Duckers,
consider the definition of just what is normal. In a society, that is defined by culturally accepted traditions and mannnerisms. But the problem is that those, unlike principles, are completely arbitrary. Hence, you're just as normal as they are and should not conform to please some in social situations. As long as you live by your own value system and stay true to the code you have defined for yourself, you're better off than all those people who try to be "sociable".
It's understandable that you think most people aren't worth your time but that's something that is not based on objective evidence. They are people too and have the same troubles and worries as you. Albeit, their intelligence may be lower, they are still people and you shouldn't completely stay away.
Is that what you mean when you say you're inept? You mean that your own intellectual level isn't understood and you see no reason to play an act or change to interact better in a group of different individuals?
If that's so, and if you want to change, you need to change how you see other people. You should remain as you are but give more people a chance and not judge so quickly.
I hope my original point of relativity in social norms was clear as that is the real idea. In this case, the two styles of interaction (others' and your's) cannot be judged as right or wrong but simply as present simultaneously.
besides, normal is just so bland and banal. Spice is much better
Edit: Azraele, my dear, you most definitely beat me to it
