Tips for dining with very quiet people

[nomorequinoa]

I volunteer with a gardening group that helps tend a local park and have made friends with a couple of people there. Some of those involved are very quiet types. I've been helping out since last summer and there are several people who've avoided eye contact or just nodded and then ignored me or turned away when I've said hello or tried to start a conversation.

The group has occasional social events and there is a group dinner in a pub organised next week. I booked a place. I've just been sent the table plan (the woman who organises these get-togethers always does a table plan that we're expected to stick to, apparently) and I'm positioned between one person who has never said a word to me and one who has barely said hello. Opposite me is someone with hearing difficulties who doesn't communicate easily.

One of the friends I've made through the group has said that once the meal is over we're allowed to move and I'm to head up to her end of the table. I get the feeling that people are expected to take it in turns to sit with the quiet people.

I'm not a particularly garrulous sort of person, but I was raised to make polite conversation. I'm beginning to get nervous about the event. Do I try to start up a conversation or would that be intrusive?

If your child found they were seated between all the loud people would you not be pushing for the seating plan to be changed?

It’s a meal out, not a work placement or requirement. Op is not saying your child shouldn’t go but that she wants a seating plan that puts her near the talkers.

@Ciaroscuro I'm very sorry for you and your child that you have the struggles that have confronted you. I have friends with a young autistic adult child and I've had quite a lot of involvement. I see how hard it is.

You know your child to be amusing and funny and charming. You love him/ her. When I encounter your silent adult, sitting next to me at a social event, not making eye contact, not talking, possibly exuding an air of fuck-off-and-leave-me-alone-ness, I don't know what's going on. I don't get the loveliness. And I'm not his/ her mother or carer. I'm not a therapeutic aid. Perhaps it's the menopause, but I seem to be over the stage of feeling a need to understand and empathise with everyone else. It's a new experience, focussing on me and what I need and being a bit selfish.

I'm a recently retired woman looking to establish some new friendships. I go out for a meal with others in the hope of some conversation, a meeting of minds, a spark, hopefully some good humour. I'll play my part in that. This is what helps keep me going. But you don't seem to think my needs count.

The friend I've already made in this group said, when we spoke about the seating plan, that I've been put in this position because I'm a nice older woman who can be expected to understand the needs of the people around me and just suck up the 90 minutes of stilted conversation/ silence/ awkwardness. It really pisses me off, the idea that I won't mind 'helping out'.

I've been in an analogous situation once or twice in the past and wished that socially it was OK to pull out a book or a newspaper! And I don't know why it isn't tbh if people are going to disregard the social expectation to make some basic chat with the people either side.

Other people in this thread, including the OP, have stated that quiet people going out and expecting chatty people to speak with them is "vaguely abusive". People have advocated confronting the quiet people about why they don't speak, which implies that the quiet people have ill intent.

Just rtft. The implications are there.

You said you think you have drawn the short straw. This time you have. Perhaps the organiser does do a seat plan so that there is a rotation of people who will take a turn at not having much conversation during their meal. The alternative would probably be a scramble to avoid them which would be very obvious to the people who are either very shy or ND. Perhaps she is hoping people will have some compassion and forgo chatting for the short time it takes to eat a meal. Instead of asking to be treated differently to the other club members who have had a quiet lunch with these people when it was there turn, perhaps you should tell the organisers to exclude the quiet people from the lunch. Maybe even the club. I mean why do these people even leave their house if they aren’t prepared to contribute to the enjoyment of other people’s lunches.

Op is not saying your child shouldn’t go but that she wants a seating plan that puts her near the talkers.

OP is now saying that the mere presence of anyone not blessed with her scintillating conversation skills is "abusive".

Thank you. Very similar situation here, I suspect — though not formally a social prescribing scheme. Happy to work on a job in the garden in silence or with minimal necessary talk. Really glad to see that I'm not alone in not feeling that way when it comes to a social situation.

I agree with this post, such a nasty thing to say OP.

If I were sat next to someone who didn’t speak, I’d try a few times to make small talk then I’d just get on and eat my meal knowing it will be an hour at most and I could then go and speak to other people. @nomorequinoa Puy this meal into perspective, you aren’t being asked to share a house with them!!

I hate discos or anything ( karaoke, charades etc) that require me to 'perform '. I don't attend these events because there are expectations of behaviour associated with those events that make me incredibly uncomfortable. I don't go and then refuse to dance, take my turn, participate.That would be unacceptable. It is just the same with sitting down, social events. The expectation of speaking to your neighbours is clearly there. I have no problem with chatting to people so I happily attend these events. If you dont want to / arent able to fulfill the basic requirements why would you go.

No I wouldn't. I would just be delighted DC was feeling comfortable enough to attend.
DC needs acceptance in the group as they are, not looking after by anyone. It would actually be more awkward to sit all the quiet people together with one chatty person, and not very fair on either party.

I am advocating for acceptance. Not sticking all the misfits on a table together with a johnny come lately so the real friends can have a fun evening. Just spread people out!

I'm saying that it feels a bit abusive to be expected to have to suppress my own needs and desires (for a little pleasant chat and connection) in order to accommodate others' needs for silence in a very specific social situation. It feels a bit abusive that I'm expected to sacrifice whatever pleasure I might have got out of the event in order to be a nice, quiet, understanding presence for the quiet people. And I think it's also quite telling that the organiser has chosen a woman for this job, because much more is expected from women in these situations than men.

When you encounter my young person at an event (which you wouldn't, but for sake if argument) I am hopeful that you would presume some neurodiversity and not think ill of them, that they shouldn't have been allowed to attend the event or that they are abusive in attending.

In my opinion the person who has arranged the seating plan has put you in an awkward position. This is the fault of that person and not the fault of the quiet and awkward people who have been sat together.

Your irritation seems focused on the quiet people who are "kidding themselves that they have friends and a social life," and not with the person who has stuck you, presumably as a newcomer with lower social capital, on the oddballs table.

The whole situation is unpleasant tbh. If the group were really inclusive then seating plans would include the quiet people, not shove them all together.

Other people in this thread, including the OP, have stated that quiet people going out and expecting chatty people to speak with them is "vaguely abusive". People have advocated confronting the quiet people about why they don't speak, which implies that the quiet people have ill intent.

No, I haven't said that. I have not advocated confronting them.

I wonder if the organiser has introduced the seating plan so that she isn’t left trying to make conversation on every occasion.
I get where you are coming from OP, and as a fellow menopausal woman I also understand the dawning realisation that I don’t owe anyone my time or effort, but I think I would suck it up this once, but then for future occasions tell her in advance that you feel you have more in common with Betty and Hyacinth so can you be sat with them. This may not happen, but at least she will know you aren’t a social patsy to be placed at will.

For the evening I would focus on gardening discussions. That’s why you are together and they may feel more comfortable discussing something neutral rather than themselves, you might get some good tips, who knows.

Confronting - not you, others have, including "theherboriste".
You said - direct quote - "Do they persuade themselves that by going out with other people they have friends and a social life? I find it vaguely abusive"

It feels a bit abusive that I'm expected to sacrifice whatever pleasure I might have got out of the event in order to be a nice, quiet, understanding presence for the quiet people.

You said upthread "Do they persuade themselves that by going out with other people they have friends and a social life? I find it vaguely abusive". It reads as if you think their presence is abusive, not the seating plan. I was sympathetic with you until you said that.

But they didn't prepare the seating plan, did they? Have they asked to all be seated together, or to have one other random "non-quiet" person placed with them? Perhaps they (or some of them - God forbid these people who have committed the cardinal sin of being quiet be treated as individual human beings) would prefer to be mixed so they can feel part of the conversation without feeling self-conscious that the person next to them is getting fed up of their existence as the chatty person can at least talk to the person on their other side?

The only thing I agree with you on here that the seating plan should be ditched. There should never have been one in the first place.

Implying that quiet, shy or introverted people should not go to such events is just plain spiteful though, and borderline discriminatory as there could be a myriad of reasons why they are the way they are. They are people and have every bit as much right to be happy and accepted as everyone else. They don't necessarily expect constant conversation. They can be just content to observe others around them being relaxed and happy around them. Calling them abusive is ridiculous, not to mention unkind and very likely totally the wrong judgement too.

I am quite introverted. I do chat and join in just enough when I do have to go to a social event but am usually relieved when they are over. However, I do understand people who are more content to take a back seat. They are not abusive any more than I am (I promise you I am not).

There should be no seating plan, and if they won't ditch it then I'd be inclined to ignore it. Without one the quieter people would probably band together and feel more comfortable and the chattier ones would too. A seating plan is a ridiculously stupid idea and I'd be finding a way to tell the organisers so.

As you're a hobby group maybe the dinner should include a gardening quiz to do when you sit down? Could be a good ice breaker? Maybe a gardening top trumps set is a thing?

This is an excellent suggestion.

So, going back to the purpose of this thread.

If you want tips on talking to quiet people, just talk about gardening. Maybe nice gardens you have been to. Plant science. Cultivars. Hybrids. How long they have attended the group. RHS sites nearby.

If you actually want to sit with a friend, that's fair enough, talk to the organiser. I like sitting with friends too. I would feel awkward being placed in a group where no one else who enjoys small talk is nearby, that's completely reasonable.

The objection I have is around you and others on this thread being pissed off with the quiet people for existing, attending the event, or for you being "lumbered" sitting with them. They have a perfect right to be there whether or not you feel uncomfortable in their presence, and they (I assume) haven't specified that they want you sitting with them. They aren't rude or horrible people, they are quite likely neurodivergent people who get joy from the group. That's not a crime. Ideally an inclusive group would properly incorporate all members and have them scattered through the tables rather than all put together (unless this is what they have specifically requested). You don't owe them anything but neither should you resent their attendance. You misunderstand if you think they require you to be silent around them, this is very unlikely.

So either go armed with some subjects to talk about, or ask to move - but don't be angry at the quiet people for wanting to attend a meal that they are just as entitled to be at as you are.

A table plan for a hobby group is stiflingly formal and controlled/controlling.
It definitely sounds like you've been seated with these people with the expectation that you'll just suck it up/help out.
I'd definitely ask the organiser to think again about the plan and, if they won't, ask to be moved.

It feels like you’re jumping to far to many conclusions. Often table plans are put in place to mix the group up, so people can get chatting to others in the group rather than sticking to the friends they’ve already made. You’ve assumed you’ve purposefully been given a role, to be the chatty person amongst all the quiet person. Why don’t you ask the person who organised if this is the case? It seems unusual to me. It also seems unusual that there happens to be several completely mute people who make no effort at all socially, as you’ve described. It sounds like you’ve leapt to conclusions based on little experiences where you’ve said hi to someone and didn’t get much of a response. Maybe they were absorbed in their gardening task and didn’t fully notice you wanted a conversation.

Can you also try and chat with the people diagonally opposite you? If there’s a conversation going there, they may feel able to chip in. Also don’t assume because someone isn’t talking much they aren’t enjoying themselves and being amongst people. I know it doesn’t also make for great conversation though!

If like me you go to many dinners/social occasions you know you will sit next to some people you absolutely could be best friends with and some you never want to see again, You accept it and get on with life.
@nomorequinoa you sound like you don’t get out very much and are putting so much on this one dinner!

I feel a bit sorry for the organiser here. She probably introduced the table seating as a method to get the group to mingle and meet new people- which is after all one of the key reasons OP joined - rather than everyone sticking with their pals.

If it’s a big group which it must be to have table plans, then she may not be intimately aware of everyone’s personality and level of outgoingness.

Its a thankless task running these events, and if it was me doing it and I was quizzed too closely, I might be tempted to hand on the baton and then there would be no social events.