The 'socially crippled'

---

<A> was always considered to be a weird kid. Why, you ask? Well, that’s because of a certain group of people called ‘friends’. Yep, you heard that right - friends. You see, <A> was never really ‘cosmetically endowed’, or ‘socially endowed’, as I like to call it. From the very onset of life, the group of people a human being calls his/her friends plays an extremely crucial role in his/her personality development. At a psychological level, your ‘face’ value is decided by the value bestowed upon you by other people in the same social circle.

A lot of people I know are ‘Masters of Disguise’. That’s mainly because they’ve mastered the skill of masquerading as someone else; someone who isn’t afraid to talk to strangers, someone who isn’t afraid to be boisterous, etc. Think about it – how many people had you under the wrong impression until a certain tragedy befell them? When people are forced into vulnerable situations, they show their true selves. A beautiful Japanese quote reiterates what I just mentioned. It goes something like this:

“Human beings have three masks – One, which they wear with everyone else, the other, when they’re with their loved ones, and the last, when they’re alone.”

We compromise our ideals for the betterment of our social circle. That is, of course, if you have a submissive personality. In psychology, your social attitude is classified into four main categories:

- Dominating

- Inducing

- Submissive

- Compliant

Those group ‘alphas’? They’re people who are mostly the dominant or inducing kind. There is a coarse distinction between those who are dominant, and those who induce. The dominant personas seek to lead in everything, have a powerful swagger around them, and are generally extroverted. The inducers possess the ‘I-bet-I-can-sell-you-anything’ attitude; i.e., they’re extremely convincing people, and can induce their ideals in you. Another word for them (albeit formal) is indefatigable.

The distinction between submissive and compliant people is, however, pretty fine. People who are compliant will not necessarily agree with your ideals, but will hesitate to say ‘no’. You’ve seen a lot of people doing this, haven’t you? Those kinds of people who have a really hard time saying no. Well, those people are of the compliant type. Submissive people, on the other hand, thrive under leadership; they NEED a leader.

If you don’t know what kind of person you are, you should probably go ahead and take a D.I.S.C. test online.

So, as you can imagine, every social circle has people falling into AT LEAST one category aforementioned. Why? Think about it – To dominate, the dominating people need compliant and/or submissive people, the inducing type of people need all the other kinds of people, the submissive people need dominating people, and the compliant people need inducing and/or dominating people. In a social circle, everyone feeds off everyone.

You might be thinking, “Well, that’s just fine and dandy, but what the hell does all this have to do with the <A>  guy you mentioned above?” I’m getting to that. You see, there exists a certain creed of personas which fall under NONE of the categories I just told you – they don’t obey anyone, their thoughts aren’t wavered easily, they aren’t compliant to change, and of course, they HATE to be made an example out of. These people are the (n)ever-famous ‘introverts’.

The onset of these introverts has greatly shifted the social paradigm, as we know it. These people prefer to keep to themselves, but are poles apart from loners. They can socialize easily, but prefer not to. They don’t talk a lot, as they know their topics of conversations are far vaguer than the ‘current’ topic of discussion. Ever seen those people who’re perfectly content sitting in the corner, not joining in on the conversation, yet enjoying themselves? Yep, those are introverts for you.

In the meantime, let’s get back to <A>. Why is it that <A>  is considered to be socially crippled? Think about this for a moment - <A>  has absolutely no obligation to follow anyone, nor is he influenced by anyone; dibs on the compliance and submissiveness as well. Do you see it? <A>  has no symbiotic need; as far the four social personalities are concerned, <A> fits in neither! That is what makes <A>  so despicable. Dominators have no control over <A>, inducers cannot influence <A>, <A> is the least bit compliant, and, well, <A> certainly isn’t submissive.

This may be the very reason why introverts are generally shunned by social circles. Then again, introverts don’t care about all this. They’re not going to be mad if you don’t text them for weeks on end, they’re not going to be mad at you if you if you don’t call them. They’ll even happily forgive you if you don’t tell them about the big outing everyone’s going out for, barring them. Why? That’s because they’ve got bigger things in mind.

Take note, I am NOT supporting introversion, nor am I shunning it. What I mean to imply here is that introverts are just like you and me – it’s just that they have different ways of perceiving things. So, if you find that that one silent guy isn’t agreeing to your saying, it’s not because he’s wrong, it’s because he doesn’t care. What is wrong to them will always be wrong to them.

Introversion also brings in social anxieties, ego issues, and in extreme cases, isolation.

But then again, <A> won’t care.