...so there's been a problem at my workplace in the definition of these conditions.
One side is saying they're socially anxious by default, and has an urge to explosively socialize with others. It calls those who don't reciprocate anti-social.
The other side is saying it's socially anxious only when others socialize with them explosively. It calls those who explode anti-social for not getting advance consent.
I'm finding it very frustrating to get along with both sides, and I wish there was a trick to it.
It's leading to workplace conflict too. Both sides keep trying to position and maneuver themselves so they can isolate individuals from the other side in order to make them look bad. The most vulnerable individuals in both groups are paranoid too. They're afraid of the other group's vulnerable individuals using them in order to look good in their own group. The popular individuals in both groups are using their status as an excuse to do nothing about it either. They kind of enjoy seeing the vulnerable individuals struggle, and when they get challenged, they go nuts and start yelling like lunatics or play dumb in saying the challenger just doesn't make sense.
I really don't know how different people with different forms of social anxiety are supposed to peacefully coexist.