I've always been a bit of a loner. I know this, and I tend to avoid large groups. Malls give me anxiety. Just this last week, I discovered at a retirement party that I have a significantly low tolerance for small talk. I respond to idle chatter by experiencing a massive urge to flee. To most people, this may be perceived as a personality deficit; however, I would argue that my inability to tolerate large groups and inane conversations is actually an embraceable personality trait.
One, I spend a lot of time observing the behavior of others. I enjoy watching how people interact, and I pick up a lot of queues that others miss because they are too actively involved in communicating verbally. I observe nervous tics, physical traits, and social patterns. Believe it or not, large groups are very predictable. I would equate the predictabiliy to that of a traffic jam. As a person would operate a car stuck in traffic, group participants behave with a measure of predictability. There are those, like me, who maintain a space cushion, attempting to regulate the speed at which they move throughout the group. Maybe these are people who like to be in control, who want to thumb their nose at the idea that they must move in tandem with others. These are the non-conformists. Then there are those who keep changing lanes. These are the people who flit from one conversation to another, unable to commit to a lane because they keep pursuing space in another. From one conversation to the next, they are constantly moving. They are seemingly unaware that they are not making more progress than any other. I imagine these people to be the social butterflies. Finally, there are those who commit to one lane, even if it is not moving. These are those who will not pick up a queue that a conversation has fizzled. They will continue to stand in conversation with one group because the idea of changing lanes is fraught with unknown possibilities. I would argue that these people are indecisive. They appear to be committing to something when, in effect, they are afraid to make choices, which can sometimes be crippling. The end result is that they will continue to stay in one place out of fear of the unknown. They are the non-lane-changers.
Two, I am extremely self sufficient. Being a loner means that I am most comfortable in my own company. I do not seek others to help me complete tasks. Some might argue that this, again, is a detriment. However, I've found that this allows me greater freedom and provides me with an increased potential for learning. When I attempt to complete a task on my own, without input from others, I am challenged to learn something. I am able to make decisions without needing a consensus. I must creatively and actively THINK. Many times, people already have the ability to solve a problem on their own, but they depend on others to provide answers. I acknowledge that there are times when it is imperative that you consult with others, as you may need a subject matter expert, or you may need to spark creativity or see a different perspective. However, there are those who cannot complete a task or make a decision on their own. These are those who need groups to function. I am not one of those, and I am profoundly glad.
Three, while alone, I spend a lot of time thinking. Being resistant to groups means that I have a lot of time to think about my feelings, behaviors, and actions. I find that, when I am forced to exist in this world of groups, I have very little time to spend with myself. I actually physically crave my alone time. I have many friends who never crave alone time. I, quite honestly, don't know how they do it. I need that time to self-reflect. I need that time to do the things that I enjoy, which do not usually involve others. I like to read (voraciously), I like to write (adequately). I could never give these things up without giving up a part of myself. My interests and group activities are mutually exclusive.
Unfortunately, it seems as though it might be human nature to need to be a part of a group. I can't fight it, and I don't condemn it. I belong to groups. What I do not accept is the social stigma applied to the "loners". It is actually possible to be a contributing member of society but to actively prefer your own company. To those of you that I have possibly offended with my antisocial behavior, I apologize. My social inadequacies are, quite honestly, conscious choices that I make. I prefer it that way (I mentioned before, I like control). What I ask is that you recognize that, when you are in a group and see us loners against the wall, you do not assume that we are deficient in some way.
Unfortunately, I don't know any of these loners because, by nature of our loner-ness, we've never met.
One, I spend a lot of time observing the behavior of others. I enjoy watching how people interact, and I pick up a lot of queues that others miss because they are too actively involved in communicating verbally. I observe nervous tics, physical traits, and social patterns. Believe it or not, large groups are very predictable. I would equate the predictabiliy to that of a traffic jam. As a person would operate a car stuck in traffic, group participants behave with a measure of predictability. There are those, like me, who maintain a space cushion, attempting to regulate the speed at which they move throughout the group. Maybe these are people who like to be in control, who want to thumb their nose at the idea that they must move in tandem with others. These are the non-conformists. Then there are those who keep changing lanes. These are the people who flit from one conversation to another, unable to commit to a lane because they keep pursuing space in another. From one conversation to the next, they are constantly moving. They are seemingly unaware that they are not making more progress than any other. I imagine these people to be the social butterflies. Finally, there are those who commit to one lane, even if it is not moving. These are those who will not pick up a queue that a conversation has fizzled. They will continue to stand in conversation with one group because the idea of changing lanes is fraught with unknown possibilities. I would argue that these people are indecisive. They appear to be committing to something when, in effect, they are afraid to make choices, which can sometimes be crippling. The end result is that they will continue to stay in one place out of fear of the unknown. They are the non-lane-changers.
Two, I am extremely self sufficient. Being a loner means that I am most comfortable in my own company. I do not seek others to help me complete tasks. Some might argue that this, again, is a detriment. However, I've found that this allows me greater freedom and provides me with an increased potential for learning. When I attempt to complete a task on my own, without input from others, I am challenged to learn something. I am able to make decisions without needing a consensus. I must creatively and actively THINK. Many times, people already have the ability to solve a problem on their own, but they depend on others to provide answers. I acknowledge that there are times when it is imperative that you consult with others, as you may need a subject matter expert, or you may need to spark creativity or see a different perspective. However, there are those who cannot complete a task or make a decision on their own. These are those who need groups to function. I am not one of those, and I am profoundly glad.
Three, while alone, I spend a lot of time thinking. Being resistant to groups means that I have a lot of time to think about my feelings, behaviors, and actions. I find that, when I am forced to exist in this world of groups, I have very little time to spend with myself. I actually physically crave my alone time. I have many friends who never crave alone time. I, quite honestly, don't know how they do it. I need that time to self-reflect. I need that time to do the things that I enjoy, which do not usually involve others. I like to read (voraciously), I like to write (adequately). I could never give these things up without giving up a part of myself. My interests and group activities are mutually exclusive.
Unfortunately, it seems as though it might be human nature to need to be a part of a group. I can't fight it, and I don't condemn it. I belong to groups. What I do not accept is the social stigma applied to the "loners". It is actually possible to be a contributing member of society but to actively prefer your own company. To those of you that I have possibly offended with my antisocial behavior, I apologize. My social inadequacies are, quite honestly, conscious choices that I make. I prefer it that way (I mentioned before, I like control). What I ask is that you recognize that, when you are in a group and see us loners against the wall, you do not assume that we are deficient in some way.
Unfortunately, I don't know any of these loners because, by nature of our loner-ness, we've never met.
No comments:
Post a Comment