Alexandra Robbins’ The Geeks Shall Inherit the Earth: Popularity, Quirk Theory, and Why Outsiders Thrive After High School
So what is popularity? Ever think about this one? What do you think?
Here’s what Robbins says: it involves visibility and recognizability and being influential. It thus involves perceived status. But it does mean that a person is liked.
A feature of many popular people is being mean. That is, popular kids participate in both overt aggression and alternative forms of aggression (social and relational). High social status often comes to those with aggressive behaviors — while aggressiveness used to be devalued as part of social misfits, it is now seen as part of how folks climb toward status. Young kids often maintain status by meanness — treating others as equals is a way of losing status.
How does this view of popularity relate to theological groups or beliefs? Sometimes popularity means conservative, traditional and … well, right … and other times the traditional view is in need of change and it has become a sign of popularity instead of truth. Thoughts? I’m thinking David Fitch’s study of ideology (inerrant Bible, decisionism, Christian nation) can be examined through this set of ideas.
One of the chps in this book surprises — I thought it was about students but discovered it was about teachers in public schools. That is, some public school teachers behave in similar forms of status formation as high school students.
Robbins discusses something called “group polarization.” That is, some groups form judgments that are more extreme than the individuals in that tribe personally have. How so? Individuals are exposed to the group’s view and feel pressure to conform and so express judgment in a way that gains that group’s further approval. I’ve seen this in theology, and any time you see really heated emotion about someone’s ideas watch for group polarization at work. Where it is often seen is not so much in the leaders but in the followers (lesser known, lesser status) who expand the negative judgment of the leaders and group. Group think, then, involves individuals surrendering private judgment to group judgment.
All of this to say that it is good not to be in a group because it takes courage to resist being popular and courage to form one’s judgment without group approval. (Of course, this can become imbalanced into radical individualism.) Conformity is a cop-out, and Robbins sketches some brain theories that show non conformity triggers fear in the brain (amygdala). So she sketches seven characteristics of the non-conformist, the cafeteria fringe, and that show the viability of quirk theory:
1. Creativity, originality
2. Freethinking, vision
3. Resilience
4. Authenticity, self-awareness
5. Integrity, candor
6. Curiosity, love of learning, passion
7. Courage
Sadly, this is so true. My (much) younger sister is encountering a lot of teasing at school and I badly want her to understand that she does not need to try to fit in with those kids. Unfotunately, everyone wants to be accepted by the popular kids!
I believe I have seen this — group polarization — in homeschool culture, and also extremely conservative churches or para-church orgs. Leaders of the Christian homeschool “movement” who make the annual conference circuit and are widely known have their talking points. Local groups often can be rather exclusive, with acceptance based on shared ideology (religious as well as political). The irony is that rejection of the “worldly” culture at large is usually some part of the rationale for homeschooling in the first place (non-conformity). Turning around and conforming to a set of religious doctrines, practices, or political ideology seems counterproductive to me. I feel exactly this way toward a church that would require me to think and do only what the leader or “popular” crowd says or does.
“All of this to say that it is good not to be in a group because it takes courage to resist being popular and courage to form one’s judgment without group approval. (Of course, this can become imbalanced into radical individualism.)” –Yep. And sometimes purposing to go against the flow is costly…as in the loss of friendships and needed support.
Love the 7 characteristics of a non-conformist. These seem about right to me. I would say that in my own experiences, and in guiding my daughter through her teen years, it takes time and maturity to develop clarity and self-awareness in order to embrace the other quirky qualities of a non-conformist identity! The teen and young adult years are a vulnerable season of life, imho. Non-conformist teens need adult role models and mentors to encourage and affirm their strengths.
Michelle — “everyone wants to be accepted by the popular kids” — my 14yo daughter has struggled with this. She is not willing to do anything to be accepted, but when she doesn’t, she’s rejected by the entire group. While everyone else is clambering to win the approval of the popular leader, they are at the same time reluctant to even acknowledge a kid who seems unwilling to play by the rules. Where does that leave a kid? Lone Ranger-ville.
Another thought on the study of TEACHERS exhibiting the same status formation behaviors — based on experience, my current hypothesis is that conformist / non-conformist identity is formed and deeply ingrained in childhood and adolescence. Otherwise, why does this popularity / polarization dynamic persist in groups of grown adults?
Popularity and the drive for achieving it is as much about power as status (visibility, recognition), if you ask me.
As a Christian, I have tried to teach my children the “Jesus Way” of caring for the least of these, the outsider, the weaker member. I have struggled to make sense of other kids from Christian families who are social climbers, that exhibit both overt and subtle ruthless behavior in their ambition for popularity, whose parents not only are not correcting this behavior but seem proud of it??? Does this come from a place of fear — and a sense of relief and satisfaction that their kid is tough and will survive and thrive in the world, being adept at working the system? In the short-term, it sure looks good for the conformists! I ponder these things…
I’m not entirely sure how to parse your second bolded paragraph — “other times the traditional view is in need of change and it has become a sign of popularity instead of truth.” Are you affirming that embracing (theological) novelty can be a way of gaining popularity, too?
I get it and I don’t get it.
One of the major problems in our current Christian milieu, as I see it, is the whole Christian celebrity thing (esp. becoming celebrities within their lifetimes). It seems to me that if we look across the landscape of Christian celebrities it’s always the non-conformists (those who are held to little if any accountability structures) who are the most popular. This is a good thing?
And back in high school, the super popular, the ones who transcended all the clicks, were also non-conformists.
Robbins’ definition of “popular” may be found wanting.
Susan N-
“Popularity and the drive for achieving it is as much about power as status”
I agree. There is that “acceptance” factor for many, but for others it is a power play to prevent interference and to expand one’s influence.
How much does this “teacher as popularity seeker” apply to youth pastors. I see a number of adults who work with youth holding court as if they were homecoming queens. Of course, these tend to be the younger, newly-minted adults so perhaps they haven’t quite shaken their high school mindset.
Chris – #5, Rick – #6, and Scott – #7 … each of you hit on some aspects of the Christian “pop culture” that I have spent many, many hours attempting to sort out and put in proper perspective. From a missional POV, expanding one’s influence in and for Christ, Apostle Paul style, seems good and right. So often, though, this high ideal of mission and transformation gets derailed by the very human, sin nature to simply be popular and powerful. I think this is a snare for individuals, but also for churches which strive for growth by trying to be “hip” or catering to a “country club” crowd.
As for a “super popular” category of non-conformists that transcends all the cliques, I’m not sure what I think about that idea… We can fool ourselves into thinking that we’re “too cool for school”, and maybe attract and hang with an eccentric band of brothers, but then before you know it, in this situation, you have become the very thing that you have despised and rejected in the popular/conformist crowd.
In Christian popular culture, the media realm, I’m guessing that the McLaren / Bell types are seen as non-conformists striving to attract like a Pied Piper the other non-conformist types who have been on the fringes of traditional Christianity… Maybe where media is concerned, a healthy acknowledgement of the fact that authors certainly desire to sell more books, in order to make more money, would temper a blind and full endorsement of anyone’s theological or political views. Churches fall into this too, I suspect, when numerical and financial growth becomes a big focus.
“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female, [there is neither conformist nor non-conformist--popular nor geeks and freaks, cliquish nor loner]; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Gal. 3:28) The question I ask of myself and of church life is, “Where is the Love?” Who would Jesus run with if He came to church? Would He be popular there? Would I talk to Him, and would He even be welcomed in the doors?
I tend to identify strongly with the underdogs of society as opposed to the victorious/ successful, but maybe that’s just my baggage and not so much a Christlike quality (fooling myself?) Who really needs the Doctor most? My non-conformist self should probably (no doubt) have more compassion for those in the other position. Read a prayer yesterday to the effect of, “Lord, help me. My boat is so small and the sea is so big. Amen!”