43 comments

[ 4.8 ms ] story [ 107 ms ] thread
These days, you'd think you'd see the opposite where parents might force boys towards left-handedness.

If you're a right-hander who throws 90 MPH, the MLB scouts will take a look at you. If you're a left-hander who throws 90 MPH, you'll get drafted.

I grew up in southeast Oklahoma, as well as all my family.. Teachers spewing off about left handedness being evil is surprisingly common, though I didn't expect it to persist to today. Anecdotal accounts: my wife was told being left hand was evil (she was ambidextrous) and she was converted to fully right handed in 1st grade (1990s). My step-brother's kindergarten teacher constantly picked on him for being left handed and made him a mockery of the class before the superintendent intervened (1970s)... I recall one other account to do with my step-mom, but I can't remember the details of who it was.

So yea, idk what is up with Oklahoma, but they do NOT like lefties

> my wife was told being left hand was evil (she was ambidextrous) and she was converted to fully right handed in 1st grade (1990s).

The 1990s? Is that a typo?

(comment deleted)
My wife is in her 20s, so yes, she was in first grade in the 90s heh
Sorry, I was not commenting on your wife's age (egads!)! I was surprised that such a practice continued as recently as the 1990s.

Wow; text can be a dangerous form of communication.

What's up with Oklahoma is a larger concentration of fundamentalist Christians who are anti-science and therefore ignorant of many modern scientific advances; and also hold a lot of prejudices from bygone eras.
I've never heard of fundamentalist Christians being anti-left-handed. And I am one.
The left side being evil and related to the Devil is pretty embedded in Christianity.
Anything in America in the last 200 years or so?
Ya you're right as soon as they left Europe, they stopped doing all the stupid stuff and became enlightened.

http://www.indiana.edu/~primate/lspeak2.html#educators http://www.landoverbaptist.net/showthread.php?t=49703

Landover is satire.
It can't be satirical if what is being lampooned doesn't actually exist.
Thanks for the link, that's cool. Looks like 3 Catholics and an ambiguous reference to Satan, and your second link is to a cult. I guess the cult might count as fundamentalist something.
I can't help but calling bull-shit on this. There could be a few fringe groups, but it absolutely does not exist in general christian theology. (Ehud was left-handed and considered a hero in the Bible)
It's certainly not a secular view.
> It's certainly not a secular view.

I don't see why not. I don't know that secular people are any less prone to ignorant ideas than people who are religious.

There appears to be secular reasons behind this view in some cultures as well:

> In some areas, in order to preserve cleanliness where sanitation was an issue, the right hand, as the dominant hand of most individuals, was used for eating, handling food, and social interactions. The left hand would then be used for personal hygiene, specifically after urination and defecation. These rules were imposed on all, no matter their dominant hand. Through these practices, the left hand became known as the "unclean" hand. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bias_against_left-handed_peopl...

Prejudice against left-handedness is not a scientific view, but it is still a prevalent secular view. For instance, consider skateboarding, where skating left-footed is called "goofy." Or consider the multitude of left-handed children who were (and still are) being forced to write right-handed in the United States and other parts of the world. Also consider the Soviet Union where left-handers were also frowned upon despite atheism being the official view of the state.

Prejudice against the left-handed existed before Christianity. Christianity did not invent the link between left-handedness and evil. Left-handedness did not become evil because the Devil is left-handed. The Devil is left-handed because left-handedness was considered evil.

The word sinister used to mean left in Latin. You can still see that in things like optometry where the left eye is called Oculus Sinister. Seems like some sort of connection between left and evil is there for everyone in western culture at least, even if it started as something to do with religion

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/oculus+sinister

My point wasn't that fundamentalist Christians as anti-left-handed because of their Christianity; it's that they hold on to ancient beliefs.

* The Earth is 6,000 years old * Man walked with Dinosaurs * Being Gay is a choice * Yoga Leads to Satanic Possession * Being Left Handed is Bad

I could go on...

Yoga only existed as a religious practice until the 80's when the physical part was separated. It's not a surprise that people who grew up before the 80's don't automatically think of the non-religious version. It's hardly "ancient".
I had years of mechanical drawing in high school, and it wasn't until my junior year that the teacher noticed I am left-handed. He started having me create drawings from the lower-right corner to the upper-left, while the right-handed kids drew from upper-left to lower-right. When I switched, I stopped having smudged drawings caused by dragging my hand across the completed parts of the drawings.

Little things.

My father's left handed, I'm left handed, my sister's ambidextrous. A couple of her kids are left handed. There is certainly a genetic component.

My son's too young yet to have a dominant hand, but I make a point of putting things in his left hand. It's a lifestyle choice.

I grew up in Australia in the 70s and 80s, and I don't recall any prejudice against left-handers at the time. I never even really thought about the difficulties of using right-handed implements. It's just the way things were.

My father does tell a story, from the early 50s, where his mother had to forcibly intervene at his primary school, where they were trying to force him to use his left hand.

> ..I make a point of putting things in his left hand. It's a lifestyle choice.

Could you expound on that?

> but I make a point of putting things in his left hand.

Don't even do that. It can make he use his left hand because you're someway influencing he and if he start writing with non-dominant hand because this he may develop a lot of problems on brain.

> it's a lifestyle choice.

What?! You first said there is certainly a genetic component then it's a lifestyle choice? it isn't.

That is a rather tiny difference in percentage, is it even statistically significant in relation to the samples?
My parents are right handed. I'm left handed. Had a pretty hard time in communist Poland too. It started with a kind of wrong diagnosis where the doctor told my parents that I'm both and that they could choose which side I'd use. So my grandparents lobbied for right. I started out left but it was hard with a fountain pen and since I had nobody to help me out with that my parents finally broke and told me to learn writing right.

My writing is still horrible. Sometimes even I can't read it. I became used to getting worse grades just for that. Same goes for art class. I was the only person in class to cut himself with paper scissors...

Thanks to the motivation of my gf and colleges, I've started learning to write with my left hand but it's not easy. It's like starting over again. My gf bought me scissors for lefties. What a beautiful feeling to cut paper with the "right" hand!

You are the 9% (if both parents are righties, then there is a 9% chance of a left handed baby).

What's interesting about left handedness is that even if both parents are lefties, the kid's chance is only 26%. Which is strangely low for something where there is some generic link.

If one parent is a lefty the chance drops to 19%, and if no parent is a lefty then it is 9%. The average over society is 10% of the population.

I almost don't wonder if generics isn't the primary reason that people are left handed, but generics can make you more likely to be a lefty (for whatever reason). That would somewhat explain the statistics.

my parent are right-handed too but my grandma is leftie. But it seems almost everybody else didn't have any leftie in the family that they're he's aware of. I find this odd, mostly because they says it's genetics so a lot of people cary left handed genes but it's hardly "primary"/"used" (I don't know the right word).
Both me and my sister are lefties, but our parents are both righties, which seems improbable but it's interesting nonetheless.
I wonder if one of my grandparents was "secretly" left handed.
Here's something I've always found strange: every relationship I've ever had has been with a left-handed woman. I'm right-handed. It's not something I notice until after maybe a third date (as I usually am the one paying the bill before then). I don't watch for it. I certainly don't ask up front. And I don't give it any kind of weight. But it's still weird.

For whatever reason, I guess I just seem to click better with lefties.

Those sneaky East Coast lefties !!!

sinister (adj.) early 15c., "prompted by malice or ill-will, intending to mislead," from Old French senestre, sinistre "contrary, false; unfavorable; to the left" (14c.), from Latin sinister "left, on the left side" (opposite of dexter)

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=sinister

it should be noted that the french word for 'left', 'gauche', also has a negative connotation when used in other contexts.

and 'maladroit' comes from 'droit', which means 'right' in french.

Forcing a child to write with their non-dominant hand can lead to all kinds of psychological trauma. Children can develop stutters, have a difficult time learning, and can experience profound secondary psychological effects.

Think about how much concentration it takes to write with your non-dominant hand. Now imagine being a child, being told you are somehow wrong _for being who and what you are_, and being forced to concentrate on working with your non-dominant hand while attempting to learn how to read, write, and do math.

This educator should be fired. She is clearly incompetent. Rather than supporting someone who already faces many challenges the right-handed world doens't face, she is actively attacking his psyche and making it more difficult for him to get an education.

It's interesting that the findings in this article are an unintended benefit of a study on smell. Makes you wonder if any other studies have important data like this where data was simply discarded because it wasn't relevant to the initial hypothesis.
My reading of the article is that the data was extremely relevant to the original hypothesis, and was used to disprove it.
"The National Geographic data also show significant variation in rates of left-handedness by U.S. state, with higher rates in the Northeast and lower rates in the middle of the country."

The actual accompanying data only describes white people born after 1950 which could be evidence of too many researcher degrees of freedom. Additionally, the legend to the map is showing single percentage points of difference which hardly speaks to a robust finding. And given the fact that the data was collected in a non-scientific manner, that 1% between New Jersey and Missouri may be as easily attributed to ambidextrous people fibbing to be more unique, or perhaps for some reason National Geographic appeals to different kinds of people than the underlying population. At least show me an r value or something.

At any rate, the idea that since the Victorian era people have evolved to be less left-handed than in certain areas is absurd and without any scientific basis.