Talk:Left-handedness

I believe that Handedness is often determined by the hand with which a person writes because neurologists believe that writing is one of the most complex hand skills. Therefore, those who write with the left hand are in fact left-handed, even if righ-side dominant, and vice versa. Ploafmaster 23:39, 16 Jul 2005 (EST)

Isn't there a complex relationship between left handedness, left footedness etc? Also, lots of historical stuff about repression. Mark Richards 00:11, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Rewrote the sentence "One of the authors of this article can attest to the difficulty of writing legible Chinese characters with her left hand." Wikipedia articles should not refer to their authors. If a reference is necessary, it should be to previously published work. arj 18:21, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

From the article: "Gay people may be up to 39% as likely to be left-handed as straight people (Habib, 2000)." This is difficult to understand. What does this mean, precisely?

Division of Labor, among other things

The article failed to mention that the left side of the brain controls the right side of the body, a key premise towards understanding this theory. I've inserted a bit to clarify.

Overall, the writing in this article is sloppy at best and confusing at worst. Here's a list of things I feel need to be changed:

1. "Many members of the British royal family are left-handed. Genetics is usually used to explain this." That line either needs to be elaborated upon or removed, because it comes out of nowhere and goes nowhere.

2. There are too many objective observations: "Left-handed people cringe at this theory..."; "...because of pseudo-religious bigotry..."; "Thus, it is clear that genetics is not the only cause"; "Anyone with a smattering of European languages can testify this bias"; "As visual thinking is much promoted nowadays, left-handers cannot help but begin to gain more and more respect"; the aforementioned (and removed) "One of the authors of this article can attest..." I understand that you're left-handed, author, but original research shouldn't be used, no matter how sure you are of its truth.

I agree, even though I think the term bigority is accurate, such terms are far too subjective. This is surposed to be an encyclopedia. - Doug1984 @ 12:12 19/Feb/2006

3. The writing is awkward and unclear in the "Causes" section, particularly during the description of the warrior theory. --Funkmistress 04:33, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dyslexia

Apparently, us lefthanders had a higher chance of developing dyslexia. Also, I've heard the claim that forcing a child to use their right hand when their left handed can cause dyslexia by "unbalancing" the brain. If anyone has sources to studies/etc proving or disproving these claims, we can add them as popular myths and state if the evidence suggests they are true or not. - Doug1984 @ 12:06 6/Feb/2006

Life expectancy

I can't remember where I saw the stat., maybe someone could corroborate, but I read once that left-handed people have a shorter life expectancy (not by much, 1-2 yrs. maybe) due primarily to auto accidents in countries where cars drive on the right. Left handed people instinctively jerk the steering wheel to the left (and presumably into oncoming traffic) when startled.

I'd assume that it's true. I had heard it a few times before and eventually saw it on one of those TV shows that does research to debunk myths. Not only are we (I'm left-handed) more likely to have car accidents, and because of those have a better chance at dying, but we're more likely to have accidents involving power tools since almost all that require two hands (saws for example) are set up for right-handed people. This causes a left handed person to either try to reverse hands in a very awkward manner, or hold it properly, although without the precision of a right-handed person, since they're holding it the reverse of what feels natural. This of course, causes very bad accidents, and is another cause of early death for left-handers. If I remember, or if someone else wants to do it, I'll try to verify this and add some more information about it later. -GamblinMonkey 15:33, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The research is probably that of Stanley Coren. A fairly well summarised and researched article by Cecil Adams (Straight Dope) that should make a good research start point is at http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a5_092.html, should GamblinMonkey or anyone else want to look into it further - Kvetch 15:03, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

== Sun Worship causes Social Stigma for Lefties? ==george

This contribution to the main article makes little sense (my additions are in parentheses):

"It is possible that sun worship relates to the association of the left with evil. People in the northern hemisphere, looking south, would see the sun rise on their left, move rightwards across the sky, and set on their right. In the southern hemisphere the opposite happens (when one faces north). Among cultures from the southern hemisphere, right-handedness is still dominant. No study on left-side connotations from those cultures has been done.

However, since most sun-worshipping cultures see the setting sun as it dying or vanishing, the right side would indicate the negative associations associated with a setting sun. This is the opposite trend from that (provided that one is not facing north in either hemisphere)."

No offence is intended, but it doesn't seem to provide any evidence either way. Am I missing something?

Cheers, Donovan. 13:27, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It strikes me as a load of hooey ... why does this only kick when they're when facing south? Facing north (due to the fixed nature of the north star) tends to be more prominent in cultural activities. - DavidWBrooks 13:34, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I've edited it to reflect what we know. Cheers, Donovan. 02:45, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Shared material with handedness

Moved to Talk:Laterality#Merger proposal. Please go there to continue merger discussion.

I'm left handed: Parents,Teachers, and all Society trys to make lefthanded people to use the right hand so how do we really know what the right persentages are of how many lefthanded people there are suppose to be. All items are set-up for righthandedness coffee mugs,sissors,power tools,doors opening,cords. But some are now being changed to the middle of the item. When corrections are made there are no accidents no more curling iron burning the arm etc.. I have no tickets, or accidents my driving is fine. I do my job like everyone else maybe better then some. I do interior Design and have a great nack for it I took classes for it in college and was at the top of my class. I'm the only one in my family that is lefthanded I have seen small children pick-up a pencil in the lefthand and the teacher/parent moves it to the righthand so then learn to use the other. There were no sissors that would cut lefthanded when I was in school so I learned how to use my righthand to use sissors you adapt to your surroundings. I have one cousin that is lefthanded. no one on my Moms side and out of 8 brothers and Sisters one of their children is that cousin that is lefthanded so it doesn't run in families none of my 4 children use their lefthand mt daughter started picking up things once in a while with her lefthand and everyone around her stopped her from doing it. She is now right handed a great at art doing it righthanded and I'm great doing lefthanded.

Material removed from the intro

I have removed the following material from the intro, where it certainly doesn't belong. If someone can find a good place for it in the article, please go ahead and insert it there!

The term southpaw is often used to describe left-hand people, because in baseball, the first base side of the baseball diamond (towards the pitcher's left side) was often towards the south. Those pitchers who were lefthanded, were thus called "southpaws".

--Niels Ø 13:46, May 21, 2005 (UTC)

Is left-handedness genetic?

Handedness runs in families, although even when both parents are left-handed, there is only a 26% chance of their child being left-handed. Thus, it is clear that genetics is not the only cause. Handedness must also be influenced by some of the other theories presented here.

Apparently, the Clan Kerr of Scotland built their castles with counter-clockwise staircases, so that a left-handed swordsman would be better able to defend it. However, a 1993 study found no statistically significant increase in left-handedness among people with the family name Kerr or Carr.

Many members of the British royal family are left-handed. Genetics is usually used to explain this.

> Anybody got a link to information regarding the 1993 study, I'm a Carr, and I'm left handed, so I'd like to read about it!

Intelligence

I have rolled-back an entry claiming that people think left-handed individuals are smarter, but that this isn't true. This is certainly a very interesting information, but I removed it because it was unsupported, either in the "widespread belief" that lefties are smarter, or in results of tests indicating that they aren't. It read very much like I-heard-this-once kind of information. A more strongly supported entry would be worthwhile. - DavidWBrooks 17:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you had even bothered to read my entry, you would have seen that I was counter-claiming the notion that left-handed people are more intelligent that right-handed people - not promoting it. Studies have shown that intelligence quotients are distributed normally, which results in a "bell curve" graph of IQ score frequency. However, in left-handed test subjects, the curve tends to be progressive, with low scores at one end, and high scores at the other.

Additionally, there is a common belief that left-handed people are more intelligent or creative than right-handed people. This very entry about left-handedness links through to a WikiPedia entry about famous left-handed people - many of whom are creative types, like artists or musicians. Personally speaking, any time I mention to people that I'm left-handed, it's usually followed up by a response querying if I'm creative or intelligent.

You didn't even bother stating in the edits why you had reverted them, nor make any effort to disprove the information. I'll keep adding it back in, until you can disprove otherwise. Copydeskcat 22:03, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, no, no - it's not up to somebody to disprove an entry in order to remove it, it's necessary to support why it's there in the first place. If I threw in a sentence saying "Folk mythology says left-handed people can't whistle" I wouldn't insist that it stayed until somebody found a study saying southpaws CAN whistle. I would have to give a reason why the statement should be there at all.

What does this term southpaws mean? -Doug 11:24, 5 Feb 2006 (GMT)

Is there any non-anecdotal connection between left-handedness and intelligence measurements? You mention "studies"? Which ones? Where? Are they linkable? I'm not saying such studies don't exist, just that the entry as worded reads like the sort of bald, half-thought-out assertions that are found all over the Net, not like something that belongs in an encyclopedia. As I said above, I "removed it because it was unsupported." - DavidWBrooks 01:18, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, then most of this article should be removed. For example, under "Causes of left-handedness", it states:

"No one knows for certain why the human population is right-handed-dominant, but a number of theories have been proposed."

So that bit should be removed. There is nothing to back up the statement other than a bunch of "theories", only one of which actually has a supporting link. The rest are superfluous, supported only by statements like:

"Apparently, the Clan Kerr of Scotland built their castles with counter-clockwise staircases, so that a left-handed swordsman would be better able to defend it. However, a 1993 study found no statistically significant increase in left-handedness among people with the family name Kerr or Carr."

What study is this? Where is the link?

If you're going to insist on links for my point, you should insist on them for every point on the page. The whole point of Wikipedia is to expand knowledge and then challenge it, not remove inserted information and require it to be fully supported. The community should decide if something is valid or relevant, not the individual.

Copydeskcat 11:06, 25 August 2005 BST.

well, the "community" is individuals ... as you know from working with wikipedia, generally there are only a few people who fixate on a partciular article (looks like it's just you and me here at the moment - a community of two)

You make good points about this article, which does have a lot of unsupported statements. That doesn't mean MORE unsupported statements are good, of course. "Things have gotten shoddy, so let's keep it up!"

I assume from your response that you don't know of any studies that support your contention - that the material you added is something you heard from somebody and are convinced is true? Do you really think that's encyclopedia-worthy? - DavidWBrooks 13:30, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can see you point. I'll fish around and dig out the studies I've mentioned - their mostly academic journals, so there might not be any online. The BBC recently did a massive national IQ test which delivered results revealing that left-handed people on average scored 109, slightly higher than the right-handers at 108:

the nation

I may have sounded a bit snippy earlier this debate; if so, I apologize. That's a bad habit I fall into on Wikipedia.

Just curious: are you a copy editor? (I'm a newspaper reporter and ex-copy desk guy) Why not create an account so responses can be sent to you directly? No personal information of any kind needs to be included. - DavidWBrooks 14:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

don't worry about it. I know how you feel. I've added an email to my account now, my username is copydeskcat.

Ultrasound and lefthandedness

I'm no expert on the subject, but when I read the section about Ultrasound I recalled hearing about the study that is only briefly mentioned in this article. Thus, I did some research:

"Kieler's team studied a group of Swedish men born between 1973 and 1978. Nearly 7000 had received ultrasonic scans in the womb, while 170,000 had not. Kieler found that of the men born between 1976 and 1978 who had ultrasonic scans in the womb, 32 per cent more than expected were left-handed. In an average population, around nine per cent of men are left-handed."

http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn1670 is where I found the information above.

But, I'm new to wikipedia and I don't feel all too confident with making an edit, especially since I'm not sure how to avoid plagiarising and how to document the edit... if someone could tell me how to go about with this I'd be very grateful.

- VanillaCreem

Lefties and alcohol

It was my understanding that left-handed people are more prone to alcoholism than our right-handed counterparts. Before I continue, I should mention that I am a left-handed alcoholic, clustered into an extreme end of the IQ spectrum. I'll do some research on the subject, for the possibility of inclusion in this article. Tomorrow, that is, when I am sober :) Autopilots 03:27, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I have used put the ""Unreferenced"" tag becuase it the article says such things as: "In a study..." or "In 1995, a study...." And there are no sources for it. — Kilo-Lima 15:48, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think that a good source for the taboo against using left hand are the lonely planet guides of India and Indonesia. I do not have them at home at the moment. Andries 13:21, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we please remove the Dutch study about breast cancer and left-handedness?

This was a flawed statistical analysis and pointed out so in newspapers, though I forgot exactly where. Thanks. Andries 13:29, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of Southpaw to Left-Handed

I propose this merge because the issue has been brought up through minor edit conflicts on the Left-handed article. The term Southpaw (in my opinion) is used often enough to refer to a left-handed person, although it has its origins in baseball (and possible boxing). A new section in the Left-handed article can be created for the term "Southpaw". Kareeser|^Talk! 03:08, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question: is Southpaw an offensive term for leftie? I live out of the USA and have no clue. Doug1984 @ 23:47 14/2/2006

Doug, as far as I know, the term Southpaw isn't necessarily an offensive term. I myself am not left-handed, nor have I used the term in everyday conversation, but I personally do not consider it an offensive term. On the other hand, if it is, then of course the two article won't be merged... Kareeser|^Talk! 16:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am a leftie, but I've never used the word either. I have heard it though, and I'm sure that it is not offensive. I suggest that this page should be merged here, but the Left-Handed, Right handed, andf handedness pages should remain separate because there is too much information on each one of them. --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 02:10, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jared, for your comment. This certainly isn't a concensus, but I do believe there is enough proof here that I can merge the pages. I'll give five days before I merge them, unless somebody would like to do so before me? Kareeser|^Talk! 02:19, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I don't think you need to wait that long; I mean, what argument would someone have against this. Its your decision, though. Glad I could be of help! --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 02:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am left-handed, and when I was young, my parents would sometimes get me left-hand-related items (books and calendars, for instance). Those sources always used the term southpaw in a neutral light, intrinsically neither bad nor good. I have also on a couple occasions had a fellow left-hander call me a southpaw. So, to my knowledge, the term isn't considered offensive. If a merger is done, though, I wouldn't see much point in changing the name of this page to "southpaw," as it seems to be a pretty obscure term. -E Maxfield Moen

I've followed this page for a little while. The merge is a good idea. -- Superdosh 17:14, 5 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the lack of action recently. I've been bogged down with work, but if somebody else would like to perform the merge, I'd be happy. I'll get around to it eventually, however. Kareeser|^Talk! 05:00, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it, and left it in a category in which future names can be added. Thanks to all who agreed. --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 20:13, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, JP, I owe you one. Kareeser|^Talk! 21:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Southpaw as a boxing term

Southpaw can be Kept as a Boxing term, since they don't use left-handed fighter in boxing.

Miscellaneous question

this seemed like the best place to ask this question:

does anyone know if there is a userbox for left handers?

just wondering.

i'm new here, so i need a lot of help with stuff.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lbr123 (talk • contribs) .

Hi, Lbr123! Welcome to Wikipedia. I don't know the coding for a "Left-handed" userbox off the top of my head, but I do know of a centralised repository of userboxes that you may be interested in. Just click the link to visit it. Kareeser|^Talk! 04:55, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lbr123, I am a fellow lefty and the UBX you can add to your page is: {{User left-handed}}. This will also add you to a category which displays other Lefty users; just another neat Wikipedia trick. Good luck on your future edits. --Jared ^[T]/_[+] 20:16, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Contradiction about handedness in primates

The last sentence of the article is "Most primates also exhibit a preference for using one hand over the other although their populations are not right-hand preferential." But earlier in the text, "Lastly, since other primates do not have a spoken language (at least of the type we have) there would be no stimulus for right-handed preference among them, and that is true." Isn't that a contradiction, or did I misunderstand something ? Unmitigated Success 15:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is saying individual primates use one hand over the other but in the popupulation as a whole their is not a tendency towards righthandedness over left handedness.--E-Bod 21:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evolutionary theories

Being better fighters isn't a theory about why most of the population is right-handed. It has no correlation to the number of left-handed people, because most people, regardless of laterality, don't fight too much.

"Disappearing" Left-Handers

Is it possible that the reason there seems to be fewer older people with left-handedness is due to the lack of acceptance of left-handedness at the time, and that left-handedness is essentially acceptable today, thus more people are open and admitting of the fact that they are left-handed, while older generations of left-handers have learned to live with being right-handed or are still too ashamed to admit it? Just a theory, but it seems to make sense; can anyone find any info that supports this?

The article already says "some researchers now attribute the different percentages among different age groups to the fact that older people would be more likely to have experienced pressure to switch hands, a factor not affecting the younger generations." I don't think people "hid" the fact that they were left-handed, rather they were forced to use their right hand. Unmitigated Success 07:31, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Satanism

Could someone with more knowledge on the subject, add a section about the left and right hand paths, left hand path in satanism, Baphomet the sabbatical goat and the symbology of the left hand?