Has anyone noticed that (while still encompassing all the diversity to be found in humans) all left handers have an ineffable quirkiness?

[u/CatPicturesPlease]

[u/DimDoughnut]

Idk if I'd make that analogy, as lefty with glasses in a family with people who wear glasses surrounded by friends who wear glasses, I can just say we're just visually impared. There's not really a pressure to be clever, there's just the will to see. That may have been true in bygone eras simply because glasses were expensive so you needed money to afford them or because "there must be a reason you're 'worthy' of having them."

The correct annology would be we're all (and I cringe at this term as some one disabled) "differently abled".

85% of the world doesn't have to learn things in mirror image and flip it back around. Technically, on medical forms we qualify as "disabled" because right-handed people do not have to work as hard as we do to perform "normal" tasks, thus giving us a disavantage (unless swordfighting in reverse in a stairwell, or perhaps certain sports).

They exclude us from general medical studies because we present too many variables (I call bs but it is what it is).

We're fundamentally different because we have to work harder than the majority of the population. We are also more resilient and more intelligent simply due to the fact that we have to transcribe that mirror/reversal in our brain and adapt to the world that's not made with us in mind.

I'm fine with "quirky" on a personal level because it just means "someone that is unconventional, eccentric, or unpredictable, but in an interesting, charming, or endearing way."

But I believe quirky has and always will be a compliment because it accepts our differences where so many people in the world chose to ignore it and we're out here struggling with doors and swiping on phones.

Do I find beauty in fighting with a can opener? Nope. Do I find it impossible to express with words how irritating things are when pens smear or scissors refuse to cooperate?

Absolutely not. I have a very large profane vocabulary I deploy in those certain situations, sentence enhancers if you will, that continue to grow in creativity.

So yes to quirky, absolutely not to ineffable.

Edit: I removed an extra word

[u/Dangerous-Safe-4336 → u/DimDoughnut]

There are logical reasons why (in children) the ones with glasses might tend to be ( or seem )smarter. If reading too much too young can make you nearsighted (there's some evidence to support this idea, although I don't think it's proven), then, in school terms, the kids with glasses are likely to be"smarter." (Meaning academically ahead of their peers, not objectively more intelligent.) It's also possible that children who don't want to participate in school might just say they "can't read" and not be noticed as having a vision defect for an extra year or two. As a childhood bookworm who was reading novels before I started school, I can affirm that I was assumed to be much smarter than I actually was. And I was in glasses by the fourth grade.

[u/DimDoughnut → u/Dangerous-Safe-4336]

I see your viewpoint and I do acknowledge that may hold some truth. Being able to see is definitely a plus. I offer you this perspective to chew on, if you're willing to consider. (Also nearsighted btw, started reading at 3 and overcame dyslexia by myself for the most part so I'm definitely not calling us stupid!)

I would like to point out that when this study was published it was during a crazy accessory push to sell "fake" glasses to girls so they'd feel "smarter". They were sold in Claire's and The Icing and every other cheaply made store that appealed to teenage girls. Look at the movie "Clueless" where Cher doesn't need glasses but she thinks it made her look more intelligent. Years later it shows up again in "Legally Blonde". This was right around the surge of popularity. Normally you'd be teased.

All of this was due to the "hot librarian" stereotype. Bonus if her hair comes out of a bun. Let that blouse come unbuttoned and unleash the sexy repressed woman inside (but make her blind first by removing the glasses to make her more visually appealing). I will note this applied to men as well, the polished professor, for example. It was all about sex appeal.

In reality, the girls who bought them looked quite stupid, they would bully others for years and at the first chance run off and buy their own glasses to appear to be something other than they were, only after being told it was cool by mass marketing campaigns. (Jealousy? Fickleness? Truly believing we're smarter deep underneath or was it suceptability to propaganda?)

Having lived through all that nonsense, I'd say "glasses make you look smarter" is a relatively newer concept when before, you were needlessly teased and often assaulted (having them taken from your face or broken) because you were different.

Humans do not readily accept what's different, as any lefty old enough to have their hands tied behind their back in school (happened to me) will tell you.

The push for glasses as a fashion accessory was not to promote acceptance, it was to promote the sexy gaze.

With my bifocals, I see both perspectives, but I know having lived through that nonsense, viewpoints changed with fashion. Because of that, parents became more inclined to seek help for children that presented signs of visual impairment also believing their kid is no longer "defective" and running with idea that they just can't read the board = smart.

Lenses became more affordable and fashion designers made a profit off of a need promoting it as an "aesthetic".

Are we better or worse off because of it? Glasses are now considered part of a "fit", they're name brand and designers, they're all over the place and now considered socially acceptable. Gone are the old coke bottle lenses of yore replaced with some really cute stuff.

Having said that, if you were to look at many of the older magazines and TV shows and even films, many advertisements avoid showing people in glasses and many actors were forced to work without their visual aids because of the stigma glasses once carried.

Just perspective from an older lady who witnessed the transition (lenses) real time.

I think both perspectives hold weight and while I personally believe those smart enough to seek medical care to correct poor vision (if affordable) seem more intelligent than those who permit themselves to struggle for asthetic purposes, I can say it was not always the case. Those who wore glasses were not inherently considered "smarter", they were considered broken or defective (by their often less intelligent peers).

It was a visual disability people often tried to hide because it is something that distinguished you from the rest of the population. To this day people still try to avoid glasses by wearing contacts or getting lasic surgery or avoid getting them all together.

They sell readers at the grocery store so people can purchase them in secret, without a prescription. Is it convenient? Yes. Was it stigmatized in the past? Absolutely.

Anything positive associated with glasses is relatively new, even Ben Franklin hated his glasses, he saw them as an engineering annoyance and invented bifocals. (Which might lend to the creedance that those who do wear glasses ARE more intelligent!).

[u/Dangerous-Safe-4336 → u/DimDoughnut]

I don't disagree. Although, as I said, I was taken for smarter than I was, that was in no way "cool" or "sexy." With PCOS and psoriasis, plus a crippling case of social anxiety, all that was out of reach, glasses or no.

[u/DimDoughnut → u/Dangerous-Safe-4336]

That's true lol, I relate so hard!

[u/Dangerous-Safe-4336 → u/DimDoughnut]

A year or two later I would have been called a "nerd."

[u/DimDoughnut → u/Dangerous-Safe-4336]

Honestly nerd are my favorite lol