i'm sorry you're upset that a word that is personal to you because you feel it symbolizes an era when you were persecuted for your adolescent social awkwardness is being adopted by the mainstream to be somewhat "cool".
Society's view of "cool" changes occasionally. Fat girls were once the hot girls, it was once cool to be sexist and racist, and bellbottoms and mullets were once awesome (ok, mullets are still awesome).
i understand that you feel that an identity that is personal to you is being encroached upon, and maybe even feel like it dilutes your identity. but words, and meanings, and sentiments change.
i've never played dungeons and dragons or world of warcraft, and your article makes it sound like that makes me not a geek.
I definitely consider myself a geek and it sounds like you think that self identification "disrespects anyone who really did get hassled for being a geek". I write code, nerd out about brain teasers, think about math problems, but yeah, I also like Corona and miniskirts (you know, at least looking at them on reddit, because that's the closest I'll ever get to a miniskirt).
Your narrow definition of "geek" is just as "disrespectful" and alienating as the societally evolved broad one that you're offended by.
I can relate to what the OP is saying. The mainstream meaning is changing, but that doesn't mean I have to like it. And I'm entitled to find it ridiculous. It's also annoying to lose a shade of meaning in the language. I find myself having to use terms like "hardcore geek" and then having to define that. It's offensive to geek culture to have all these wannabe lightweights claiming an identity that used to be meaningful and even honorable (among the geeks themselves). How many of these so-called geeks have read the Jargon File?
I agree that you, the OP, or anyone is entitled to not like the fact that the mainstream meaning is changing (or find it ridiculous).
As I understand it, the conflict is that essentially this:
Person A has adopted a word to mean a certain static thing.
Person B interprets that word differently (or persons B-Z).
Person A is entitled to feel it is ridiculous, sure.
Person B is equally entitled to feel ownership of that word, unless you think that Person A's prior self-identification with that word or longer history of usage is sufficient to warrant some sort of authority over its common usage.
Would you understand why someone who self identifies as a geek might be offended if you were adamant that they didn't "embody geek culture"?
Words mean different things to different people. People got worked up over pg's supposedly narrow interpretation of the word "startup" in "Startup=Growth".
i'm sorry you're upset that a word that is personal to you because you feel it symbolizes an era when you were persecuted for your adolescent social awkwardness is being adopted by the mainstream to be somewhat "cool".
Society's view of "cool" changes occasionally. Fat girls were once the hot girls, it was once cool to be sexist and racist, and bellbottoms and mullets were once awesome (ok, mullets are still awesome).
i understand that you feel that an identity that is personal to you is being encroached upon, and maybe even feel like it dilutes your identity. but words, and meanings, and sentiments change.
i've never played dungeons and dragons or world of warcraft, and your article makes it sound like that makes me not a geek.
I definitely consider myself a geek and it sounds like you think that self identification "disrespects anyone who really did get hassled for being a geek". I write code, nerd out about brain teasers, think about math problems, but yeah, I also like Corona and miniskirts (you know, at least looking at them on reddit, because that's the closest I'll ever get to a miniskirt).
Your narrow definition of "geek" is just as "disrespectful" and alienating as the societally evolved broad one that you're offended by.
Language and social norms change. Accept it.