Rules for getting along with neurotypicals

Neurotypicals constitute the majority by definition, man is a sociosexual/political animal, and the difference between a Delta (a functional breeder) and an Omega (a social pariah) is the ability to work well with the average person. Please understand I’m not moralizing, criticizing, or catastrophizing. It’s just Game, and human nature isn’t pretty.

The fundamental paradox of (modern?) normie mindset is to believe you are special without appearing to believe you are special. All bizarre normie behavior, such as enjoying The Office, may be explained from this premise. This paradox emerges from the normalfag reproductive strategy, which I’ll explain in another, more theoretical post. As a practical consideration, it informs us to avoid the two unforgivable sins:

1. Do not under any circumstance give neurotypicals the impression, justified or not, that you think you’re better than them. They will perceive this as malignant parasitism and it will trigger an out-grouping antibody reaction.
2. Do not under any circumstance give neurotypicals the impression, justified or otherwise, that you feel like they’re better than you. They will perceive this as weakness and it will trigger a predatory reaction to exploit you for lolz and profit.

The way to do this is to move, act, and sound like an narcissistic aristocrat while spouting platitudes about equality and how you don’t take yourself seriously, i.e. humblebragging. White neurotypicals are the easiest to get along with because you can just joke ironically about your superiority. One of my favorites is to tell people I’m independently wealthy and “I only work here to better understand you common folk.” The joke is that this isn’t true, therefore I obviously don’t think of myself as being special. But our emotions are blind to irony, so on the limbic level others still perceive me as “not prey”, which is a typecasting I can get behind. The more common version is to complain about “people” (but obviously not including you, the audience, because the unspoken premise is that the in-group is special and better).

To get along with normies, you must satisfy their three primary expectations (in order of importance):

1. Show up most of the time.
2. Don’t be a buzzkill.
3. Know what everybody is thinking.

Deltas generally fail at #3 (annoying but forgivable), Gammas generally fail at #2 and #3 (unforgivable but tolerable), and Omegas generally fail at all three expectations (intolerable). If you’re an Omega looking to achieve Delta status your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to show up most of the time and not be a buzzkill.

There are additional expectations depending on how you are typecast upon first impression (using instinctive phrenology, TV tropes, etc.). If you fail to meet such expectations it will make neurotypicals nervous because they won’t have an emotional script to follow when dealing with you. For example:

  • If you’re a man, you are expected to be effective and competitive.
  • If you’re a woman, you are expected to be nice and thin.

You ought to take a realistic inventory of what the important people in your life expect from you, and how you can meet them in the middle with your life choices. You don’t get to choose other people’s expectations for you, you only get to decide how much trouble it’s worth to be yourself. My parents still think I fucking love science after knowing me for 29 years because that’s how Sheldon Cooper is. I wouldn’t advise wasting your energy fighting first impressions, as a general thing, because people’s opinions of you perpetually regress to baseline instincts. It’s not all bad either, many cultural expectations will make you happy if you can live up to them.

Here’s a dramatized conversation between my parents and me that illustrates the rules I’ve given and pokes fun at the neurotypical aversion to revealing one’s preferences by discussing existential questions out loud:

“Do whatever you want with your life.”

I don’t want to do anything.

“Just do something.”

I want to work at McDonald’s and read library books forever.

“Well, you have to do something else.”

…I want to go to college?

“We support you 100% in pursuing your dreams. What do you want to study?”

Philosophy.

“Yeah, no.”

…Physics?

“Getting warmer..”

…Engineering physics?

“Close enough. We support you 50% in pursuing your dreams.”

Because normies are entitled but fearful of ostracism, they are constantly riding a line between parasitism and morality that gives them a complex attitude toward degeneracy. It can be both high-status and low-status to be degenerate; what determines the valence is whether one is inconveniencing oneself or others. It’s high-status to inconvenience someone else, particularly if they aren’t in a position to retaliate, and it’s low-status to be inconvenienced. So if you want to be high-status don’t stick your gum under your own desk, stick your gum under someone else’s desk and then laugh about it, and don’t get caught. It’s high-status to cheat but low-status to get punished. Emulate Archer’s nonchalant sadism, not his mother issues. Because of this dynamic you should expect everybody to be screwing you a little bit all of the time as a rule, taking a bit more than they give, with only a few exceptions. Most people will not completely fuck you over, and most will not be charitable either.

To be adaptive, you must accept the need to function within Pareto distributions where most coworkers, friends and family want to take a little bit more than they give while still feeling like plausibly better-than-average people (i.e. safe from group punishment).

About Aeoli Pera

Maybe do this later?
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

63 Responses to Rules for getting along with neurotypicals

  1. Lazer says:

    This reads like a Rocky Horror Picture Show manual on how to Interact with Schizophrenics.

      • Lazer says:

        Game sounds like a mental disorder then, and the lower classes love it. High functioning people rarely act this way. If they do its as retaliation.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          >Game sounds like a mental disorder then, and the lower classes love it.

          “Game” just means playing by the rules of reality as they exist.

          >High functioning people rarely act this way. If they do its as retaliation.

          Quite the contrary, the most high-functioning people are almost always the most neurotypical.

          • Lazer says:

            ““Game” just means playing by the rules of reality as they exist.”

            And Laws are the rules of reality. when you become an adult. Lots of amygdala damage IRL if NTs are playing by the rules.

            “Quite the contrary, the most high-functioning people are almost always the most neurotypical.”

            There is a business in here. Instead of taking them to the sarengeti we can take them on a safarai to the ghetto.

            • Lazer says:

              Also I find it frightening that somehow we can emulate their thought processes, but they refuse to emulate ours. Maybe its not so much as cant, but they wont. So much for human charity and grace.

  2. Lizard King says:

    Fuck yeah, good shit.

    “My parents still think I fucking love science after knowing me for 29 years because that’s how Sheldon Cooper is. I wouldn’t advise wasting your energy fighting first impressions, as a general thing, because people’s opinions of you perpetually regress to baseline instincts. It’s not all bad either, many cultural expectations will make you happy if you can live up to them.”

    Lol, this part is all too true.

    My biggest problem with people is that even though I do basically everything you talk about, people still see through me. The worst is probably above average guys (IQ 115ish). I think it makes them jumpy. The average guys see me as smart and come to me for advice. The above average guys just see me as a threat (EVEN THOUGH WE’RE FRIENDS, fucking idiots don’t even understand loyalty as well as the “dumb” guys do).

    I’d rather have average guys or smart guys as friends. The mid-range 115 IQ “lol im smrt ur not” crowd doesn’t get it in my experience.

    Lol, I’ve had some REALLY dumb motherfuckers to deal with before and after trying EVERYTHING to let them know that I hate them and want nothing to do with them they still keep coming back. *sigh* People.

  3. Ulixes Orobar says:

    You’re right; human nature isn’t pretty. How do you apply this without disliking the people to whom you apply it or without disliking yourself?

    • Son of Distant Trebizond says:

      Well, some of them have quite pleasant skin texture and charming mannerisms. Being living things, you have a natural affinity for them that is perhaps fundamental; the rest is hashing out details. The great majority are not actively evil and therefore don’t warrant hostility like actual sociopaths do.

      • Ulixes Orobar says:

        *LOL* I agree. That’s kind of the problem, actually. Much of this feels hostile to me.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        >Well, some of them have quite pleasant skin texture and charming mannerisms. Being living things, you have a natural affinity for them that is perhaps fundamental; the rest is hashing out details. The great majority are not actively evil and therefore don’t warrant hostility like actual sociopaths do.

        Yup.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >You’re right; human nature isn’t pretty. How do you apply this without disliking the people to whom you apply it or without disliking yourself?

      It’s exactly the same as Gaming women. If you learn how to get along with people correctly, the experience of it is quite pleasant. We’re social animals and we need relationships to be happy.

      • Ulixes Orobar says:

        I know that it’s pleasant. My problems in social situations come from two sources: blunted affect / lacking emotive expressiveness and being too nice. With most people, this really isn’t a problem at all. In the past, however, this caused some to misread me consistently. (I’m a half-melon; that sort of cluelessness triggers me even though it’s totally my fault.)

        When it comes to Game, the brutal theoretical side of things makes me feel like I’m staring right into the darkest part of the human soul. The application doesn’t bother me once I stop worrying about outcomes. I have to stop being so self-conscious and let it flow.

      • Jana- says:

        what did you read that gave you info on gaming women? ive started reading heartiste but it doesnt seem to help

  4. Tom Kratman says:

    Just referenced back to last March’s discussion of work habits, which you cited to. A bit of evidence for your thesis:

    In 1997, sick of lawyering for a bit, I arranged to get myself “involuntarily” mobilized as a major and sent to Germany. Various interesting financial kickers made it a fairly remunerative exercise, something around a quarter mil a year, in 2017 dollars, so note here that I am not complaining.

    But what was interesting, to me, was that for various reasons I ended up taking over the jobs of six different people. Was it horrible? Was I working myself to a frazzle? No, I could accomplish all of them to perfection in 10-15 hours a week, and was bored to death the rest of the time. I am pretty efficient, but I am not, or ought not be, _that_ efficient. What had been happening is that those six people did essentially no work worthy of the name.

    Question: what if someone isn’t especially interested in getting along with normies but insists that they learn to get along with him?

    • A_KUMA says:

      “Question: what if someone isn’t especially interested in getting along with normies but insists that they learn to get along with him?”

      You dont say! Kratman and I have something in common. Maybe Aeoli can expand on this. There has to be someway to inspire self awareness in the normies. Personally Ive tried everything from leading by example to almost beating them with a monograph to stealing their women.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        I’m going to leave this up even though we all know it will spiral out of hand. It will serve as a lesson about the limits of free speech when people refuse to control their own behavior.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        Well…there’s a difference. Objectively speaking, I had the means to make them have to get along with me. Most don’t have that.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          Yeah, but formal censure is only much good at discouraging and halting pathological behavior. Informal methods are better when available.

          • Tom Kratman says:

            The way an army typically runs, the informal is the formal. For example, “a superior officers ‘I would like’ has all the power of a formal order.” Ditto for “I wish,” “Why don’t you,” “It would be better if.” You may possibly recall the everyjoe article on some cunt of a female brigadier general having ROTC cadets parade around in red high heels, male cadets, I mean. Yeah, the twat probably said something like, “I think it would be nice,” and that was translated into “we will comply.” And, because the filthy twat was female, hence coddled, her actual direct order would, of course, be translated as “oh she didn’t mean that,” never mind thousands of years of military custom and tradition.

            • Son of Distant Trebizond says:

              Huh. That’s interesting. Does that informal clothing of command serve a particular function, do you think?

            • Tom Kratman says:

              Men of any character need an excuse to obey. It might be nobility of birth. It might be special selection and schooling. It might be raw intelligence. Whatever it is, though, it must be something that will allow him to obey without feeling less a man for it.

              However, the other aspect of that is tact in dealing with subordinates. Rather than, (free translation), “do this as I say because I am so clearly better-more important-more powerful than you,” going about it this way allows (again, free translation), “We both know that this would be good to do and I have complete faith in you, as a man of character, and your ability to accomplish it.” The first approach bring the subordinate down, making him less useful, if, indeed, it doesn’t incite him to passive insubordination. The second brings him into the team and elevates him to something close to the commander’s level.

              There is a place for “do it my way or I’ll rip your balls off,” but it is a rare place, and not one to enter lightly.

            • Son of Distant Trebizond says:

              Ah. So the dopamine economy conforms to the chain of command. I suppose that happens organically over time and remains implicit, rather than being instituted by policy, at least most of the time?

      • Pseudorandom Bypasser says:

        Spice their drinks with antipsychotics. Literally.

        • Aeoli Pera says:

          That raises the possibility for a range of interesting psychology experiments. E.g. Drink the water, then do Duncker’s candle problem. Pop psychology predicts that antipsychotics will diminish performance in this task (because pop psych says creativity is psychoticism), but I wonder…

    • Tom Kratman says:

      I should clarify, I suppose. That wasn’t 10-15 hours a week, each. Oh, no, at least then I would not have been bored. Rather, all six could be done for 10-15 hours worth of work, _all_together_.

      • Aeoli Pera says:

        Yeah, I got that. It’s not at all surprising now that I’m working a corporate job: the more abstract a job is, the more difficult it is to tell the difference between complexity and bullshit. So abstract jobs attract a lot of bullshit.

      • Tom Kratman says:

        What if further means, though, is that humanity wouldn’t miss much if about 3/4th of the population went phphffft.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >Question: what if someone isn’t especially interested in getting along with normies but insists that they learn to get along with him?

      You’re asking the wrong crowd, I suspect. Even if I were in a position to do that I probably wouldn’t, which is an attitude I may have to fix in the future.

  5. Pseudorandom Bypasser says:

    >1. Do not under any circumstance give neurotypicals the impression, justified or not, that you think you’re better than them. They will perceive this as malignant parasitism and it will trigger an out-grouping antibody reaction.

    A good way to trigger this is to communicate intellectually and literally. They will take it as either status frauding or authority posturing via faulty projection or their socioemotional scripts. It could also be that it’s too cognitively demanding and they lash out. As Lazer said somewhere, tone also seems to do this. Not sure how this relates to aspies’ aversion to being spoken to with affect.

    • Lazer says:

      Or normies just have severe mental disorders. On the flip side if you didnt say anything theyd view that as weakness. See this is what I dont understand:

      How can such huge swaths of the population be this fucked in the head literally?

      See once SHTF I hope whoever rebuilds institutes segregation by IQ bracket.

    • Aeoli Pera says:

      >A good way to trigger this is to communicate intellectually and literally. They will take it as either status frauding or authority posturing via faulty projection or their socioemotional scripts.

      I haven’t experienced this. If anything, my ability to explain complex situations inspires people to ask me for life advice.

      > It could also be that it’s too cognitively demanding and they lash out. As Lazer said somewhere, tone also seems to do this. Not sure how this relates to aspies’ aversion to being spoken to with affect.

      I expect these are manifestations of the same thing. Aspies don’t enjoy emotional complexity, neurotypicals don’t enjoy rational complexity, and both respond poorly to being overwhelmed by negative stimulus.

  6. Koanic says:

    It’s nice to see everyone getting along. Someone exerted leadership.

  7. Pingback: The third step: leave the house and find other people who like music | Aeoli Pera

  8. ACC says:

    I have a great memory but I just can’t remember anything in this post. Maybe I don’t want to. That’s like a blueprint for second-handers.

  9. Pingback: How to seduce a narcissist | Aeoli Pera

  10. Mich says:

    This is a very good post, Pear.

    Even using one-two words lime “therewith” or “nonetheless” is enough to earn a “2 out of 16 people found this helpful” on Steam or elsewhere.
    And the fact is, anything you do as an individual will make them think you are trying to be better than them, because THEY (subconsciously or however) never do anything to a different end than that. So projection assures things be like this, and it’s like, in any given scenario (from “love” to “community” and “co-operation”) there is 98 things you can say that will make your score drop and only 2 that won’t alarm their deception-enamoured vanity and pride and won’t lower your score.

    So you see this dreary uniformity all over all places. Any deviation will cost.

    Then you think of ant colonies and all sorts of packs, and wonder to yourself how can 93 billion neurons be not enough to move beyond that by a step.

    All of this of course if you are a gamma. The others seem to be luckier…

  11. MichB says:

    You liar.

    Women are expected to be fat, aggressive, and have cats.

  12. Pingback: Detaching from normies vs. defooing them | Aeoli Pera

  13. Pingback: Precepts of the upper middle class | Aeoli Pera

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s