I've known a bunch of homeschooled folks, and I know this is definitely coming from a place of confirmation bias, but...all of them were especially bad at code-switching. I think there's plenty of ways one could have wider socialization as a kid among adults, but it's much easier to imagine it coming to fruition in play with peers. I don't think exact age-matching is really necessary, but being around people that are at a similar life-stage certainly can't hurt in establishing "peering" where it matters.
Was homeschooled, can confirm that I am terrible at code switching.
Although it seems to have stopped mattering once I got to the "adult" world, where whether one is 30 or 80, there is a fairly standard template for treating and dealing with people.
It was a relief to stop being in a stratified age driven hierarchy.
I was public schooled k-9th grade, homeschooled 10-12th (though doing college courses, some in person at colleges).
I am also terrible at code switching (I fit in better in the college classes while homeschooled than I ever did in public school, for whatever that is worth). And always have been. And I don't see it as a problem, since the implication that it's beneficial in a given context implies that context isn't diverse or inclusive, and thus I want out of it, not to conform to it.
The rules of interaction depending on context and demographics, to put it roughly.
Youth examples:
- You may swear in conversations with peers, but you should not in conversations with people higher in the hierarchy.
- When people ask "how are you?", they are not genuinely asking in most cases. It is just a greeting. But there are exceptions like your grandmother and a teacher you have not seen in years, but are close to.
Adult examples:
- You can tell a rich person about your great vacation, but not a poor person. If you have a high paying job, you are expected to be happy when talking to a person who earns less than you do.
- Random men (I am also a man) will find it completely appropriate to start a conversation with you discussing the body parts of a nearby woman. It has happened enough times that otherwise successful people view it as an appropriate way to start a conversation on a train. Pretty sure they do not do that with non-peers/women as it is pretty creepy.
- For a more comic take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tms0yk9kqVM. Basically the war should not be mentioned by a Brit to a German, but you can mention the war to another Brit.
Changing how you present yourself to match the social environment you're in. Formal vs informal speech, mannerisms, what is appropriate behavior in context, all of that sort of thing.
Code-switching is the way people act differently in different contexts. So you're more likely to be formal and polite with your boss or grandparents and around your friend group you'll be more casual, maybe swear more.
Code switching originally was a term in linguistics to refer to the same speakers using multiple languages (or multiple registers of the same language, etc.) in a single conversation, which is probably why imbnwa is confused about the application here. In the last few years it's been picked up by the broader social science world to describe people using different modes of speech in different situations, which is how you're using the term--e.g., using a "white" voice, using a "straight" voice, etc.
You can call it disingenuous if you want, but it's just the reality that different behavior is appropriate in different contexts, and different relationships have different expectations.
