When I was getting my start, it was almost exclusively nerdy white males.

That is no longer the case. Tech now looks a lot more like any other community.

Misanthropy is often a self-fulfilling prophecy. That’s different from social awkwardness or fear.

For myself, I’m “on the spectrum,” so high-stimulus environments are exhausting. That describes most social gatherings; especially amongst neurotypicals. It’s unfair for me to insist that they cater to my proclivities, and it’s also unfair for me to insist that they understand why I am the way I am.

One of the things that I learned, early on, is that I am the variable. It’s not something to be self-pitying about, but understanding myself, helps me to interact better with others. I appreciate it when others understand, but I don’t expect it.

I am old enough. It is not about changed composition. It simply never was true that everyone would be a "nerd" or bullied. Or even majority of us. Or that majority of the people in tech would ever be neurotypical. There might be more neuroatypical people then in teaching, but not enough to make it reasonable default assumption.

Some people were nerds and some people were bullied. There was overlap between those groups, but not perfect circle and it was far from majority of people in tech.

> Misanthropy is often a self-fulfilling prophecy. That’s different from social awkwardness or fear.

Yes. And what I had in mind was something kind of third. When I said "mean I meant literally "being mean": being condescending, telling people they are idiots, mocking them or their interests.

There is being awkward, which is socially punished. And then there is something else that is euphemized away as "awkward" so that we avoid saying something negative.

We also had a lot of ties, back then. Sucked. I did learn to tie a Windsor, though, so I guess it's not a total loss.

Nah, Dunning-Kruger is in effect here. People are frequently far less emotionally-intelligent than they believe themselves to be, and will misinterpret the actions and intentions of others, often projecting onto them their own hang-ups, insecurities, and vices. There is also an erroneous conflation of comfort and prosociality, where someone who merely makes another individual (or, more likely, someone of the social group that individual is a part of with large amounts of social capital) uncomfortable is branded as "mean" or "an asshole", while another person - who is charismatic, but actively harming the people around them - is accepted, or even admired.

IME, "nerds" (frequently neurodivergent) tend to be observant, but have difficulty wearing social masks. This is where the above comes in: they actually have above average emotional intelligence, but because their attempts to be prosocial are considered rather than instinctual, they come off as "unnatural", their efforts are misinterpreted as malice, arrogance, apathy, etc., and they themselves begin to believe that they're socially-inept. Meanwhile, they are, unfortunately, surrounded by people who are often incapable of identifying or acknowledging this dynamic.

The irony is that this comment is meant to elucidate and inspire empathy, but it will itself likely be misinterpreted as condescending.

I am talking about people who are insult others, mean, condescending, refuse to consider very real and practical needs of others as valid. These absolutely exist and they get euphemized away, just like you do it now, as "just being awkward and misunderstood".

You basically refuse to consider such situation, unless the person in question is also charismatic. If someone is not highly charismatic, they can not be jerk, basically.

> The irony is that this comment is meant to elucidate and inspire empathy, but it will itself likely be misinterpreted as condescending.

You are refusing to listen and read what I said, projecting some kind of completely different situations onto the one I described. That wont elucidate empathy, because you are simply not considering what I said in the first place.

> they actually have above average emotional intelligence, but because their attempts to be prosocial are [...] their efforts are misinterpreted as malice, arrogance, apathy

I will stop at "malice". If on ended up doing harm to others unintentionally, his/her emotional and social intelligence is not high. And if it was not unintentional or result of not caring about others, then it is what it is.

Same goes with arrogance. Someone is being overbearing manner to others or operates on the assumption that others are dumb so much, that it is noticeable. When others notice, their conclusion that he is arrogant is correct and valid. It is not awkwardness nor fear nor anything like that.

I didn't say that it doesn't happen. I said that people are very bad at distinguishing when it does from when it isn't happening. The crux of this discussion is regarding when one should make assumptions about someone's possibly antisocial behavior, and I'm saying that most people aren't able to do this in a way that isn't itself antisocial.

>You are refusing to listen and read what I said, projecting some kind of completely different situations onto the one I described. That wont elucidate empathy, because you are simply not considering what I said in the first place.

Please consider the implications of the fact that I said "elucidate and inspire empathy," not "elucidate empathy".

>If on ended up doing harm to others unintentionally

Discomfort is not necessarily harm. You are likely to feel discomfort when you're wrong. That should be okay, as correcting that since of discomfort should shepherd you to a more correct stance.

If not, then there's an element of hypocrisy involved, as "nerds" (often neurodivergent) are frequently made to feel uncomfortable. They are told that this discomfort is natural and simply a part of socialization, even while they're the only ones made to feel this way (and often because of misinterpretations of their behavior or intent). This reservation of a right to comfort to a default group is an ACTUAL harm, as it's a tenet of many social ills, including classism, white supremacy, and caste.