[maplant]

Socializing is not a "dull chore" it is a essential component of healthy living[1]

By not socializing, you are avoiding (to quote the linked article) a "fundamental human need." This is not something you can simply live without, just like you cannot live a good live without exercise.

The view you are espousing is fundamentally unhealthy.

[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11403199/

[pjerem]

While you are totally right, it doesn't means we are all good and/or equal when it comes to fulfilling our fundamental human needs.

Your exemple is in fact good because a hella lot of people find exercice to be exactly a "dull chore". Same as eating healthy actually.

So, mentioning that socializing can be, for some people, a chore doesn't go against the fact that it is something essential.

You can even be conscious about it and still don't like it : I hate exercising but i still do it because, well, it's needed.

[tootie]

These kind of findings are probably accurate on average, but not to a person. Some people are wired differently. Some (presumably most) require community and extensive social connection. I really think that some of us just need much, much less. I don't get much sense of reward from social interactions. It really does just feel like a dull chore most of the time. Even with people I genuinely like and respect.

[urban_strike]

Yeah, I've been trying to wrap my head around this recently. I always get a bit irked by the inevitable comments confidently asserting things like "humans are social animals, if you think you don't need tight social connections you're just hurting yourself". And then pointing to these results averaged out over the entire population as "proof".

It seems like there's got to be some statistical fallacy being made, like asserting "all humans need visual stimulation to survive" and then all the blind people on earth shrug at the data and realize they're not human I guess? On average it's true, "all humans" would go crazy if deprived of their sight, but it turns out some people do it just fine and can have rich, human lives.

I wonder if it's just when people live very social lives, the idea of deriving satisfaction in life internally, to be able to self regulate and maintain a health sense of identity without frequent input from others, is just too alien to consider. To not dislike people, or lack social skills, but just be as disinterested in socializing as I am in starting a coin collection. Or maybe all that is just extremely uncommon and experiences like mine are just a true rounding error.

[Kiro]

I used to be like you, living my life based on external beliefs of what I "should" do. Once I realized that I didn't have to all my stress disappeared and I've never been happier.

[maplant]

People told me I "should" exercise for years and I didn't, but when I did I suddenly got a lot less depressed and my life turned around for the better so I'm going to continue to trust other people

[dukeyukey]

You won't be happier if you don't eat healthy, stay indoors al day, avoid talking to anyone, never exercise, never clean up, because those things are considered a chore. There are things people avoid doing that are still needed to be healthy!

[calf]

There is a deep irony in an argument that pushes a pro-socializing view in a black-and-white, authoritarian way, "shoulding" statements, shaming tactics. It's actually anti-social, and the authors of the cited paper probably would not agree.

[nunez]

It definitely can be a chore.

I organized a large (600+-person at its peak) Meetup in Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY during Meetup's hayday (2010-ish).

Meeting heaps of different people from all walks of life was interesting at first. But like a previous poster stated, connections like these are fleeting and take a lot of work to maintain (especially if you're a man, which I am; see the end of this post for more on that).

Consequently, the process of meeting people eventually became very same-y after a short while, and knowing that these conversations usually won't amount to anything other than nice, fleeting moments got old.

There was also the drama of managing "interesting" personalities in a free Meetup group. I passed the baton in 2012 or so, but that's another post for another day.

I'll conclude this post with some unsolicited advice: try to learn what people do for work without asking them directly.

EVERYONE expects this question, and it can be a conversation killer if your occupations don't intersect (less likely) or if the person you're conversing with hates their job (more likely). Everyone ALSO loves talking about themselves. Finding out how someone spends the largest part of their day without asking point-blank adds interesting twists and turns that can really liven up a conversation. It also makes you a better listener and better at asking questions.

I lied; I have more unsolicited advice. The easiest way to give a shit about what someone does for work is to ask lots of questions! Unless they hate their job, in which case, you'll want to ask questions that get them talking about what they do enjoy!

Typing that last paragraph reminded me of another reason why I got burned out on socializing with people. I'm a man. Most men only like sports and video games; two things I couldn't care less about. Socializing with other men as a man who dislikes these things is extremely difficult, especially in the US South, where I live. I blame the suburban lifestyle, but that, too, is another post for another day.

[treis]

>Everyone ALSO loves talking about themselves

I see this a lot and it's interesting because I don't like to talk about myself much. Doubly so about work. I wonder how many of us there are.

[tormeh]

Have you tried getting meta about sports and video games? I don't care about sports, but I'll be interested if you talk to me about the business of sports clubs or the technicalities of stadiums. Video games have a lot going on around them: The lawsuits and general weirdness around how Disco Elysium was made is the stuff of several documentaries, for example.

Anecdotally, I'd say women are worse when it comes to interests. It's incredibly common that they just don't have any, which isn't the end of the world, oddly enough. There might be little to discuss, but drinking some wine, going to the movies or a gallery while having a pleasant conversation - these can be fine activities. Hard to turn it into a club, but on the other hand it's basically universal.

[slumberlust]

I agree people love to talk about themselves. I disagree about work being the one to go for though. Career is the default conversation; the boring conversation.

I ask 'What keeps you busy?' and if people think of work then that's fine, but for those of us that don't center our lives that way there is an opportunity to discuss something else. Asking what you do for income is a more narrow and closed conversation.

[danenania]

Oh man, I relate so hard on the sports conversations.

[dubeye]

It’s perhaps possible to get the bulk of this ‘required’ socialisation from your home life though

[basisword]

While this is true, when your relationship comes to an end you are suddenly very alone.

[iamnothere]

Yes. It helps to have a partner who also has a rich intellectual and/or creative life.

[snerbles]

Finger-wag all you want, it's not going to make that Sisyphean boulder any lighter.

[iamnothere]

I guess I’m unhealthy then. Sad!

[johnfn]

I do think unhealthy is the way to put it. I think that being asocial is kind of like being overweight, in that they have similarly negative effects on health[1]. Of course, being in good health is multifactorial, and just as you can find many overweight people who are otherwise in fine health, you can find many people (like yourself) who eschew social situations but are otherwise perfectly happy.

Though I do think, if you extend the metaphor, that saying that socializing is a dull chore is a bit like saying exercising is a dull chore.

[1] https://www.ssmhealth.com/newsroom/blogs/ssm-health-matters/...