forced him to.
As I said in another post, I actually ended up meeting the person I ended up marrying in a bar!
(I also did start drinking myself later on.)
To be clear I don't want to put you down or anything, just sharing my perspective.
Club soda with a lime in a regular drink glass instead of a water cup. Everyone will assume it's a vodka club.
Three pints is already drunk, not mildly impaired or "buzzed" (for the average human). Even two pints in an hour and most humans shouldn't be driving.
well, if i am not interested in keeping the conversation between me and the friends i am meeting or if i want to talk to strangers because they're late/i am in a foreign city etc. what works for me is to sit directly at the bar (is this correct english, i hope you understand what i mean). It's way easier to start a conversation there.
Yeah I prefer to sit at the bar (that's the correct phrase), but I think my problem is more what wott said. The bars I go to just have a "come with your group of friends and only talk to them" culture. Thus, me going alone doesn't really give me interaction other than a quick chat with the bartender.
I could be wrong but I feel like its generally more difficult to meet people at bars in small town, and its also tougher to fail fast.
Bars in big cities provide more opportunities but then I think people are generally seen as more "disposable" if that make sense.
This is coming from someone who also feels like they have been going to the wrong bars.
Bars in big cities provide more opportunities but then I think people are generally seen as more "disposable" if that make sense.
This is coming from someone who also feels like they have been going to the wrong bars.
Try small bars.
I have been to too many bars over the decades.
I usually went because I wanted to meet someone new. I had very mixed results. While I had mixed results; people did seem to interact with eachother. Yes--it was small talk, but interaction.
Fast forward to today. The smart phone seems to have just ruined the experience all together.
I can blame myself--I'm not the same social person? I've aged? I don't find people and their stories as interesting? Blah--blah--blah?
I don't know? I do know that Phone Stare is really played out. It seems like everyone is engrossed in that screen?
The last time I was out, I was in an Irish themed bar in San Francisco. The older Bartender was asked a question by a patron. "This place is dead?"
He then said, "Maybe you should put the phone away? Plus, the led light brings out all the fine lines around the eyes?"
Yea--it was kinda rude, but he said it in a joking way, and with that Irish accent it came across as kinda endearing. Someting a father might say?
The phone eventually went into the bag. A person sat next to her, and asked her if he could buy her a drink. They talked, and talked. They genuinely seemed content--
I walked out, and it seemed like 90% of the patrons were still staring into that screen. All looked kinda misserable. I thought--what could be so interesting? A fifteen dollar drink, and waste the time on the screen?
I don't know if we are going to put the phone away, but I hope I'm still around if that day comes.
(I understand pulling out the phone if your socially awkward, or shy, but after awhile of Staring into the Abyss, put it away? And yes, if your at lunch putting together that huge business deal; I get it, but most of us just arn't that important. You're in a bar because your lonely. Admit it! Own it! Life is short--no one is judging you, nor cares. That phone is a huge turn off on so many levels. This goes two fold for guys.)
I usually went because I wanted to meet someone new. I had very mixed results. While I had mixed results; people did seem to interact with eachother. Yes--it was small talk, but interaction.
Fast forward to today. The smart phone seems to have just ruined the experience all together.
I can blame myself--I'm not the same social person? I've aged? I don't find people and their stories as interesting? Blah--blah--blah?
I don't know? I do know that Phone Stare is really played out. It seems like everyone is engrossed in that screen?
The last time I was out, I was in an Irish themed bar in San Francisco. The older Bartender was asked a question by a patron. "This place is dead?"
He then said, "Maybe you should put the phone away? Plus, the led light brings out all the fine lines around the eyes?"
Yea--it was kinda rude, but he said it in a joking way, and with that Irish accent it came across as kinda endearing. Someting a father might say?
The phone eventually went into the bag. A person sat next to her, and asked her if he could buy her a drink. They talked, and talked. They genuinely seemed content--
I walked out, and it seemed like 90% of the patrons were still staring into that screen. All looked kinda misserable. I thought--what could be so interesting? A fifteen dollar drink, and waste the time on the screen?
I don't know if we are going to put the phone away, but I hope I'm still around if that day comes.
(I understand pulling out the phone if your socially awkward, or shy, but after awhile of Staring into the Abyss, put it away? And yes, if your at lunch putting together that huge business deal; I get it, but most of us just arn't that important. You're in a bar because your lonely. Admit it! Own it! Life is short--no one is judging you, nor cares. That phone is a huge turn off on so many levels. This goes two fold for guys.)
>The last time I was out, I was in an Irish themed bar in San Francisco.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_pub#North_America
A typical "Irish pub" these days is usually the bar equivalent of Applebee's. However, the bartender in your story definitely sounded legit. :)
I find that small, established live music venues that operate a bar regardless of shows tend to be far more "real". There's usually only a few of these in any given major metropolitan area.
The phone stare ratio is far lower than average, but you run into the opposite problem: everyone knows everyone, and you're the outsider. Of course, that's usually a healthy sign that just indicates the place is worth becoming a regular at.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_pub#North_America
A typical "Irish pub" these days is usually the bar equivalent of Applebee's. However, the bartender in your story definitely sounded legit. :)
I find that small, established live music venues that operate a bar regardless of shows tend to be far more "real". There's usually only a few of these in any given major metropolitan area.
The phone stare ratio is far lower than average, but you run into the opposite problem: everyone knows everyone, and you're the outsider. Of course, that's usually a healthy sign that just indicates the place is worth becoming a regular at.
Go up to the person staring at their phone and say all that :) "you're lonely, admit it! That's why you're here!" Haha.
15 dollar drinks !!?!
Just a small town girl, living in a lonely world, she took the midnight train goin' anywhere...
Just a city boy, born and raised in south Detroit, he took the midnight train going anywhere...
Just a city boy, born and raised in south Detroit, he took the midnight train going anywhere...
> but living with someone is more likely to destroy your friendship than strengthen it.
Never live with someone you aren't prepared to hate. Nothing kills a friendship like becoming roommates.
Never live with someone you aren't prepared to hate. Nothing kills a friendship like becoming roommates.
This is a fair observation; Manhattan always feel to me very impersonal. However, I think the parent comment is referring to the Interstate Highway System construction in the '50s (and the broader 'Urban Renewal' movement of that era), which razed many of the dense neighborhoods in smaller cities to make room for highway construction. The relevant comparison isn't Manhattan to Scarsdale but the life one could once live in Hartford or Newark to how those cities are today.
[deleted]
To say that it is an extremely poor argument (as though I was giving an argument) is a bit hyperbolic. I'm not a proponent of the style of urban living you find in mega-cities either, though I'll propose that they are a superior alternative to somewhere like, say, Atlanta.
people in new york ~love~ to chit chat, including on the subway. The weekends are especially full of casual talk since not everyone is busy commuting.
I can imagine the sprawling suburbs would be really hard to live in, obvious benefits in lower cost housing and more green space but the isolation and need for a car seems pretty terrible.
I live in Barcelona and the majority of people live in flats/apartments, my apartment building is like a large family, mixture of retirees, families, young couples and mixed flats of people just out of university. Everyone knows each other and relies on each other, for our neighbours' 90th birthday almost the whole building (10 flats) took her cake and stayed and chatted and had fun. (My partner and myself are both foreigners here and we're still accepted into the culture and events like this. IMO it's really hard to overstate how crucial this sort of interaction and sense of belonging is in a large city. What intensifies this even more is in Barcelona the first floor of a lot of apartment buildings is where there are shops/bars/butchers/restaurants etc. For most of my food and leisure needs (including the gym for example) I don't need to go more than 400m, this also creates social situations where you bump into the same people and staff over and over creating a real village feel.
Here's a great shot of Eixample, a district in Barcelona divided by distinctive grids that lends itself to these 'micro' village communities. http://lh4.ggpht.com/-I28z_xwspR0/UdgqfgPxzCI/AAAAAAAAqCY/Mj...
Sorry that was quite the tangent to go off on!
I live in Barcelona and the majority of people live in flats/apartments, my apartment building is like a large family, mixture of retirees, families, young couples and mixed flats of people just out of university. Everyone knows each other and relies on each other, for our neighbours' 90th birthday almost the whole building (10 flats) took her cake and stayed and chatted and had fun. (My partner and myself are both foreigners here and we're still accepted into the culture and events like this. IMO it's really hard to overstate how crucial this sort of interaction and sense of belonging is in a large city. What intensifies this even more is in Barcelona the first floor of a lot of apartment buildings is where there are shops/bars/butchers/restaurants etc. For most of my food and leisure needs (including the gym for example) I don't need to go more than 400m, this also creates social situations where you bump into the same people and staff over and over creating a real village feel.
Here's a great shot of Eixample, a district in Barcelona divided by distinctive grids that lends itself to these 'micro' village communities. http://lh4.ggpht.com/-I28z_xwspR0/UdgqfgPxzCI/AAAAAAAAqCY/Mj...
Sorry that was quite the tangent to go off on!
I have often watched Barcelona's honeycomb structure in Google Maps. Didn't know it was home to a small-village-like atmosphere. That's an amazing thing.
[deleted]
I've seen this brought up many times before but I disagree completely that American cities' designs are the culprit. I enjoy visiting my family in their "suburban fortresses" out in the Midwest where you have to drive a car to get anywhere. I enjoy it because it gives me a chance to recover from the crippling social isolation that comes with living in a city with roommates, taking buses everywhere, walking around in crowds, and generally being surrounded by people who don't care about you.
The way I see it, the level of community involvement and social interaction in general have almost nothing to do with infrastructure, unless you decide to go full-on hermit in the mountains. It matters what people are in your life, not just how many are in your proximity.
The way I see it, the level of community involvement and social interaction in general have almost nothing to do with infrastructure, unless you decide to go full-on hermit in the mountains. It matters what people are in your life, not just how many are in your proximity.
> I enjoy visiting my family
> surrounded by people who don't care about you
That's the difference. Not city vs. suburban. Where are the people that care about you and that you care about? That's where you will feel less socially isolated.
I'd bet that if you went to a suburbia that doesn't contain your family, you'd feel just as isolated as you do in the city.
> surrounded by people who don't care about you
That's the difference. Not city vs. suburban. Where are the people that care about you and that you care about? That's where you will feel less socially isolated.
I'd bet that if you went to a suburbia that doesn't contain your family, you'd feel just as isolated as you do in the city.
Not necessarily family. Having some good old friends can serve as a seed to start connecting with other folks in the community.
I leave the house far more thanks to Uber. There are cool things happening, but it requires me to drive and I hate driving.
> It matters what people are in your life, not just how many are in your proximity.
It matters how many of the people you meet actually know you.
It matters how many of the people you meet actually know you.
We city apartment people aren't better at socializing with our neighbors, probably even worse. The stereotype that cities can be harsh and unfriendly is very much rooted in reality.
I've live on a cul-de-sac (back) in Extreme Flyover Country now for a whopping ... three months, and I met all the neighbors and chat with 'em often. People in stores are very open and will talk if spoken to.
I find driving my car is much more efficient than taking trains allowing me to make multiple stops thus talking with numerous people through out the day.
I have lived in my Manhattan building for only 2 years. Know most of the other residents, the owners of neighborhood restaurants, local politicians, et cetera.
That said, I do not feel that expectation of social and civic engagement in San Francisco.
That said, I do not feel that expectation of social and civic engagement in San Francisco.
Yup. I've lived in SF since 2000 and every time I go to NYC it's way easier to connect with people. It's either I'm different when I'm in NYC or it's SF. Or maybe a bit of both but your comment resonates very strongly with me.
It very much depends on the city and even the specific part of the city. e.g. London, despite mostly being as you describe, has areas where there is a strong sense of community, even for new comers. Typically more working class areas.
In Brazil, architects often build a social space into their apartments. It's a good idea and works really well, but the people have to want to socialise together in the first place.
I think it's cultural. I've lived in apartments and condos designed with nice common spaces (pool, clubhouse, lawn, chairs), and those areas were empty 95% of the time. At most, a couple of people swimming, or a guy taking a phone call.
We work all day, come home at 8pm, watch TV while surfing with phone, update Facebook, text a friend, go to bed. Repeat.
We work all day, come home at 8pm, watch TV while surfing with phone, update Facebook, text a friend, go to bed. Repeat.
I think some people don't like being visible in a public space that includes "others". Maybe a feeling of being judged and feeling self-conscious as a result?
Go back 10,000 years and almost all people encountered would be people familiar to you. Any other instances would've been a potential stand-off. I'd guess it's a carry over from that.
Go back 10,000 years and almost all people encountered would be people familiar to you. Any other instances would've been a potential stand-off. I'd guess it's a carry over from that.
the ones in my apartment really aren't compfy, and if you look closely, you quickly notice how much they cheaper out on everything
We may have identified the root cause of Social Isolation: Cheap lawn furniture. :-)
> it's the way American cities are designed. Instead of mixed-use walkable neighborhoods where people with a variety of incomes and backgrounds live, and stay put, we have suburban fortresses where people live in a box, never talk to their neighbors, drive a box to work, work in a box, then do it all over again.
That's not the highways fault in any way. Walkable neighborhoods are expensive, and most Americans are too poor to afford anything like that.
You can't jump in early, because you'll just get gentrified out as soon as decent density & transit exist. You can't jump in after, because the costs are 3x to 50x higher. If your not wealthy, it's a loose-loose situation. That's why walkable neighborhoods can't maintain their "variety of incomes and backgrounds".
If anyone could afford to put their family in walkable NYC / San Francisco / Seattle / etc, many more would choose to do it. But until high-quality safe family housing in walkable neighborhoods drops to $150k - $250k, it's just not going to happen.
Suburbs don't happen because people love looking at asphalt. Suburbs can be made cheap, safe and affordable for regular middle-class people. Dense urban housing is almost never affordable, even in tiny little towns with no zoning or permitting in low-cost-of-living places like the Midwest.
Until people honestly address the exploding high costs of density (and not just blame "red tape" or "design" or "subsidy" for it), that won't change and suburbs will continue to get built.
That's not the highways fault in any way. Walkable neighborhoods are expensive, and most Americans are too poor to afford anything like that.
You can't jump in early, because you'll just get gentrified out as soon as decent density & transit exist. You can't jump in after, because the costs are 3x to 50x higher. If your not wealthy, it's a loose-loose situation. That's why walkable neighborhoods can't maintain their "variety of incomes and backgrounds".
If anyone could afford to put their family in walkable NYC / San Francisco / Seattle / etc, many more would choose to do it. But until high-quality safe family housing in walkable neighborhoods drops to $150k - $250k, it's just not going to happen.
Suburbs don't happen because people love looking at asphalt. Suburbs can be made cheap, safe and affordable for regular middle-class people. Dense urban housing is almost never affordable, even in tiny little towns with no zoning or permitting in low-cost-of-living places like the Midwest.
Until people honestly address the exploding high costs of density (and not just blame "red tape" or "design" or "subsidy" for it), that won't change and suburbs will continue to get built.
I know the whole stereotype of suburban isolation is popular, but I have never found it to be true. I have lived in cities, small towns, and in suburbia. I found suburban folk knew their neighbors the most. In the city, people ignore each other. In small towns, you know everyone, but almost too much so. But in the suburbs, we knew everyone within about 5 homes, and the kids would go out and play together, we'd have dinners together, see each other at the parks... it was a community. It was the stereotype of talking across the fence to your neighbor as you both did yard work.
I'm not defending suburbia... I don't like it in general, and now have a small homestead in a small town, but my dislike of suburbia does NOT stem from social isolation.
I'm not defending suburbia... I don't like it in general, and now have a small homestead in a small town, but my dislike of suburbia does NOT stem from social isolation.
Just the same, there are city neighborhoods where everyone down the block knows one another and whose families spend time together often, and suburban neighborhoods falling into crime and dysfunction where few community bonds exist.
Neither of these is proof that one is inherently better than the other, just that there are many dependent factors which can change the fabric of a neighborhood in any setting. That's the point of the entire field of urban studies existing; to understand what makes these types of places happen. As you would expect, many of the communities that we have in reality don't implement the best solutions that have been discovered due to local resistance, funding issues, misguided political mandates, etc.
Neither of these is proof that one is inherently better than the other, just that there are many dependent factors which can change the fabric of a neighborhood in any setting. That's the point of the entire field of urban studies existing; to understand what makes these types of places happen. As you would expect, many of the communities that we have in reality don't implement the best solutions that have been discovered due to local resistance, funding issues, misguided political mandates, etc.
It's also the way American culture is: as a society of individuals with little obligation to their communities outside of work and family.
You could get involved in local politics, and maybe eventually even run for governor. Is there anything stopping you?
Yes. I have a high-paying job, a mortgage, and although I'm personable I don't see any starting point or path toward doing anything about it.
Volunteer with your preferred local political party. The path to getting into politics can start as easily as showing up until people know you, and having good ideas that enough people agree with. Your job as a politician would be to carry those ideas to the structures of power (town council, school board, whatever).
It's pretty time-consuming, but it's a big responsibility, making decisions that affect lots of people's lives. So, trade-offs.
It's pretty time-consuming, but it's a big responsibility, making decisions that affect lots of people's lives. So, trade-offs.
Another reason not to do so is that it's a high-risk, low-reward endeavor.
Exactly. If you want this stuff to change, stop waiting for others to do it, you can get involved and start changing things.
[deleted]
Terrible. I wish I could be governor or something and make sure that we stop this. It makes me sad.
How would you stop this as governor? I have a feeling your solution would be far worse than the problem you're trying to solve.
How would you stop this as governor? I have a feeling your solution would be far worse than the problem you're trying to solve.
Uuuuuuh... call out the National Guard?
knock knock knock <opens door> "Huh?"
"I'm Sergeant Jones with the 665th Airborne. Our records show you haven't been out all week. Come with us, sir... "
It'd be different if he handed you a beer first, I guess.
knock knock knock <opens door> "Huh?"
"I'm Sergeant Jones with the 665th Airborne. Our records show you haven't been out all week. Come with us, sir... "
It'd be different if he handed you a beer first, I guess.
I would build mixed-use development neighborhoods, and create spaces where people would be able to meet together for events, etc. I'd move highways that go straight through the downtown area and reroute them around the city. I'd make cities more walk/bike/subway/bus - able and work on smart regulation that would allow for mixed-use development so people could work-live-play in different areas.
I'd also fix the schools. But that's a much larger discussion.
This is my opinion.
I'd also fix the schools. But that's a much larger discussion.
This is my opinion.
You seem to have many misunderstandings on the power that Governors have. Real life isn't Simcity.
I could change zoning laws and provide tax incentives. Those work pretty well.
The vast majority of zoning laws are done at the local level. You'd actually be better off running for mayor of some city. It's much better to do what you're proposing at a local level anyway.
A lot of that funding comes from the federal government. Basically anything involving roads has to come from Washington because roads are so damn expensive to build and maintain.
You'd probably have better luck as a senator.
You'd probably have better luck as a senator.
Older research is generally given less credence than newer research because of certain assumptions which may or may not be accurate:
* That the researchers looked into previous research, examined those results, and are either replicating them (thus adding extra evidence to those hypothesis), or have found some sort of flaw in how the research was gathered.
* That the researches have, in their research, looked into multiple previous studies, including the old one you referenced, and synthesized them all for their new research.
* It's often been shown that older research studies are flawed in some way, especially in certain fields, such as nutrition, so older studies should be held suspect (really the newer studies should be held with just as much skepticism, but they never are)
Again, the assumptions that this is done is not necessarily what happened in reality, but without media or laypeople doing their own research into things (and neither have time for that), it's usually a useful greedy heuristic to assume newer research is better and more accurate than older research.
* That the researchers looked into previous research, examined those results, and are either replicating them (thus adding extra evidence to those hypothesis), or have found some sort of flaw in how the research was gathered.
* That the researches have, in their research, looked into multiple previous studies, including the old one you referenced, and synthesized them all for their new research.
* It's often been shown that older research studies are flawed in some way, especially in certain fields, such as nutrition, so older studies should be held suspect (really the newer studies should be held with just as much skepticism, but they never are)
Again, the assumptions that this is done is not necessarily what happened in reality, but without media or laypeople doing their own research into things (and neither have time for that), it's usually a useful greedy heuristic to assume newer research is better and more accurate than older research.
>'I gotta ask: why the focus on "new research"?'
I think this passage is key, I had not heard this postulated before:
"New research suggests that loneliness is not necessarily the result of poor social skills or lack of social support, but can be caused in part by unusual sensitivity to social cues. Lonely people are more likely to perceive ambiguous social cues negatively, and enter a self-preservation mind-set — worsening the problem."
I think this passage is key, I had not heard this postulated before:
"New research suggests that loneliness is not necessarily the result of poor social skills or lack of social support, but can be caused in part by unusual sensitivity to social cues. Lonely people are more likely to perceive ambiguous social cues negatively, and enter a self-preservation mind-set — worsening the problem."
Totally agree. I think the internet and social media have just exacerbated the existing problem that society is fracturing into countless splinter groups, with no tolerance for any of the others' views, and it's really difficult to find and keep up with those handful of people you can actually tolerate enough to keep a close social bond with. I don't think that it takes a degree in sociology, or a controlled study, to see this happening. As for WHY, my own, personal theory is that "we" (the US) came together to support the war effort in the forties in a way that the world had never experienced before or since, and it's all been a snowballing disassociation since, made worse as a reaction TO the perceived stifling effect of the dominant societal norm of that day.
FWIW communities coming together in times of emergency is a pretty universal experience, not unique to the US in the 1940's (the UK's home front experience during WW2 [1] is cited as an example most often I think). A book I've been meaning to read for a while is "A Paradise Built in Hell" by Rebecca Solnit. From the Washington Post review [2]:
"Her book is worth reading for its storytelling alone. But what makes it even more fascinating is Solnit's demonstration that disasters give rise to small, temporary utopias in which the best of human nature emerges and a remarkable spirit of generosity and cooperation takes over. 'Disaster,' she writes, 'along with moments of social upheaval, is when the shackles of conventional belief and role fall away and the possibilities open up.' People suffering unimaginable misfortune often revert not to savagery but to an almost beatific selflessness, comforting themselves in extremis by aiding others. Solnit cites many examples of those who remember a disaster as, paradoxically, one of the great moments of their lives. The reaction is similar to that of some who recall the Great Depression as a time of spiritual and social richness."
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_front_during_World_War_II...
[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08...
"Her book is worth reading for its storytelling alone. But what makes it even more fascinating is Solnit's demonstration that disasters give rise to small, temporary utopias in which the best of human nature emerges and a remarkable spirit of generosity and cooperation takes over. 'Disaster,' she writes, 'along with moments of social upheaval, is when the shackles of conventional belief and role fall away and the possibilities open up.' People suffering unimaginable misfortune often revert not to savagery but to an almost beatific selflessness, comforting themselves in extremis by aiding others. Solnit cites many examples of those who remember a disaster as, paradoxically, one of the great moments of their lives. The reaction is similar to that of some who recall the Great Depression as a time of spiritual and social richness."
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Home_front_during_World_War_II...
[2] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08...
> why the focus on "new research"? Is "old research" not good enough?
Because the NYT is a newspaper and they need a reason to publish a news article. This is known as a "hook." The hook in cases like this will be something new being published. It's hard to hook readers by announcing: What we've known since the 1970s still holds true. Just doesn't work.
Because the NYT is a newspaper and they need a reason to publish a news article. This is known as a "hook." The hook in cases like this will be something new being published. It's hard to hook readers by announcing: What we've known since the 1970s still holds true. Just doesn't work.
Yep, same reason Taylor Swift has so many breakup songs. They sell. The NYT has so many words to push per release and they have to come from a variety of topics.
> Is "old research" not good enough?
Indeed.. while waiting for the new research to come out, read Marcus Aurelius, Erich Fromm and Hannah Arendt. Maybe throw in some Roman and Greek classics. That should "help a bit".
The problem isn't that we don't know how to live well and healthy and sleep soundly, it's that we want to be healthy and sleep soundly without living that way. We don't want to be simply just and honest and go from there. Well, joke's on us, the truth remains where it is, waiting for dithering people to stop being scared of it.
Indeed.. while waiting for the new research to come out, read Marcus Aurelius, Erich Fromm and Hannah Arendt. Maybe throw in some Roman and Greek classics. That should "help a bit".
The problem isn't that we don't know how to live well and healthy and sleep soundly, it's that we want to be healthy and sleep soundly without living that way. We don't want to be simply just and honest and go from there. Well, joke's on us, the truth remains where it is, waiting for dithering people to stop being scared of it.
I think that been undergoing a number of changes - including (but not limited to) the increase in urbanization (moving away from close small communities), increase in movement (relatives spread across the country/globe), increase in secularism (decrease in religious communities), and more access to personal entertainment (see the end of the Chautauqua movement), that have definitely caused us to be more isolated and have less of a sense of community. We are still trying to adapt to - or even be aware of - the changes we have been undergoing and the implications of it.
It seems like a sense of community is extremely important for a society, particularly with the connection there seems to be between community and happiness (my understanding is that much of the happiness that religious people get is from the community, for example). Still, I haven't seen a great idea as to how one can be fostered (though there are some decent ideas about what you as an individual can do to get a better sense).
It seems like a sense of community is extremely important for a society, particularly with the connection there seems to be between community and happiness (my understanding is that much of the happiness that religious people get is from the community, for example). Still, I haven't seen a great idea as to how one can be fostered (though there are some decent ideas about what you as an individual can do to get a better sense).
It's because loneliness is much more prevalent now than in 1974. It's no longer exotic but a condition sometimes voluntarily chosen and supported by modern technologies in 2016.
Also we used to think that heart disease risk is mostly tied to diet and exercise. But it's still the #1 killer in the United States. So every protective or risk factor needs to be considered. As such, new research linking heart disease, CVD, CHD to loneliness, friendship or marriage is interesting.
And It doesn't stop there. Loneliness is also tied to breast cancer, lymphoma and obesity : http://outcomereference.com/causes/59
Also we used to think that heart disease risk is mostly tied to diet and exercise. But it's still the #1 killer in the United States. So every protective or risk factor needs to be considered. As such, new research linking heart disease, CVD, CHD to loneliness, friendship or marriage is interesting.
And It doesn't stop there. Loneliness is also tied to breast cancer, lymphoma and obesity : http://outcomereference.com/causes/59
My folks were Silent Generation,and I think we're a lot less lonely than they were. And face it, I like being alone. I haven't felt lonely since college, and I think that was mostly performance anxiety.
That's not to say that loneliness causes those things. I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that lonely people are more likely to be depressed and sedentary. Many diseases follow from being depressed and sedentary.
From my perspective, I think most people want to be socially isolated, or at the very least, never change their social bubble. After completing school, I didn't want to be lonely when living in the working world. So I bought a few books on socializing, picked up swing dance, went to meetups, took adult education classes and volunteered in the US election.
After 16 months of continuous practice, I have made 0 friends. Conversations with strangers, yes. I got contact information, was religious about following up, but people who agreed to do something with me in the future suddenly didn't respond to my messages. Attempted to have a few gatherings at my apartment and despite the people I invited saying they would come, nobody showed up.
Why even bother if people won't meet you a tenth of the way?
After 16 months of continuous practice, I have made 0 friends. Conversations with strangers, yes. I got contact information, was religious about following up, but people who agreed to do something with me in the future suddenly didn't respond to my messages. Attempted to have a few gatherings at my apartment and despite the people I invited saying they would come, nobody showed up.
Why even bother if people won't meet you a tenth of the way?
This is going to sound terribly judgemental, but have you considered that the problem might lie with you? It sounds like you are doing exactly the right thing in terms of meeting new people but the fact that your results are very poor, seems to suggest you are not doing something correctly, or are putting people off in some way.
Just show an interest in people, without being creepy. Respect boundaries but show you are a good listener and ask questions that show that you have listened and do care. Rather than shotgun everyone, just be friendly and interested and concentrate on developing relationships with people that appear interested in you.
It is also important to not rush things. If you perceive a connection with someone - don't ask them around to your house for drinks immediately, but develop the relationship for a few more meetings before taking it to the next level (I mean this from a platonic point of view).
Also consider your appearance and personal hygiene. Are you dressed about the same as everyone else? Try to be better dressed than average without being extreme. Have you too much deodorant? Are you freshly showered? Do you have bad breath?
Try to ask a family member or honest friend the tough questions about yourself.
Just show an interest in people, without being creepy. Respect boundaries but show you are a good listener and ask questions that show that you have listened and do care. Rather than shotgun everyone, just be friendly and interested and concentrate on developing relationships with people that appear interested in you.
It is also important to not rush things. If you perceive a connection with someone - don't ask them around to your house for drinks immediately, but develop the relationship for a few more meetings before taking it to the next level (I mean this from a platonic point of view).
Also consider your appearance and personal hygiene. Are you dressed about the same as everyone else? Try to be better dressed than average without being extreme. Have you too much deodorant? Are you freshly showered? Do you have bad breath?
Try to ask a family member or honest friend the tough questions about yourself.
No, it's true, it's my problem. But I don't know what. I have good hygiene. I did a lot of research into fashion and purchased a well fitting wardrobe. I think I might come across as odd for reasons nobody will be honest with me about.
This is going to sound a bit Machiavellian. Ask around and befriend a really crappy person that everybody avoids all the time. Someone who doesn't have a filter and is proud of "telling it like it is" but is infact an a...
Then bring this up with them. They will tell you the truth.
Also, do you suffer from low self-esteem or are otherwise needy? Needy people are human repellants and other people can smell it a mile away.
Then bring this up with them. They will tell you the truth.
Also, do you suffer from low self-esteem or are otherwise needy? Needy people are human repellants and other people can smell it a mile away.
People also avoid people who are very overbearing. It's easy to be overbearing and not realize it.
Even if there is more you can do, a society where this much effort at making friends can fail has got some problems. I took a few years off and volunteered, learned to ice skate, and so forth but never came close to making any friends. I wasn't looking for any, but don't know what I would do if I had wanted to.
I did something similar (continuously went to meetups for two years), but had the exact opposite experience. Now I have more friends than I can realistically keep up with.
Just repeatedly showing up to these things and making an effort to talk to these people a bit each time and eventually I stopped being a stranger to people and started getting invited to private events they hosted. It might have helped that the meetups I focused on were often board game related (or movies or dinners or theater) and I'm a board game nut, though. I'm also getting more and move involved with my local writer's group (hosted two writer's workshops last year).
I've gone to several software development meetups and had really poor experiences befriending people there. People seem to be more shy or standoff-ish, or the focus is too much on the lecture or 'hacking in a corner' and not on a group activity, so that might be part of it. Oh, also I think too many of those people go to those for 'professional networking' purposes and not to have some fun talking about technology and making some genuine connections, so it feels a little artificial, too.
Just repeatedly showing up to these things and making an effort to talk to these people a bit each time and eventually I stopped being a stranger to people and started getting invited to private events they hosted. It might have helped that the meetups I focused on were often board game related (or movies or dinners or theater) and I'm a board game nut, though. I'm also getting more and move involved with my local writer's group (hosted two writer's workshops last year).
I've gone to several software development meetups and had really poor experiences befriending people there. People seem to be more shy or standoff-ish, or the focus is too much on the lecture or 'hacking in a corner' and not on a group activity, so that might be part of it. Oh, also I think too many of those people go to those for 'professional networking' purposes and not to have some fun talking about technology and making some genuine connections, so it feels a little artificial, too.
My experience with "pounding the pavement" at IT conferences has been the same. I'm there to network and learn, but also to make acquaintances and friends. People there tend to be less social than ones at hobby related meetups. Their mindset isn't as social. And I hate to say it, but there's truth to the stereotype that IT people aren't the most socially adept either.
It's frustrating when you're trying to make friends to work on an open source collaboration with, or just grab a beer and vent or talk shop.
It's frustrating when you're trying to make friends to work on an open source collaboration with, or just grab a beer and vent or talk shop.
I think the best you can do to build strong relationships -- at my 41 I don't know what friendship is anymore -- is by putting yourself into social situations which present problems to be solved collectively. Sports is a good one. Not losing the game requires a lot of problem solving and cooperation. It is rewarding to people to solve problems because it was key for our survival along the ages -- a Darwinian thing.
Some 10 years ago I joined a new management team in the company I was working for, and our director took us on a trip to a seaside town where we would work on a "teambuilding" activity, we would do some sailing. Sailing a midsize boat when you know zero about it can be very demanding. You are solving problems all the time to yourself, to the crew and to the ship. At the end of those two days sailing we were a completely different team. I felt that I had made 3 new friends and spotted a new enemy, a person I couldn't get along with. I keep their friendship till this day.
Some 10 years ago I joined a new management team in the company I was working for, and our director took us on a trip to a seaside town where we would work on a "teambuilding" activity, we would do some sailing. Sailing a midsize boat when you know zero about it can be very demanding. You are solving problems all the time to yourself, to the crew and to the ship. At the end of those two days sailing we were a completely different team. I felt that I had made 3 new friends and spotted a new enemy, a person I couldn't get along with. I keep their friendship till this day.
>>and spotted a new enemy
There is something about this that just makes me chuckle. Don't know why.
There is something about this that just makes me chuckle. Don't know why.
Sounds like the common denominator in all of these interactions is you. You might want to hire a dating/social coach who can give you candid feedback on how you come across as a friend.
Just like anything else, people want social interactions that are stimulating and rewarding. Being around other people for the sake of being around other warm bodies is typically not very interesting for most people.
Who has no shortage of friends? People with obvious value propositions. Rich or influential people. Well connected people. Good looking people. People who already have a lot of friends. It's strange to think about it in economic terms, but I've found it's a very useful abstraction.
Who has no shortage of friends? People with obvious value propositions. Rich or influential people. Well connected people. Good looking people. People who already have a lot of friends. It's strange to think about it in economic terms, but I've found it's a very useful abstraction.
I am rich, and don't have many friends.
Well, money itself really doesn't put you ahead. You can be a rich guy who owns a bunch of real estate and nobody would notice. Buy the Miss USA pageant and all of a sudden lots of beautiful girls really want to get to know you. If you're not that rich, settle for being the money guy of a popular nightclub.
I find that simply making people feel comfortable being themselves around you is the easiest way to make friends.
I am not attractive, influential, connected or rich, but I also don't expect anything from people... as in I'm not trying to gain anything from them, not that that I have low expectations of people.
I find that people appreciate social interactions where they feel comfortable being themselves and don't feel like they have to be on guard or put on a mask lest they find themselves in some kind of obligation or awkward situation.
I am not attractive, influential, connected or rich, but I also don't expect anything from people... as in I'm not trying to gain anything from them, not that that I have low expectations of people.
I find that people appreciate social interactions where they feel comfortable being themselves and don't feel like they have to be on guard or put on a mask lest they find themselves in some kind of obligation or awkward situation.
> find that people appreciate social interactions where they feel comfortable
How is that done?
How is that done?
It's not easy until it is, but it didn't really come naturally to me. Acceptance and empathy are important as my sibling mentioned already, but those are hard things to just "do".
I've been continuously trending toward more comfortable in my own skin as I've gotten older, though I've also actively worked toward breaking down my internal belief systems and assumptions about people, the world and what people expect of me.
I've done that by exploring a lot of psychology, philosophy, spirituality and mind-altering experiences to get out of my own head. I think the most profound effect has been from combination ayahuasca/san pedro plant medicine ceremonies though I don't know how much all the prior work I'd done toward breaking down my ego academically set me up to take advantage of those experiences.
I think the biggest thing that makes people feel uncomfortable in social situations is anxiety and insecurity... which are both just forms of fear. Fear of being vulnerable, fear of being perceived as "less than", fear of being rejected or humiliated by exposing too much of yourself.
These are all things that might not be conscious thoughts, but the underlying signal does come across in body language, intonation and automatic reactions which can make people feel uneasy.
I think the first step is to become more mindful of how you're carrying yourself in social situations, which means focusing less at "succeeding" in a social situation and more seeing about what you can learn from them. How do "successful" socializers carry themselves? How does their reaction compare to how you would have reacted? Why would you have reacted the way you would have and why do you think they reacted the way they did? Eventually you stop thinking about it and you say something you see gets a more positive reaction (like asking an interesting question of someone) and you consciously avoid doing something that probably would have gotten a negative reaction (like bringing the conversation back to yourself for the third time)
Another thing that helps is realizing that other people are in the exact same boat for the most part and they aren't judging you as much as you might think and are much more willing to forgive a fuck up.
Fucking up in a social situation and not being weird can actually be really good since it's an opportunity to let other people feel like you won't care if they say something stupid... it's like an agreed step down of the social threat level.
Alright, prob wrote more than necessary, but soooo bored waiting on this holiday commute.
I've been continuously trending toward more comfortable in my own skin as I've gotten older, though I've also actively worked toward breaking down my internal belief systems and assumptions about people, the world and what people expect of me.
I've done that by exploring a lot of psychology, philosophy, spirituality and mind-altering experiences to get out of my own head. I think the most profound effect has been from combination ayahuasca/san pedro plant medicine ceremonies though I don't know how much all the prior work I'd done toward breaking down my ego academically set me up to take advantage of those experiences.
I think the biggest thing that makes people feel uncomfortable in social situations is anxiety and insecurity... which are both just forms of fear. Fear of being vulnerable, fear of being perceived as "less than", fear of being rejected or humiliated by exposing too much of yourself.
These are all things that might not be conscious thoughts, but the underlying signal does come across in body language, intonation and automatic reactions which can make people feel uneasy.
I think the first step is to become more mindful of how you're carrying yourself in social situations, which means focusing less at "succeeding" in a social situation and more seeing about what you can learn from them. How do "successful" socializers carry themselves? How does their reaction compare to how you would have reacted? Why would you have reacted the way you would have and why do you think they reacted the way they did? Eventually you stop thinking about it and you say something you see gets a more positive reaction (like asking an interesting question of someone) and you consciously avoid doing something that probably would have gotten a negative reaction (like bringing the conversation back to yourself for the third time)
Another thing that helps is realizing that other people are in the exact same boat for the most part and they aren't judging you as much as you might think and are much more willing to forgive a fuck up.
Fucking up in a social situation and not being weird can actually be really good since it's an opportunity to let other people feel like you won't care if they say something stupid... it's like an agreed step down of the social threat level.
Alright, prob wrote more than necessary, but soooo bored waiting on this holiday commute.
Acceptance and empathy. It can take a lot of practice. You need to ascertain where the person is mentally and emotionally, and meet them there.
[deleted]
Maybe for some obvious exception cases. But for the bulk of the bell curve, who are not particularly influential or handsome, it's more to do with coincidence of social position. Lucking into a friendly crowd at work for instance.
Sure, social position is influence. In my experience, people have been more impressed by social position than wealth.
[deleted]
We are pack animals, it is why dogs evolved in to our family. Isolation is a severance from our natural social state and is hurtful. I think one of the great benefits of the internet is that it is possible to meet and befriend people outside of the normal social routes. It is not a cure for isolation, but friends you game with or chat with or share stupid stories with is a help.
The problem is that reddit and digg killed the conventional forum, so no one really cares who you are any more (unlike when people would start to 'know' regular posters on forums). Now it's a crapshoot of random people and a smattering of comment replies if people vote on your comment. No personality, no real interaction.
The problem is that reddit and digg killed the conventional forum, so no one really cares who you are any more (unlike when people would start to 'know' regular posters on forums). Now it's a crapshoot of random people and a smattering of comment replies if people vote on your comment. No personality, no real interaction.
traditional forums still exist
the problem with reddit is that there is too much news, outrage, and hype there.
the problem with reddit is that there is too much news, outrage, and hype there.
They still exist, but they have been dying. There are a few niche forums that still hold on to users, but the proliferation of subreddits leaks people away.
I visit no forums today, whereas when I grew up it was a majority of my online-life.
I visit no forums today, whereas when I grew up it was a majority of my online-life.
I agree with this wholly. I used to play chess on a service called FICS and it had a decent social scene in some ways for someone who was growing up geek in a town that wasn't really giving avenues for it (I grew up in the rural Midwest...it's no rural south but it's not great either) I went back recently and it's usershio is wwaaaay down
Well, I think like every other loosely federated communication system from the 90s (except email), the scene has moved on to a couple proprietary platforms providing a better user experience. lichess.org and chess.com have pretty good scenes now, and you can still make friends there.
Thanks for those recs I'm checking theM out now!
That's interesting now that I think about it....I do still belong to a few forums for dedicated topics, and they are always such friendlier places than reddit.
Depends on the subreddit. The smaller ones still have strong community. I know lots of people from /r/mechanicalkeyboards for instance, many of whom are local. I think it helps a lot that users organize a TON of meetups all over the world so people have faces to put to usernames.
It's articles like this that genuinely make me wonder if I'm a weirdo because I actually prefer to be alone when at all possible.
And I like people! I have no trouble engaging in small talk while getting to know new folks. But man, they wear me out. Even ones I love. At the end of the day, I need aloneness if I'm going to recharge for tomorrow's challenges.
And I like people! I have no trouble engaging in small talk while getting to know new folks. But man, they wear me out. Even ones I love. At the end of the day, I need aloneness if I'm going to recharge for tomorrow's challenges.
Sort of anecdotally, I think the big difference is whether it's voluntary or involuntary aloneness. Even the difference between 1 person and 0 persons to just call/talk to is huge
Similar introvert here. Open plan offices destroy me. It's a balancing act, not being too isolated so you get depressed, but having your own space really matters
That's the very definition of introversion, and it's perfectly OK.
But even introverts need some social interaction.
But even introverts need some social interaction.
They do, but not the same type or intensity of extroverts. That's another facet of what I call "extrovert's dictatorship". Extroverts just assume that their way of doing social interaction is the healthy and correct one.
Same for me. I think small talk is draining because it lacks authenticity and the possibility of a real exchange that allows both party to understand themselves better.
Often times, admitting loneliness makes one look "needy" or "desperate" and even less desirable for a friendly relationship. It's almost a catch-22.
[deleted](1)
If you find this interesting you may enjoy The Village Effect[1] by Susan Pinker. It's a more in-depth look at this phenomenon.
If social isolation is as deadly as smoking or not exercising, should we approach the problem with a similar level of seriousness? Maybe we need "social exercise" three times a week, and if we aren't getting it naturally should contrive a way to get it much like going to the gym.
[1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18167005-the-village-eff...
If social isolation is as deadly as smoking or not exercising, should we approach the problem with a similar level of seriousness? Maybe we need "social exercise" three times a week, and if we aren't getting it naturally should contrive a way to get it much like going to the gym.
[1]: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18167005-the-village-eff...
I think it's valuable to think about this problem from an evolutionary perspective. Almost every problem we have can be viewed this way.
We should be asking ourselves how we were living 100,000 years ago. This is what our bodies and our brains are expecting. The whole concept of the nuclear family and a house and a fence is a completely foreign concept to our bodies because we haven't been doing it for very many generations.
From what I know, we should be living in tribes, right?
From that perspective, I would immediately look at communal housing solutions. Maybe we should often be living in very small apartments with communal living areas and communal eating and cooking areas. That's closer to what our bodies and minds expect, right?
We should be asking ourselves how we were living 100,000 years ago. This is what our bodies and our brains are expecting. The whole concept of the nuclear family and a house and a fence is a completely foreign concept to our bodies because we haven't been doing it for very many generations.
From what I know, we should be living in tribes, right?
From that perspective, I would immediately look at communal housing solutions. Maybe we should often be living in very small apartments with communal living areas and communal eating and cooking areas. That's closer to what our bodies and minds expect, right?
> I think it's valuable to think about this problem from an evolutionary perspective. Almost every problem we have can be viewed this way.
Spot on. I was an Anthropology major in college, and this is the single most important takeaway from my education.
Even a few decades ago, families often at least lived with or close to the elder generation (grandparents) which created a greater sense of community and history. At some point it was decided that elder persons should live by themselves, or they were not welcome in their adult children' homes (or there was no room for them there.)
I think what you say about tribes is interesting -- I think people tend to create their own "tribes" either with friends, workmates, hobbies that are communal etc.
Spot on. I was an Anthropology major in college, and this is the single most important takeaway from my education.
Even a few decades ago, families often at least lived with or close to the elder generation (grandparents) which created a greater sense of community and history. At some point it was decided that elder persons should live by themselves, or they were not welcome in their adult children' homes (or there was no room for them there.)
I think what you say about tribes is interesting -- I think people tend to create their own "tribes" either with friends, workmates, hobbies that are communal etc.
Not just old people, but having young people segregated into cohorts of kids the same age, being directed in activities, away from what adults are naturally doing at that time.
There is a whole age spectrum from 0 to 100 where the 20-60 year olds are providing the main physical sustenance, but the others are giving the main social sustenance.
Our society has organized all that away. So kids wait to grow up so that they can finally have freedom and old people wait around to die. That's a bit extreme, of course, but there is a kernel of truth in it.
There is a whole age spectrum from 0 to 100 where the 20-60 year olds are providing the main physical sustenance, but the others are giving the main social sustenance.
Our society has organized all that away. So kids wait to grow up so that they can finally have freedom and old people wait around to die. That's a bit extreme, of course, but there is a kernel of truth in it.
If that's the way we "should" be living, why then as a society did we mostly chose to live separately in family units? It must have a survival advantage or we would have stopped doing it.
That's the wrong way to think of it. Rather, it must not be a crippling survival disadvantage or we would have stopped doing it. And happiness doesn't necessarily correlate with survival either.
I don't remember the name, but in an anthro class we discussed a culture where children were married as infants and raised together. This ends up being suboptimal because the kids identify each other as siblings and biology basically interferes with them developing a romantic relationship. As a result they end up taking romantic partners outside the arranged marriage. But hey, it still produces kids so the culture continued on, even with this suboptimal practice.
Likewise for tribes who practiced eating the brains of the deceased. It gives you a neurodegenerative disease, but the incubation period is sufficiently long so that you can still keep your population up.
I don't remember the name, but in an anthro class we discussed a culture where children were married as infants and raised together. This ends up being suboptimal because the kids identify each other as siblings and biology basically interferes with them developing a romantic relationship. As a result they end up taking romantic partners outside the arranged marriage. But hey, it still produces kids so the culture continued on, even with this suboptimal practice.
Likewise for tribes who practiced eating the brains of the deceased. It gives you a neurodegenerative disease, but the incubation period is sufficiently long so that you can still keep your population up.
>It must have a survival advantage or we would have stopped doing it.
LOL yea because we have totally stopped polluting the earth or filling our food with sugar. Give me a break, this is pop evopsych at its worst
LOL yea because we have totally stopped polluting the earth or filling our food with sugar. Give me a break, this is pop evopsych at its worst
One of the biggest differences of the Philippines that I noticed on arrival was how many people are out and walking around in neighborhoods and around the city in general. One of the first comments my friend made when moving from the Philippines to the US was that she never saw people because everyone was either in their cars or their houses.
Personally, I love being alone. I don't get lonely though. It's from my social life where all my bad and unhealthy habits come from. So, I would say it's a wash for me.
Personally, I love being alone. I don't get lonely though. It's from my social life where all my bad and unhealthy habits come from. So, I would say it's a wash for me.
One observation I've had: I feel/have felt more isolated when I don't have close connections with people around me but I am around a lot of people. I grew up in a really rural area and spent a lot of time outside alone and never felt isolated in nature. However once you get out in the city, get an internet connection etc, all the sudden you do feel isolated.
Also, does anyone else like it when the power goes out? Its so surreal to be in the city without power (I'm used to it in the country however) and all the sudden everyone is on their porch or out in the street chatting. Then it comes on and everyone goes back into their little isolation chambers.
Also, does anyone else like it when the power goes out? Its so surreal to be in the city without power (I'm used to it in the country however) and all the sudden everyone is on their porch or out in the street chatting. Then it comes on and everyone goes back into their little isolation chambers.
> I feel/have felt more isolated when I don't have close connections with people around me but I am around a lot of people.
I really like Venkat’s write-up about masks[0]. Large cities, dense yet impersonal, strain our voice masks. Smaller communities, what you likely experienced in the rural area when you were not outside alone, can be psychologically healing but on the other hand strain our exit masks. Everyone has their own tipping point—you seem less susceptible to exit mask stress than me, for example.
[0] http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2015/05/20/pretending-to-care-pret...
I really like Venkat’s write-up about masks[0]. Large cities, dense yet impersonal, strain our voice masks. Smaller communities, what you likely experienced in the rural area when you were not outside alone, can be psychologically healing but on the other hand strain our exit masks. Everyone has their own tipping point—you seem less susceptible to exit mask stress than me, for example.
[0] http://www.ribbonfarm.com/2015/05/20/pretending-to-care-pret...
Last year the New York Times ran an article on New Yorks Potters cemetery called Hart Island. Die without someone to make arrangements and the city efficiently buries you in this indigent cemetery. Sometimes people are not discovered dead for weeks until the rotting smell in their multiple housing becomes too strong for neighbors. The Times tracked down acquaintances and relatives of these people. They never knew these people had died. The city doent try too hard to find such relatives.
If we were to do something kooky and nutty like abandon centralized large corporate offices as our primary places of work, and instead the majority of us worked from home, that would result in many people spending several hour a day in their local neighborhood rather than sitting in their car. I expect local communities would be revitalized simply by default because people would finally be PRESENT instead of commuting and spending the majority of their waking hours far away from their local community. Just another way that the death of our antiquated 'way of work' that was optimal for manufacturing and assembly lines but downright ludicrous now will benefit everyone. Well, except for middle managers. They'll mostly be automated out of a job. Have to get their heart attacks the old fashioned way I guess.
This is interesting in that many people get their only social interaction from their co-workers. Work from home would just isolate them even more.
That would only be true if human beings were not fundamentally social creatures by nature. Working from home, it should be remembered, was the default state of mankind from the beginning of time up until the rise of factories a little over a century ago. It is tempting, but I think a mistake, to assume that people currently isolate themselves out of desire rather than out of consequence of long commutes, the psychological fatigue of the modern workplace, etc.
Just look at different age groups. Children are isolated forcibly by their parents, so they're not informative. Adolescents, though, take great pains to avoid isolation even though their parents and society generally goes to great lengths to try to impose it upon them. Retired people do not generally isolate themselves (there are, of course, exceptions). It's only the working stiffs that tend to isolate themselves. And even that is mostly a modern phenomenon. It might be down to people being satisfied with social media as their means of socializing, but I doubt it.
Just look at different age groups. Children are isolated forcibly by their parents, so they're not informative. Adolescents, though, take great pains to avoid isolation even though their parents and society generally goes to great lengths to try to impose it upon them. Retired people do not generally isolate themselves (there are, of course, exceptions). It's only the working stiffs that tend to isolate themselves. And even that is mostly a modern phenomenon. It might be down to people being satisfied with social media as their means of socializing, but I doubt it.
Your expectation assumes that workers with home offices would replace the times they’ve spent commuting or socializing outside of their community with traversing around and being present in their community.
Personally I think it’s a crapshoot: your expectation might be true or these workers might become recluse and replace the time commuting with sitting at home (especially if they tend to be in a neighborhood that favours individualism over collectivism, isolation over community).
Personally I think it’s a crapshoot: your expectation might be true or these workers might become recluse and replace the time commuting with sitting at home (especially if they tend to be in a neighborhood that favours individualism over collectivism, isolation over community).
Not entirely true. Often people work in a different time zone than their neighborhood, thus rendering the proposed effect useless. That's my case.
Odd that we see so many articles like this on HN.
Do the studies factor in introverts vs. extroverts? Do the studies factor in intelligence? Do the studies factor in people that have been alone for nearly all their life? And what about pets? Are they useful in alleviating loneliness?
Do the studies factor in introverts vs. extroverts? Do the studies factor in intelligence? Do the studies factor in people that have been alone for nearly all their life? And what about pets? Are they useful in alleviating loneliness?
For anyone reading, really feeling lonely and having the means yo affort it. Come and visit a country like Colombia, we love having people over and making friends (really honest and helpful ones) is what we do best. I met an Austrian girl last week who told me she never felt as much in home as the next day she landed here. She now quit his tech job in Europe and moved here.
When I was starting to use facebook in 2007, I thought it was the greatest thing ever to meet people and do things.
I still think that the internet can make people who live near each other meet and socialize. I don't understand why no site like this is being created, and why facebook has become so alienating instead of becoming a site that encourage exclusivity between friends. People are really adopting the jetset attitude of social circles, always excluding the more people they can because they think it will improve their social life.
I have thought so long and hard about my isolation, I also had the idea of: * building new types of apartments where people live together, instead of individual apartment that make you feel you are in a prison cell, unable to see your neighbor. People eat together, but they still have their bedrooms and private space. Basically you make life collective instead of individual. You reduce costs, so it's another incentive for people with low income. * Renting large apartments with many bedrooms and organizing life with people inside of it. * organizing regular meals for 10 people at a time, to improve food quality and make people eat together.
I'm really tempted to create this kind of real life, "open" social website where you can do things with people based on proximity and maps. There are a million things people can do in the context of a sharing economy. It would be targeted towards isolated people so that they can find each others.
I still think that the internet can make people who live near each other meet and socialize. I don't understand why no site like this is being created, and why facebook has become so alienating instead of becoming a site that encourage exclusivity between friends. People are really adopting the jetset attitude of social circles, always excluding the more people they can because they think it will improve their social life.
I have thought so long and hard about my isolation, I also had the idea of: * building new types of apartments where people live together, instead of individual apartment that make you feel you are in a prison cell, unable to see your neighbor. People eat together, but they still have their bedrooms and private space. Basically you make life collective instead of individual. You reduce costs, so it's another incentive for people with low income. * Renting large apartments with many bedrooms and organizing life with people inside of it. * organizing regular meals for 10 people at a time, to improve food quality and make people eat together.
I'm really tempted to create this kind of real life, "open" social website where you can do things with people based on proximity and maps. There are a million things people can do in the context of a sharing economy. It would be targeted towards isolated people so that they can find each others.
This is the very representation of what I call "extrovert's dictatorship". This idea simply assumes that everyone is extroverted and long for social interactions. It is far from the truth.
I've lived that (the seventies) and it wasn't too great - people with problems relating to others self-selected for it. Our present situation is something of a Nash Equilibrium, that way, unfortunately. Those best at relating can sort of get by as things are, so they do. But we aren't raising especially ethical, unselfish or socially ept humans these days, IMHO. Almost every civilization has done a better job of that, anthropologically speaking, and a lot of that has to do with how little interactive time kids get with adults. I really think it starts there.
I'm trying to start something that you described. Check it out TheCoopApp.com and let me know what you think.
meetup.com is a great website focused on helping people who live near each other meet and socialize. Highly recommend it.
Only around specific and punctual activities, and it's mostly city centric, not location or neighbor centric.
Specific and punctual activities? Getting together to chat with like-minded individuals does require showing up at the right time, yes. But like, how else will you meet people? You have to agree to show up at a time.
The topics I discuss at meetups I attend - software development, business development, and just geeky folks who like to discuss what they're hacking on - don't particularly have punctuality needs.
You have to organize it by some location metric. It would be cool to have more options - let the Meetup folks know what you'd like!
The topics I discuss at meetups I attend - software development, business development, and just geeky folks who like to discuss what they're hacking on - don't particularly have punctuality needs.
You have to organize it by some location metric. It would be cool to have more options - let the Meetup folks know what you'd like!
I wonder how much this is due to living in a big city like New York where there is pretty good availability of basic living services whether government or private. Services like housing, health, food. Then you not really need to build social netwrks to live. Great for loner types then.
Only few things made me feel more isolated than using Facebook. Living newly in Tokyo, having a hard time making new friends, everyone seemed to live these wild an exciting lives. Left the service, the disconnect from my old friends made it easier, made new ones. A new life commenced.
Ultimately, you can't treat social as a science, think of it as faith, as an never ending improv performance.
There are four ways to create a social life:
Fake it till its fact - be someone else until it feels like you
Be artistic - find an expressive outlet you enjoy and find other people who express the same way
Be vulnerable and live in moments - take every loss and win with a grain of salt, acknowledge something happened then move on. No moment has more emphasis than others, they are just lily pads for you to jump on and off.
Think outward, not in - react to what people say or do without introspection, trust what you already intrinsically know/feel
There are four ways to create a social life:
Fake it till its fact - be someone else until it feels like you
Be artistic - find an expressive outlet you enjoy and find other people who express the same way
Be vulnerable and live in moments - take every loss and win with a grain of salt, acknowledge something happened then move on. No moment has more emphasis than others, they are just lily pads for you to jump on and off.
Think outward, not in - react to what people say or do without introspection, trust what you already intrinsically know/feel
A great paradox of our hyper-connected digital age is that we seem to be drifting apart. Increasingly, however, research confirms our deepest intuition: Human connection lies at the heart of human well-being. It’s up to all of us — doctors, patients, neighborhoods and communities — to maintain bonds where they’re fading, and create ones where they haven’t existed.
Robert Putnam has written extensively on this issue and the underlying causes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam
Robert Putnam has written extensively on this issue and the underlying causes:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_D._Putnam
[deleted]
Don't underestimate the social value of consistency - being in the same place at the same time very reliably. Then those who decide you're interesting can come back and visit again. You may have to put in a lot of hours before anything happens, but at least it can happen. Even if it's just buying a coffee and drinking it at the same place and time every day.
There is the blue zones were people are living the longest in the world. Besides eating healthy a lot of those places has a strong local community where you can connect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Zone
People are staring down in the cell phone screens instead of talking to strangers in social environments. Plus if one is looking at the phone one is not that approachable. Apps can connect people but also disconnect humans. Time for a debate on how to use new tech in a positive manner.
Even people that know each other sometime disconnect through tech for example friends going to a cafe together instead of talking using their cell phones.
We are using GPS instead of asking others for directions.
Robots are replacing cashiers and simple jobs at service desks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Zone
People are staring down in the cell phone screens instead of talking to strangers in social environments. Plus if one is looking at the phone one is not that approachable. Apps can connect people but also disconnect humans. Time for a debate on how to use new tech in a positive manner.
Even people that know each other sometime disconnect through tech for example friends going to a cafe together instead of talking using their cell phones.
We are using GPS instead of asking others for directions.
Robots are replacing cashiers and simple jobs at service desks.
I'm glad so much of the discussion here is about suburbanization. As a staunch urbanist I want to beleive this is a huge cause, but I must admit the "alone in New York" counter-narrative is also compelling. I think I have to speculations on reconciling the two.
First, I think we can agree that frequent interactions with another is a necessary (if not sufficient) condition for friendship. If so, it should be obvious that density is good but size is bad.
Second, I believe our major metros—especislly since the great invertion—attract a certain sort of person less likely to foster community. Your steriotypical new gentrifier is career-focused with strong sense of individuality, moving for work, and, perhaps most importantly, fresh out of school where making friends presents very different challenges.
First, I think we can agree that frequent interactions with another is a necessary (if not sufficient) condition for friendship. If so, it should be obvious that density is good but size is bad.
Second, I believe our major metros—especislly since the great invertion—attract a certain sort of person less likely to foster community. Your steriotypical new gentrifier is career-focused with strong sense of individuality, moving for work, and, perhaps most importantly, fresh out of school where making friends presents very different challenges.
imho the problem is more to do with boredom and unfulfillment than isolation
This is a well written article. I agree that this problem is growing, due to less social interaction and more reliance on social media tools and apps. This is not good for society
It is very important this research was shared. However, the very difficult and likely impossible part is to actually change the emotional and interpersonal ethos of society. Given the very intangible nature of the problem, no one in power will care enough to initiate a national program to motivate such social change. Therefore, it must come from us, the people. We ought to stand to the call and do something of value to nudge society towards a more interactive state.
How clear is it that the isolation actually precedes the disease rather than potentially being a symptom? A disease process doesn't pop into existence when the condition is diagnosed, and diagnosis often doesn't occur before the condition leads to some kind of crisis. Many conditions' symptoms include depressed mood and fatigue, which tend to reduce social activity.
[deleted]
That Linkages site appears to be limited to only California and Oregon. If you're outside that area, I found another site that looks similar with a broader network of opportunities to help Senior Citizens:
http://www.elderhelpers.org/
http://www.elderhelpers.org/
It is easier being egotistical when someone is able to live alone with enough comfort. I guess that it could be somehow "solved" with tax discounts by having kids, by sharing home with elder people, or even by sharing home in general, in general.
[deleted]
Maybe American culture of families living far away is a bad one. In other countries, like Italy and Brazil, there are social unities that stay together all their life. Families that just meet at Thanksgiving is weird.
Anecdotally, and with the risk of the greatest generalisation, in my experience Protestant countries tend to be far more atomised than Catholic ones.
[deleted]
I'm an introvert. I'm also a remote worker, and I no longer attend church. I was very involved in the church when I was growing up, so I'm well aware that my life is now lacking something, in terms of connection and a sense of community.
I've recently been searching for some alternatives. There's Unitarian Universalists [1], who welcomes people from any faith, including atheists and agnostics. You can discuss any religion openly, and they have regular services on Sunday where you can socialize, enjoy some music, and listen to a speaker.
There's also the Rotary Club [2], where people regularly meet for meals, and work to help their community. Then there's the Freemasons, but I don't think that's for me.
I might like to organize a secular humanist "church" or club with regular meetings and meals. I think it would be nice to have discussions about philosophy and science, maybe watch some documentaries and talks together, and have a book club.
Another random thought on the topic of isolation: St. John's runs a "caring caller" [3] service in New Zealand, where people can volunteer to call elderly people on the phone, and just have conversations with them. If I'm ever back in New Zealand, I think I would like to get involved with that.
Also in New Zealand: The High Street Cohousing project [4] in Dunedin. I think it's a fantastic idea. I love the idea of a shared community space, and the sustainability. I'm seriously thinking about getting involved, or maybe I can buy one of the houses in the future.
I enjoy living in Chiang Mai, and it's not too hard to meet people here. There are plenty of meetups and groups to join. I meet a lot of digital nomads who come and go, but my wife and I have a small group of friends that are living here long term. There's also a Rotary Club here that we have been thinking about joining.
My wife and I have also been rewatching Gilmore Girls. We agree that it would be really nice to live somewhere like their fictional town of Stars Hollow, in Connecticut. The main reason is to be part of a close-knit community, but also because that area has distinct seasons (especially fall and winter), beautiful architecture, history, and close proximity to New York. I ended up reading quite a lot of articles and blog posts from people who want the same thing, and have visited similar towns in Connecticut. One blog post was a bit depressing [5]. They are saying that this town could never exist, because of big-box stores like Walmart who are killing many small businesses.
YC has a plan to build a new city, so I hope they are thinking about these things. I think the issues of community and isolation might be more important than anything else.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarian_Universalism
[2] https://www.rotary.org/en
[3] http://www.stjohn.org.nz/What-we-do/Community-programmes/Car...
[4] http://highstreetcohousing.nz/
[5] https://thecompletistblog.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/stars-hol...
I've recently been searching for some alternatives. There's Unitarian Universalists [1], who welcomes people from any faith, including atheists and agnostics. You can discuss any religion openly, and they have regular services on Sunday where you can socialize, enjoy some music, and listen to a speaker.
There's also the Rotary Club [2], where people regularly meet for meals, and work to help their community. Then there's the Freemasons, but I don't think that's for me.
I might like to organize a secular humanist "church" or club with regular meetings and meals. I think it would be nice to have discussions about philosophy and science, maybe watch some documentaries and talks together, and have a book club.
Another random thought on the topic of isolation: St. John's runs a "caring caller" [3] service in New Zealand, where people can volunteer to call elderly people on the phone, and just have conversations with them. If I'm ever back in New Zealand, I think I would like to get involved with that.
Also in New Zealand: The High Street Cohousing project [4] in Dunedin. I think it's a fantastic idea. I love the idea of a shared community space, and the sustainability. I'm seriously thinking about getting involved, or maybe I can buy one of the houses in the future.
I enjoy living in Chiang Mai, and it's not too hard to meet people here. There are plenty of meetups and groups to join. I meet a lot of digital nomads who come and go, but my wife and I have a small group of friends that are living here long term. There's also a Rotary Club here that we have been thinking about joining.
My wife and I have also been rewatching Gilmore Girls. We agree that it would be really nice to live somewhere like their fictional town of Stars Hollow, in Connecticut. The main reason is to be part of a close-knit community, but also because that area has distinct seasons (especially fall and winter), beautiful architecture, history, and close proximity to New York. I ended up reading quite a lot of articles and blog posts from people who want the same thing, and have visited similar towns in Connecticut. One blog post was a bit depressing [5]. They are saying that this town could never exist, because of big-box stores like Walmart who are killing many small businesses.
YC has a plan to build a new city, so I hope they are thinking about these things. I think the issues of community and isolation might be more important than anything else.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitarian_Universalism
[2] https://www.rotary.org/en
[3] http://www.stjohn.org.nz/What-we-do/Community-programmes/Car...
[4] http://highstreetcohousing.nz/
[5] https://thecompletistblog.wordpress.com/2014/06/06/stars-hol...
I wonder if intelligence and propensity-to-learn gaps are major causes of social isolation among us here. I feel that they are two of the most important factors affecting my social life, from childhood up to now. The times I felt less socially isolated had always been when I studied or worked among some of the more intelligent and eager-to-learn people. And it gets more pronounced as I grow more mature and have spent more time learning and thinking.
I found this out a few years ago and thought it might be pertinent to my situation: “Observation shows that there is a direct ratio between the intelligence of the leader and that of the led. To be a leader of his contemporaries a child must be more intelligent but not too much more intelligent than those to be led… But generally speaking, a leadership pattern will not form—or it will break up—when a discrepancy of more than about 30 points of IQ comes to exist between leader and led [1]
I grew up in a developing country with inadequate educational system, to put it mildly. I have always done well academically, ranking top 10 nation-wide in two middle school exams. I got impatient and skipped two years of high school to attend a local college, which is considered a 'good' one. (I picked it for personal reasons, while having the 'national entrance exam' score high enough to pick the top university in the country.) I became increasingly aware of how much most people think differently in those years, as I could ace most analytical tests without putting much efforts and my friends struggled. We remained good friends but we shared few interests and not much in common intellectually. (I can perform most other activities, like sports or dance, fairly well given the little amount of time I spend on them, but I find most of them boring.)
Then I got a scholarship to study in a top 10 CS graduate departments in the US. I found out that there are many more people who share my interests and we can interact on equal terms intellectually. I moved back to the country after graduation and started to suffer social isolation again.
I dated someone who is a bit above average in intelligence but did not have the patience to explain everything so we parted away soon after. I had since have trouble finding people who I can be myself with in most respects intellectually and can explain my thought process concisely and get them to give interesting responses back in turn. For friends, it's not as big a problem since we usually don't have to see each other that often; but for dates, I think it might be a problem after a while. (Please let me know if and why you disagree. It would be helpful.)
Earlier this year, I went back to live for a few months in a very intellectual city with a top university in the US and felt like I could connect with people around me again. Unfortunately, it will take quite a bit of efforts to move there permanently.
If anyone has a differing perspective and interpretation that I have, please comment here. I'd love to connect better with the 'intellectually average' people as well.
[1] http://www.functionalmovement.com/articles/Philosophy/2013-0...
I found this out a few years ago and thought it might be pertinent to my situation: “Observation shows that there is a direct ratio between the intelligence of the leader and that of the led. To be a leader of his contemporaries a child must be more intelligent but not too much more intelligent than those to be led… But generally speaking, a leadership pattern will not form—or it will break up—when a discrepancy of more than about 30 points of IQ comes to exist between leader and led [1]
I grew up in a developing country with inadequate educational system, to put it mildly. I have always done well academically, ranking top 10 nation-wide in two middle school exams. I got impatient and skipped two years of high school to attend a local college, which is considered a 'good' one. (I picked it for personal reasons, while having the 'national entrance exam' score high enough to pick the top university in the country.) I became increasingly aware of how much most people think differently in those years, as I could ace most analytical tests without putting much efforts and my friends struggled. We remained good friends but we shared few interests and not much in common intellectually. (I can perform most other activities, like sports or dance, fairly well given the little amount of time I spend on them, but I find most of them boring.)
Then I got a scholarship to study in a top 10 CS graduate departments in the US. I found out that there are many more people who share my interests and we can interact on equal terms intellectually. I moved back to the country after graduation and started to suffer social isolation again.
I dated someone who is a bit above average in intelligence but did not have the patience to explain everything so we parted away soon after. I had since have trouble finding people who I can be myself with in most respects intellectually and can explain my thought process concisely and get them to give interesting responses back in turn. For friends, it's not as big a problem since we usually don't have to see each other that often; but for dates, I think it might be a problem after a while. (Please let me know if and why you disagree. It would be helpful.)
Earlier this year, I went back to live for a few months in a very intellectual city with a top university in the US and felt like I could connect with people around me again. Unfortunately, it will take quite a bit of efforts to move there permanently.
If anyone has a differing perspective and interpretation that I have, please comment here. I'd love to connect better with the 'intellectually average' people as well.
[1] http://www.functionalmovement.com/articles/Philosophy/2013-0...
Getting married helps.
I have been "lonely" most of my life. I have lived in a terrible town growing up where everyone lived on the other side of town.
I went to college where nothing was happening and nothing is really interesting and I didn't connect with anyone really.
Now, I am reaching 30, and have spent the most of my 20s trying to find a way to move to a place that will make me happy. I'm hoping this will eventually happen, but I have lost a lot of hope.
I don't feel connected to humans whatsoever. However, the greatest joy for me is sitting in front of my computer interacting with you folk.
I don't get social interaction...
I went to college where nothing was happening and nothing is really interesting and I didn't connect with anyone really.
Now, I am reaching 30, and have spent the most of my 20s trying to find a way to move to a place that will make me happy. I'm hoping this will eventually happen, but I have lost a lot of hope.
I don't feel connected to humans whatsoever. However, the greatest joy for me is sitting in front of my computer interacting with you folk.
I don't get social interaction...
I feel the exact same way. It's quite strange. I find I can't connect with others either. In my job I appear to be quite social and pass largely as someone who is considered nice and socially adept...not that I'm not a nice person I just mean nice in the sense of being easy to get along with and "understanding" people but unless I have a given context for interacting with someone (like...work) I've been deemed 'too intense' to be around for a long time in my life. I can't just turn 'me' off so I often find it hard to make friends. I'm lucky that I met my wife because she's very understanding of my peculiarities. If it want for her I wouldn't have a lot of social interactions outside work at all.
i feel you man, I feel you
i feel you man, I feel you
Man, could I give an advice to you? Don't expect too much from other people, and try you to create "events" and invite some people, with similar interests, to join with you. Don't worry about the "no"s you will receive, pay attention to the "yes". The change start on you. This works for me.
I mean I still try and I give more than I receive for sure, but nothing seems to be working.
For the first half of my 20s I didn't leave the house under the assumption that, "if I work hard, I can live where I want to and find a job in a cool place. No reason to make friends now."
I have since replaced that assumption, but it's hard to find meaningful relationships in a place you despise.
For the first half of my 20s I didn't leave the house under the assumption that, "if I work hard, I can live where I want to and find a job in a cool place. No reason to make friends now."
I have since replaced that assumption, but it's hard to find meaningful relationships in a place you despise.
Do you despise all people living in the place you live now?
Take this lightly, but I bet you can find at least one more person that "despises" your place and you can discuss that with them. :)
Take this lightly, but I bet you can find at least one more person that "despises" your place and you can discuss that with them. :)
I will say that my limited connections comes from mutual hate and not mutual interests.
Not sure if that is good or bad.
Not sure if that is good or bad.
My (not so limited) connections come from continuously contact, not common interests or hates.
Very different, oposing views and values can break a relationship. Very similar views cannot make them - only if this similarity leads to continuous contact.
My friends come from: childhood neighboors, two student organizations I was part of and college soccer team. Each of these environments allowed for years long contact with the same people. And from that came friendships. Not from similar anything.
Friendships are born from tedious hours of boring conversation with random people that only happened because no one there had nothing else better to do.
That comfortable feeling of having a meaningful relationship only comes years after that.
Very different, oposing views and values can break a relationship. Very similar views cannot make them - only if this similarity leads to continuous contact.
My friends come from: childhood neighboors, two student organizations I was part of and college soccer team. Each of these environments allowed for years long contact with the same people. And from that came friendships. Not from similar anything.
Friendships are born from tedious hours of boring conversation with random people that only happened because no one there had nothing else better to do.
That comfortable feeling of having a meaningful relationship only comes years after that.
Agree with this, circumstance can accelerate this process: sharing some mutual experience like going on a tour or living in a foreign country can leave you making friends with people you would probably never have associated with back home
As mentioned elsewhere: meetup.com
If you live in a community too small to have a meetup, make one yourself and see if anyone attends. I did it, fully expecting not a single person to show up. I met so many people through that, starting in a community of under 70,000 people.
If you live in a community too small to have a meetup, make one yourself and see if anyone attends. I did it, fully expecting not a single person to show up. I met so many people through that, starting in a community of under 70,000 people.
Are there any meetups in your area or other groups that have weekly/monthly meetings? If not, can I ask where you are located? Also, have you tried volunteering? Or teaching a free class at a library or civic organization?
Life (generally) returns what a portion of what you give. If you never put yourself out there, you can't get relationships back in return. I'd focus first on getting new acquaintances, they don't have to be friends. As your circles grow, you will find some number of actual friends.
Life (generally) returns what a portion of what you give. If you never put yourself out there, you can't get relationships back in return. I'd focus first on getting new acquaintances, they don't have to be friends. As your circles grow, you will find some number of actual friends.
For 4 years, at university, I lived surrounded by people I didn't found interesting, and I was pretty sure that I was the problem.
Then I changed the city, and found cool people, smart and interesting, I never was so happy.
I really hope you do not stop trying, and find your place.
I really hope you do not stop trying, and find your place.
> Don't expect too much from other people
I think you have to at least "expect" things to change for the better socially. Maybe its just a matter of finding the right people where you can set expectations of each other? There will be times when the expectations cannot be met, but respect and communication help with that.
Maybe this view is too idealistic :/
I think you have to at least "expect" things to change for the better socially. Maybe its just a matter of finding the right people where you can set expectations of each other? There will be times when the expectations cannot be met, but respect and communication help with that.
Maybe this view is too idealistic :/
Sorry, I tried to mean, don't expect people will "love" you easily or for few reasons. Don't do good things to people expecting they will do the same to you, just do.
I used to be like you. I am high functioning autistic so social interaction is mentally very hard for me and I feel completely drained after talking to people for an extended period of time. That said, I am now quite extroverted, especially when intoxicated.
Making friends is hard. I am a lot more social than I used to be now but I have a wide and shallow list of people I get along with. I don't feel there is anyone I am actually close to (other than my wife and kids). So don't take my advice too closely because I am definitely not a model for socialisation, I spend most of my free time child raising and studying.
If I can give one piece of advice it is that you should get involved in some activities. Be it sports, gaming, joining a hackerspace, whatever it really doesn't matter what it is as long as there is some level of complexity that keeps people hooked and enough to keep you interested as well. You will find that in situations of mutual difficulty you find the people you actually like and the people who actually like you. As long as you aren't a completely antisocial arsehole you should develop a connection to someone eventually if you just throw yourself into it. Listen to people when they talk, almost everyone has some interesting story lurking away inside them. Even if you don't like them at all you can at least be entertained by the occasional anecdote or bizarre circumstance. The important thing is to try and you might surprise yourself.
Making friends is hard. I am a lot more social than I used to be now but I have a wide and shallow list of people I get along with. I don't feel there is anyone I am actually close to (other than my wife and kids). So don't take my advice too closely because I am definitely not a model for socialisation, I spend most of my free time child raising and studying.
If I can give one piece of advice it is that you should get involved in some activities. Be it sports, gaming, joining a hackerspace, whatever it really doesn't matter what it is as long as there is some level of complexity that keeps people hooked and enough to keep you interested as well. You will find that in situations of mutual difficulty you find the people you actually like and the people who actually like you. As long as you aren't a completely antisocial arsehole you should develop a connection to someone eventually if you just throw yourself into it. Listen to people when they talk, almost everyone has some interesting story lurking away inside them. Even if you don't like them at all you can at least be entertained by the occasional anecdote or bizarre circumstance. The important thing is to try and you might surprise yourself.
As somebody else on the spectrum, how did you get to understand dating? I find that I miss so many cues, and there's a lot about human interactions that I don't understand.
Bit of a necro (raised from a dead thread) reply but worth adding a little more.
I gave up trying to pick up all the cues at all. Instead I focus mainly just on conversation. It take a lot of work but it is possible (for me at least) to focus entirely on the content and when to say something, when not to in an almost scripted way. Listen to conversation and interject at the right time. I am interested in almost everything and if you listen and probe well enough then you will find almost anyone has something interesting to say or an amusing story to tell. That said, I don't pick up on much of the group interaction at all but it doesn't matter. All this is quite mentally challenging but just focusing on one part, the conversation, and not all of the other meta communication is pretty much how I do it. It is still quite stressful and mentally draining but I think that I can mostly hold a discussion with random strangers now. People will either think I am an interesting person to talk to or not and we part ways.
How this ties back into dating is where it gets interesting. I've had remarkable luck in forming lasting relationships just by talking to people, I usually miss all of the early cues entirely and I don't even know whether someone is interested in me until their number is in my phone (the modern equivalent is adding you on facebook) or some similar forward sign. The important thing is just to start the conversation and to listen to people. Don't hold any preconceptions about people; be open and friendly and be unafraid to talk about yourself and your own experiences.
I gave up trying to pick up all the cues at all. Instead I focus mainly just on conversation. It take a lot of work but it is possible (for me at least) to focus entirely on the content and when to say something, when not to in an almost scripted way. Listen to conversation and interject at the right time. I am interested in almost everything and if you listen and probe well enough then you will find almost anyone has something interesting to say or an amusing story to tell. That said, I don't pick up on much of the group interaction at all but it doesn't matter. All this is quite mentally challenging but just focusing on one part, the conversation, and not all of the other meta communication is pretty much how I do it. It is still quite stressful and mentally draining but I think that I can mostly hold a discussion with random strangers now. People will either think I am an interesting person to talk to or not and we part ways.
How this ties back into dating is where it gets interesting. I've had remarkable luck in forming lasting relationships just by talking to people, I usually miss all of the early cues entirely and I don't even know whether someone is interested in me until their number is in my phone (the modern equivalent is adding you on facebook) or some similar forward sign. The important thing is just to start the conversation and to listen to people. Don't hold any preconceptions about people; be open and friendly and be unafraid to talk about yourself and your own experiences.
I missed sooooo many cues. I started having much, much better luck in my mid-twenties when I just said fuck it, and started making moves on date 2 or 3 without trying to 'read the situation, see if she'd react favorably first'. And even after I started doing that I'd get women saying afterwards, "Phew! I thought you might not like me before you did that!" to which I'd always think "You're crazy! I would have ended the date or not asked you out again if I wasn't interested!"
Thanks, that makes sense! Sorry if this sounds autistic, but what kind of moves did you make and how did you know you weren't jumping the gun too soon?
If you are a guy, you're not alone. We just generally suck at cues. Ya gotta get lucky and find someone to spell it out for you. At least that's how I met my wife.
Shit. The older I get the more I realise I may have missed or misinterpreted cues. I've started wondering if I am on the spectrum.
>I've started wondering if I am on the spectrum.
This is an honest fear of mine. Maybe "fear" isn't the right word, but I feel like I exhibit behaviors that would indicate I'm on the spectrum, but they're always intentional and rooted in the idea that I don't want to bother or disturb others.
So I keep to myself, avoid eye contact, and don't initiate conversation if it's for "selfish" reasons. I need an excuse to be social that isn't just "because I want to". If I have such an excuse (like I'm part of an established group, or it's business related, or so on), I have absolutely no problem. Only when the purpose is personal or self-serving do I have problems. Not because I don't want to interact, but because my fear is that in doing so I'll just upset or annoy everyone else. I've been actively fighting this peculiarity for many years (with professional help) and while it's gotten better it's still very difficult. And I think from an outside perspective this comes off as a bit like mild autistic behavior.
This is an honest fear of mine. Maybe "fear" isn't the right word, but I feel like I exhibit behaviors that would indicate I'm on the spectrum, but they're always intentional and rooted in the idea that I don't want to bother or disturb others.
So I keep to myself, avoid eye contact, and don't initiate conversation if it's for "selfish" reasons. I need an excuse to be social that isn't just "because I want to". If I have such an excuse (like I'm part of an established group, or it's business related, or so on), I have absolutely no problem. Only when the purpose is personal or self-serving do I have problems. Not because I don't want to interact, but because my fear is that in doing so I'll just upset or annoy everyone else. I've been actively fighting this peculiarity for many years (with professional help) and while it's gotten better it's still very difficult. And I think from an outside perspective this comes off as a bit like mild autistic behavior.
I'm the same, except I actually found such a place: a 38-person student cooperative during my last year of college. I'm convinced living in a creaky old house with a varied cast of characters is the way to go for a happy and socially fulfilling life. College is almost a decade behind me, but I hope to find such a place again before I turn 30. (And one that's hopefully not 100% filled with startup folks... we need artists, writers, researchers, educators, and everything else -- not just programmers.)
Yes, I completely agree. The difficulty is finding the right people. And I don't think of this as being exactly the same as co-living or other movements. I'm not sure what to call it...but it requires a certain mindset...or maybe we're thinking of different setups. The "creaky old house" says a lot about the character of the people; I don't think that's a small detail--not that it would have to be a creaky old house, but that the occupants wouldn't mind that. Because for the living conditions there is a priority above materialism...
One thing I really loved about our house is that it bore the scars of many past generations. Odd wiring... staircases leading to nowhere... strange wooden fixtures holding things up... handmade room extensions. The house had its own eccentric character, shaped by the people who lived in it.
>However, the greatest joy for me is sitting in front of my computer interacting with you folk.
That sounds like my version of hell.
I think the best thing you can do is ask people to do things with you. Many will say no, but that's okay. Eventually you'll make friends.
That sounds like my version of hell.
I think the best thing you can do is ask people to do things with you. Many will say no, but that's okay. Eventually you'll make friends.
I hear you.
Be happy where you are. It's essentially a form of self-delusion. And I DARE you to watch Ren & Stimpy's "Stimpy's Invention[1]" and not be happy, at least for a little while.
[1] in which Stimpy invents "The Happy Helmet" and Ren is his ... involuntary happiness subject. And yes - it's on YouTube.
"I don't think you're happy enough! That's right! I'll teach you to be happy! I'll teach your grandmother to suck eggs!"
Be happy where you are. It's essentially a form of self-delusion. And I DARE you to watch Ren & Stimpy's "Stimpy's Invention[1]" and not be happy, at least for a little while.
[1] in which Stimpy invents "The Happy Helmet" and Ren is his ... involuntary happiness subject. And yes - it's on YouTube.
"I don't think you're happy enough! That's right! I'll teach you to be happy! I'll teach your grandmother to suck eggs!"
Haha this is so funny as I found myself singing "happy happy joy joy" earlier today.
Now I have the Dog Pound Hop (the intro song) stuck in my head.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVRJ8TiicM4
Love that rockabilly beat. Can't be sad when listening to that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVRJ8TiicM4
Love that rockabilly beat. Can't be sad when listening to that.
For music along similar lines, check out Wes Montgomery https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU3OwXyL5R8
At age 30 most people are strong and healthy. That is huge asset. When you get older like 60 or 70 you may start losing these and needvto depend on others whether friends or government. Young people feel invincible, read some of these nebulous self help articles and believe they will never become dependent. Well we have news for you - life is not always roses.
What?
Hey, welcome to the club! I loved reading your comment and feel more connected now. Ah, the social webs of hacker news, can't beat it. Except I say stupid shit sometimes and get downvoted to oblivion. Let me tell you something... There is no place you can move to cure what you have. Sorry.
Going to encouragingly dispute that. Tech hubs are full of people who came out of just this situation and are ecstatic at having found a like-minded community. You may not suddenly be a social butterfly, but the chances of making friends and finding meetups you enjoy etc go up by literal orders of magnitude. If you're an isolated computer type, you owe it to yourself to at least visit a place like this for a weekend and schedule some meetups or job interviews etc to see what life could be like.
> move to a place that will make me happy
I'm sorry, but that is not how it works.
You are what's making you unhappy, and that's what you have to change. The good thing is you have plenty of free time to do it in, and all the power to do it.
I'm sorry, but that is not how it works.
You are what's making you unhappy, and that's what you have to change. The good thing is you have plenty of free time to do it in, and all the power to do it.
Unfortunately, as someone who has lived in many, many places, this is true. People are socializing everywhere and if you're lonely where you are, you will probably be lonely anywhere. Unless you're flamboyantly gay in Aleppo, or something, moving probably won't affect your ability to socialize too much.
However. I've found there is a period of increased energy upon moving to a new city. During this period, I am more open and alert, more willing to start conversations that may not end well.
When you live in a place for years, a mental cocoon forms that blocks out most of the stimuli.
When you live in a place for years, a mental cocoon forms that blocks out most of the stimuli.
I used to feel this way, and occasionally still do, but it is no longer the pervasive norm.
I still don't connect to most folks, but that's ok. I found a few.
But I also moved countries, so the stakes changed and so did my relationship with the world around me. Best thing I've ever done.
I still don't connect to most folks, but that's ok. I found a few.
But I also moved countries, so the stakes changed and so did my relationship with the world around me. Best thing I've ever done.
TLDR - Stop worrying about finding the perfect place and try to get the best out of what is around you. Find a local volunteer opportunity that will force you to interact with random people and other volunteers (volunteermatch.org is not a bad choice). Just pick something and do it immediately, you may find better/different connections than you would with friends (I have at least).
Long version:
I have a couple recommendations that could help you to connect with people better if you can take a couple minutes to read this, its a little longer than I would like but I really think that you can turn things around. I am by no means an expert and I have struggled with isolation myself at other times in my life, but I do feel like I have made some small improvements so my guess is you could to.
First off, while I think a location can be either conducive or adverse to the type of lifestyle you would like, I think a big part of how well or poorly you fit into a place is on you - you get out of it what you put into it (or something like that). That sucks to hear and you probably already know it and I think it is the truth. The only reason I say that is to caution you to not overlook what might be around you already. That being said, I have a buddy who I feel like was in a similar situation until he picked up and move to Portland kind of on a whim (after doing similar things with other places) and this time it worked out for him (so far), but he probably had to be ready and open to good things happening or else it would have been like it had been before in other places.
More importantly, I think it is way easier to connect with people outside of what we typically think of as "social" situations. I've never liked going to bars to meet people or any kind of mixer situation although these days I'm much better at it. What really did it for me was to go way out of my comfort zone and do volunteer activities that forced me to do things I really didn't feel like doing but I kind of put myself in a situation that made it hard to give into my desire to bail. The main one for me was political volunteering, starting during the primaries of this year and going into the general election. The outcome was devastating but the process and the changes I felt were pretty amazing. The actual work required connecting with total strangers in situations where I otherwise never would have: registering people to vote (talking to people on the street, going to large festivals and walking around and talking to strangers), going door to door to talk to people (mostly giving information but also trying to convince people to vote and giving them my personal opinions), and phone banking (talking to random strangers who were mostly in my city but who I would never likely meet). All these things were really uncomfortable at first but once I met the organizers involved and got excited by their excitement and passion I would sign up for something and then it was like "well, guess I gotta do it". Lock yourself into something that can't really hurt you but that pushes you outside your comfort zone.
After doing all of that, at 30 years old I felt like I had kind of finally figured out how to be a part of my own environment (as opposed to a mindless drone only focused on going from A->B). I haven't found my "next thing" yet, but since then I've found many social situations to be easier than they used to be, even something as stupid as buying a car was 10x less stressful than it used to be for me (and I got a couple grand better of a deal than I usually would have). Once you get over knocking on the door of a strangers house and realizing that a) most people are actually pretty cool and b) the vast majority of the time you are going to be totally fine no matter what, a lot of other things feel like a cakewalk. I met more new people in 6 months than in the prior 6 years and since we were all going to a similar stressful time, connecting was easy for once (even though aside from politics personality wise nobody was that similar to me).
All that to say this: forget (or at least, demphasize) the typical social stuff and find a cause that you can get on board with, just pull the trigger and show up and say "what can I do?". Don't spend ages shopping around for something to do (I've done that, I had no less than 60 bookmarks from a volunteermatch.org at one point before this, never did a single one of them), look around in your area (volunteermatch.org is not bad if you don't abuse it like I did), find anything that will involve working with other people you don't know (both other volunteers and strangers ideally, which is a lot of things) and just sign yourself up and do it. In my experience once you are actually there, nature kind of takes its course. I may be lucky in that but my problem has largely been hesitation. If you are male you will find in a lot of volunteer situations that you will be one of the few men and your contributions will be appreciated if you don't hold back and give it your best shot. You won't have to deal with the weirdness of finding a like-minded social group to fit into and honestly, I enjoyed the interactions I had more than I usually would have in a purely social environment (sometimes working towards a common goal that isn't job is more fun than just hanging out).
I know this was long as hell but your comment got the juices flowing, sorry if it was a slog but I've had my perception change quite a lot over the last year (in some ways at least) and I would like to think that other people can have a similar experience.
Long version:
I have a couple recommendations that could help you to connect with people better if you can take a couple minutes to read this, its a little longer than I would like but I really think that you can turn things around. I am by no means an expert and I have struggled with isolation myself at other times in my life, but I do feel like I have made some small improvements so my guess is you could to.
First off, while I think a location can be either conducive or adverse to the type of lifestyle you would like, I think a big part of how well or poorly you fit into a place is on you - you get out of it what you put into it (or something like that). That sucks to hear and you probably already know it and I think it is the truth. The only reason I say that is to caution you to not overlook what might be around you already. That being said, I have a buddy who I feel like was in a similar situation until he picked up and move to Portland kind of on a whim (after doing similar things with other places) and this time it worked out for him (so far), but he probably had to be ready and open to good things happening or else it would have been like it had been before in other places.
More importantly, I think it is way easier to connect with people outside of what we typically think of as "social" situations. I've never liked going to bars to meet people or any kind of mixer situation although these days I'm much better at it. What really did it for me was to go way out of my comfort zone and do volunteer activities that forced me to do things I really didn't feel like doing but I kind of put myself in a situation that made it hard to give into my desire to bail. The main one for me was political volunteering, starting during the primaries of this year and going into the general election. The outcome was devastating but the process and the changes I felt were pretty amazing. The actual work required connecting with total strangers in situations where I otherwise never would have: registering people to vote (talking to people on the street, going to large festivals and walking around and talking to strangers), going door to door to talk to people (mostly giving information but also trying to convince people to vote and giving them my personal opinions), and phone banking (talking to random strangers who were mostly in my city but who I would never likely meet). All these things were really uncomfortable at first but once I met the organizers involved and got excited by their excitement and passion I would sign up for something and then it was like "well, guess I gotta do it". Lock yourself into something that can't really hurt you but that pushes you outside your comfort zone.
After doing all of that, at 30 years old I felt like I had kind of finally figured out how to be a part of my own environment (as opposed to a mindless drone only focused on going from A->B). I haven't found my "next thing" yet, but since then I've found many social situations to be easier than they used to be, even something as stupid as buying a car was 10x less stressful than it used to be for me (and I got a couple grand better of a deal than I usually would have). Once you get over knocking on the door of a strangers house and realizing that a) most people are actually pretty cool and b) the vast majority of the time you are going to be totally fine no matter what, a lot of other things feel like a cakewalk. I met more new people in 6 months than in the prior 6 years and since we were all going to a similar stressful time, connecting was easy for once (even though aside from politics personality wise nobody was that similar to me).
All that to say this: forget (or at least, demphasize) the typical social stuff and find a cause that you can get on board with, just pull the trigger and show up and say "what can I do?". Don't spend ages shopping around for something to do (I've done that, I had no less than 60 bookmarks from a volunteermatch.org at one point before this, never did a single one of them), look around in your area (volunteermatch.org is not bad if you don't abuse it like I did), find anything that will involve working with other people you don't know (both other volunteers and strangers ideally, which is a lot of things) and just sign yourself up and do it. In my experience once you are actually there, nature kind of takes its course. I may be lucky in that but my problem has largely been hesitation. If you are male you will find in a lot of volunteer situations that you will be one of the few men and your contributions will be appreciated if you don't hold back and give it your best shot. You won't have to deal with the weirdness of finding a like-minded social group to fit into and honestly, I enjoyed the interactions I had more than I usually would have in a purely social environment (sometimes working towards a common goal that isn't job is more fun than just hanging out).
I know this was long as hell but your comment got the juices flowing, sorry if it was a slog but I've had my perception change quite a lot over the last year (in some ways at least) and I would like to think that other people can have a similar experience.
Thanks for the very long response. I will definitely look into volunteering. I am apart of the Planetary Society volunteer program, but never really do anything with them.
I guess I just need to start doing it and not question it so much
I guess I just need to start doing it and not question it so much
Social isolation is a huge problem. There's stigma around declaring it.
I'm doing my part to address this problem right now:
I'm doing my part to address this problem right now:
Any HN'ers in downtown Vancouver reading this post, let's
grab coffee near Robson Square. My email is in my profile
and synced to my phone so I will reply promptly.
To some extent, Meetups help. It's not just an opportunity to hear about the latest in a filed that you have an interest in, but also an avenue to meet-and-greet.
I always found Meetups impersonal and difficult to socialize in large crowds due to my debilating social anxiety.
Btw, nobody showed up yesterday but I haven't given up. I'm here from 9am ~ 5pm near Robson Square. Coffee (or tea) is on me.
If you are not in Vancouver then shoot me an email, you can talk about anything.
Btw, nobody showed up yesterday but I haven't given up. I'm here from 9am ~ 5pm near Robson Square. Coffee (or tea) is on me.
If you are not in Vancouver then shoot me an email, you can talk about anything.
I found Meetup to be the same way for me. So I'm starting something that allows you to limit how many people can join and have the option to create plans without needing a Meetup Group. Check it out TheCoopApp.com and let me know what you think.
I love the idea but I'm stuck on the "Logging in" page looking at a diamond-shaped spinner on both Firefox (50.0) and Chromium (53.0.2785.143), both on Linux. I notice the page is trying to load a script from facebook.net, something that's not going to happen on any system that I have control over. Not sure if that's the problem or if it's something else...
To know your dying, and to have no one in your life is a very scary place to be in.
Why's that? Nobody will be sad when you do so there's that silver lining.
Not as bad, but it's scary even if you aren't dying.
Here's a book from 1974 [1] by Robert Weiss, whose first (sample) chapter [2] reads very similar to the NYTimes piece, and covers many of the same issues, even before the internet was around. In particular, it draws the line (much more clearly than the NYTimes piece) between what it calls loneliness of emotional isolation and loneliness of social isolation, and, to me, its examples like the condition of married couples who moved far away are much more salient (and convincing) than reliance on surveys and dry statements like "loneliness can accelerate cognitive decline" and "increases risk of heart disease by 29%".
Am I missing something?
P.S. One cool thing I learned about from reading about Cacioppo's research is that when designing a survey about loneliness you can't ask questions like "do you feel lonely?" because it's much too ambiguous and people end up giving incoherent useless answers. I never thought something so basic could be so confusing to people.
[1] https://mitpress.mit.edu/books/loneliness
[2] https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/titles/content/...