I think this article is using the term "nerd" in high regard. "smart" as opposed to "glasses and giant backpack". The article paints these people as colorful characters and rock stars. If anything, I thought it was a little too fawning.

The Social Network. Nate Silver. TED. Nerds are actually doing pretty well in the popular culture right now. I don't mind seeing the word "nerd" in the title of an article. It's usually not a bad thing, and at least I know they're talking about me.

Yes, I think you are right about this particular article, and maybe also about the other examples you list.

But I am not sure I agree with your conclusion that "nerds are actually doign pretty well in popular culture right now." To me it seems like your examples are the exception rather than the norm. Too many times I find myself reading the exact same stereotypes repeated over and over again: yes, a lot of technically inclined people are shy and their discomfort around other people shows in non-standard behavior.

But instead of showing empathy toward otherness, this and other cliches are too often used as an easy to hit target for laughs and ridicule.

Not so much in this example. Perhaps not in some of the others you name. But as long as "the nerd" is presented as some kind of peculiarity of society, as long as we get described with the same stereotypes again and again, as long as we're not accepted the way we are, I think it's worth pointing out that we don't like to be stared at, we don't like to be laughed at, and we don't like to be labeled. We deserve better than being looked down on as "just the tech guy" who's just good enough to help set up the new wireless router.

Again, I agree that this article is for the most part actually pretty good. We need more articles that portray us fairly. But even this one still yields to the temptation every now and then, for instance with the choice of the photo, an allusion to table-top RPGs ("Hatch was playing the role of dungeon master") and the n-th iteration of certain cliches ("He, too, has a memory that all nerds share: Late at night, light from a chunky monitor illuminating his face, fingers flying across a keyboard, he figured something out.")

I think this depends on the question whether nerds actively choose to be nerds, or whether they are born into their fate. Generalisations about people who willingly do/become something are different IMHO.

You're right that the classes of people named by your parent are all categories one gets born into. But is this really the defining difference?

I believe it may seem that "nerds" differ because after all, you're not born with technical knowledge, you get into it by interest and learn it through studying and practicing.

But it is not the technical know-how that nerds get ridiculed for. That's actually about the only part that gets us at least some respect, unless it's downplayed as "just technology".

No, it is the inability to comply to some social norms. For instance, most of us don't care about the latest fashion trends (because we think that fashion is ridiculous). Or, we don't easily pick up on certain subtext signals. It is this non-acceptance that perhaps drives us toward technology in the first place. Because computers don't judge us. Because we understand them, and they understand us.

We are not nerds because we like technology. We like technology because we are nerds.

I agree with all of that, but sadly the word 'nerd' is not clearly defined. To many it is a lifestyle choice, including some people who label themselves as nerds. If you compare, "When the Goths go marching in" (another lifestyle choice) would seem much more acceptable than "When the Aspergers go marching in" (which is closer to what you described as nerd).

I think the word nerd is like that other n-word. It's fine when it's used inside the nerd-dom, but it is offensive when used by someone who is not a nerd themselves. At least it is for me. Maybe it's just because I grew up in the 80's when being a nerd was not nearly as cool as it is today. Being obsessed about computers and science was a very negative thing socially for me.

Totally agree. You should go ahead with the lobby group.

> I think the gay community, despite their ongoing struggle, has at least managed to make it almost impossible to receive a similar kind of media report that consists of nothing but stereotypes.

Are you kidding?

Yeah, I get where you're coming from on the offensive tone in some articles, but I think it's absolutely ridiculous to compare the portrayal of nerds in the media to the struggle for gay rights and equality.

And on that offensive tone - I don't think it's really present, here. I felt flattered as this article hammered home the importance of being up to date on tech, and employing the kinds of people that'll get great work done.

I've noticed a tendency, not just amongst others but also something I catch myself doing, for people like you and me to be a little over-sensitive. I spent a big period of my life being ridiculed over what I liked, and what I did, and what I looked like. I got used to confusing insults being thrown at me veiled under sarcasm, and felt like the whole world was laughing at me and I didn't even hear the joke.

So I got mean. I stopped trusting people, and I always assumed the worst. If someone (particularly someone matching the profile of former tormentors - bigger than me, cooler than me, better hair than me, plays sports better than me) said something that was maybe sincere, but possibly a sarcastic insult, I took it as the latter. These people were out to get me and if I gave them the benefit of the doubt, they would set me up for a fall!

Of course, the real world isn't high school, and more than that, the world has changed and attitudes have moved on. But any geek who is still carrying around a defensive attitude has turned the tables: now they are the ones judging others, being exclusionist (see: people crying about "fake" nerd girls), judging people on their appearances (many of us are anti-suit) or what they do (and many of us are anti-sports).

> self-content righteousness in making fun of those people who created everything modern society cannot be without: facebook, twitter, the internet, apps, you name it

On the one hand this sounds arrogant; I think as a developer I'd be remiss in not including many other people in the credits (product managers, finance, legal, designers, ux experts - many of these people are not nerds). On the other, whenever I speak to people about what I do ("What's a software engineer?" "I uh.. make websites") the reception is generally positive and enthusiastic - most people acknowledge that they enjoy the fruits of technological development, appreciate the people that bring it to them, and often aspire to learn more of the inner workings.

Of course, there are some bad articles - but they aren't representative of people's opinions in the wider world, in my experience, and the number I read that are flattering versus insulting is improving all the time.

Thanks a lot for your thorough reply.

You certainly have a point that the kind of discrimination that nerds receive is in no way comparative to what homosexuals have to put up with. Gay people get killed just for their sexual orientation alone, and that is certainly not comparable to the bullying nerds receive.

But it was not my intention to claim that these two are the same, and if you got that from the "thought experiment" I described you misunderstood me. Still, I hope I haven't hurt anyone's feelings, yours or some other reader's, with what I wrote. My point was not so much to say "both groups are exactly equal in the discrimination they experience", but rather to raise awareness that there is, in fact, discrimination happening against nerds. People today are more sensitive to gay rights, and imagining that an article was about gays rather than nerds might help illustrate potential problems in that article.

That said, let me point out one more time that I do not think that this particular article is especially bad. I've written it before that for the most part it is a fair depecition, yet it cannot resist the temptation to throw in some of the same old cliches that are well-suited to manifest a certain discriminatory picture of nerds.

If you are right and the number of flattering articles is improving all the time, that would be a very welcome development. I certainly hope for it. But that doesn't mean we should accept anything less than that. I am not sure I agree with your assessment of people's opinions in the wider world, but even if it was a minority that discriminated it would not be acceptable.

Yeah, this article isn't discriminatory, it's just lazy.

"We saw a bunch of stories about the Romney ORCA meltdown, we need something about the success on the Obama side. What's the human angle? Nerds! Great, print it!"