NationStates Jolt Archive

abnormal-(adj) 1: not normal; not typical or usual or regular or conforming to a norm;

unnatural-(adj) 1: not in accordance with or determined by nature; contrary to nature; Contrived or constrained; artificial:

I was reading the gender/transgender thred, and I saw a lot of people using the words abnormal and unnatural interchangeably.

They are not the same, if something is abnormal it is "out of the norm" that is not necessarily bad, it just means something is different than average. If something is unnatural it means it's contrary to nature, or not naturally occurring, it's contrived, faked, ect.

Transgendered people are abnormal in the sense that they are not the "norm" but it is in no way unnatural, they have an actual thing going on with them, it's not something they "make up" or "fake" it's actually real, meaning it's natural.

I am abnormal, for many reasons. All of them are real, none of them are unnatural, I have an auto immune disorder, I have OCD, neither of these are normal, only 1 in 133 people have my auto immune disorder, the 132 that don't would be 'normal', 1.6% of people have OCD, the other 98.4% are 'normal'.

Now before anyone jumps on me about how being transgendered isn't a disease to be cured I am quite aware, I wasn't trying to make the comparison. I was trying to illustrate how someone can be abnormal, but not unnatural.

It bothers me how "abnormal" has this negative connotation, like something is wrong with it. Just because something isn't "normal" doesn't mean it's bad, it just means it's different.

Please feel free to point out my flawed logic, I am sure it's right there ;) I am currently on happy pills for my foot, so this whole thred may be incoherent....

I'm boringly normal. I would like something that I could point to as being a little bit distinct.

both words are used to suggest that we ALL need to stay within a narrow range of behavior. that conformity is the highest good. that we would all be better off if we just did as we were told regardless of our own inclinations.

abnormal and unnatural are both used negatively but they can both be very good things, as you said. they are negative due to the insistance that there is only one right way to be/live.

most days i have no idea what the point of calling something UNNATURAL is. almost everything we do is unnatural. to label only certain conditions or behaviors unnatural is to lie about the reality of modern human life.

Everything that occurs in nature is natural. Therefore, since all behaviour is either the result of genetic disposition or social pressures, all behaviour is natural.

At least, that's how I see it.

Like you, Smunk, it bothers me that people can't simply be honest & say perverse, when that's what they mean.

Both of them are just words which can be used, like all other words, either positivly or negativley. Think of the history of the word gay for instance, positive, negitive and then back to positive.

By all means let it anoy you if you must, but I wouldn't really be that bothered with words, but the people that use them on the other hand, well hehe lets just keep our eyes open for the abnormal freaks huh!;)

Everything that occurs in nature is natural. Therefore, since all behaviour is either the result of genetic disposition or social pressures, all behaviour is natural.

At least, that's how I see it.
yep, but all behavior can't be normal, as some might fall outside the "norm"

yep, but all behavior can't be normal, as some might fall outside the "norm"
But who determines the "norms"?

But who determines the "norms"?
you had to ask didn't you?

there are somethings for which there are no norms, but other's it's measureable, for example 1 in 133 people have celiac disease, it's normal not to have it.

But who determines the "norms"?
I do. Because I'm the reference point from which I judge normal or not normal.

I do. Because I'm the reference point from which I judge normal or not normal.
I prefer the terms normal and abnormal. ;)

There is nothing wrong with being abnormal, btw, it's normal to be abnormal in certain areas, I could argue that everyone is abnormal in some areas and normal in others so that none of us are "true normal".

Who cares as long as no one is biased against you for it? The way I see it, most people are fine with themselves, it's others' standards that make them feel abnormal or unnatural. Which absolutely sucks because it's harder to change someone else's mind than your own.

Who cares as long as no one is biased against you for it?
but people are biased against people because of thier abnormality, there is this feeling that if you are not "normal" that you are bad, or evil, or sick, or twisted.

The way I see it, most people are fine with themselves, it's others' standards that make them feel abnormal or unnatural.
my point was that there is nothing wrong with being abnormal, and that being abnormal and being unnatural are two very different things.

I prefer the terms normal and abnormal. ;)

There is nothing wrong with being abnormal, btw, it's normal to be abnormal in certain areas, I could argue that everyone is abnormal in some areas and normal in others so that none of us are "true normal".
Well, I would argue that I'm normal in all cases and others are 'abnormal'. But in most cases I don't give rat's ass if they're abnormal or not. Live and let live is my motto generally.

Well, I would argue that I'm normal in all cases and others are 'abnormal'. But in most cases I don't give rat's ass if they're abnormal or not. Live and let live is my motto generally.
being completely normal in all areas would make you by definition abnormal. ;)

my point was that there is nothing wrong with being abnormal, and that being abnormal and being unnatural are two very different things.
give me an example of "being unnatural"

as i said before, almost everything about modern human life is unnatural. unnatural is natural for humans. so what would really qualify as "unnatural"?

give me an example of "being unnatural"

as i said before, almost everything about modern human life is unnatural. unnatural is natural for humans. so what would really qualify as "unnatural"?
there is no unnatural, everything that occurs in nature is natural, therefore something can be abnormal (out of the norm) and not be unnatural.

It bothers me how "abnormal" has this negative connotation, like something is wrong with it. Just because something isn't "normal" doesn't mean it's bad, it just means it's different.

I don't see why "unnatural" or "abnormal" should carry negative connotations. My uncle's wheel chair is both unnatural and abnormal, but it's a freaking awesome gizmo. My computer is both unnatural and abnormal, if we're speaking in global terms, and I have found it to be a very welcome presence in my life. My hip was set with an unnatural, abnormal piece of equipment when I was an infant, and because of this I am able to walk and run normally when otherwise I would have been crippled for life.

There is nothing inherently bad about "abnormal" or "unnatural" things. So can we all be done using them as insults, now? :)

I don't see why "unnatural" or "abnormal" should carry negative connotations. My uncle's wheel chair is both unnatural and abnormal, but it's a freaking awesome gizmo. My computer is both unnatural and abnormal, if we're speaking in global terms, and I have found it to be a very welcome presence in my life. My hip was set with an unnatural, abnormal piece of equipment when I was an infant, and because of this I am able to walk and run normally when otherwise I would have been crippled for life.

There is nothing inherently bad about "abnormal" or "unnatural" things. So can we all be done using them as insults, now? :)
thank you! once again you are smarter than me when it comes to the expressing ideas kind of thingy....:)

But who determines the "norms"?

Norms are defined statistically, generally using a bell curve. The fattest part of the bell curve is where the norm is, as it tapers off to either end you get further away from the norm. Sometimes you have a skewed curve which shows the statistical norm as being closer to one end than to the center. The curve is divided into sections or deviations from the norm, so something can be one, two, three or more deviations from the norm on a standard bell curve. It's all very mathematical. But please don't ask me to explain it any more than that, because I've just exhausted my statistical knowledge (such as it is).

I don't even know what a transexual is suppose to be. Isn't that someone who gets a sex-change?

A homosexual: Abnormal.
Someone who gets a sex change: Un-natural.
(As you weren't born the other gender, wether or not you feel like it is irrelevant.)

Course there's a differance between un-natural and unacceptable. I can accept a sex change, I can't exsept bisexuality. I refuse.

I sorta think the OP is about me and my posts in that thread, am I right?

*snip*

Wonderful post.

Honestly, I'm baffled to no end by the people who seem to find "abnormal" to be an insult, and therefore, presumably, "normal" to be high praise. What the heck's so great about being close to a statistical average?

I just like to remind people that, when you come right down to it, "abnormal," "exceptional," and "extraordinary" mean pretty much the same thing. It bothers the bigoted types to hear that they've just called a bunch of people they hate "exceptional" and "extraordinary." :D

("Unnatural" is another funny insult, of course. My contact lenses don't exactly grow on bushes, but you'd be hard-pressed to call them evil for it.)

But who determines the "norms"?
The majority?

I don't even know what a transexual is suppose to be. Isn't that someone who gets a sex-change?

A homosexual: Abnormal.
Someone who gets a sex change: Un-natural.
(As you weren't born the other gender, wether or not you feel like it is irrelevant.)

Course there's a differance between un-natural and unacceptable. I can accept a sex change, I can't exsept bisexuality. I refuse.

I'd say people who get sex changes occur in nature, unless you think they're actually beamed in from some alternate universe. You could sort of argue that sex change operations themselves are "unnatural," for certain definitions of unnatural, but transsexuals themselves clearly aren't.

And why on earth would you "refuse to accept" bisexuality? What does that even mean? Did someone come door-to-door and ask you to adopt it as your personal savior, or are you just refusing to accept that attraction to both genders exists? :confused:

I sorta think the OP is about me and my posts in that thread, am I right?
not really. You got me thinking about it, someone else prompted the compulsion to start a thred about my thoughts, I didn't want to hijack Sin's thred so I started my own. I haven't seen "the person" around here though, don't know where they went, probably a puppet.....

And why on earth would you "refuse to accept" bisexuality? What does that even mean? Did someone come door-to-door and ask you to adopt it as your personal savior, or are you just refusing to accept that attraction to both genders exists? :confused:
If you must know, what I mean is I refuse to validate a bisexual as an equal. There is no scientific excuse for a bisexual. If we have harmones that attract us to males or females, what is the likelyhood that they would be perfectly balanced to be attracted to both?

A percentage too small for the amount of supposed bisexuals out there..

Therefore, it's a choice, wether they had some kindof truama or are sexualy confused is not my problem. But to purposely go against what you are out of some loony toon logic is not something I have to deal with. So I won't.

Besides that, it's tough enough finding someone as it is. And you're going to cheat the system and swing both ways? Cowards like that don't deserve anyone at all. If you want to play the game, you gotta' play by the same rules as everybody else. Also ussualy people who are bisexual tend to be atleast one of the following;

Polygamus.
Zoophyliac.
Liberal.

And sense I hate these things, it's clear to me there is a pattern forming, so I can't think of a reason why I shouldn't despise it..

Now mindyou, I've met some really nice girls who were bi. But, I refused to acknowledge them. I don't talk to them, I refused to go out with them, anything, such is the sacrifice one makes of thier own princaples. But the sacrifice is worth it, eventualy others will lead by my example and wakeup.

Truth is, I knew a guy who was bi and he did grow out of it. Thus proving my point. And he fealt really stupid afterward, which he was, but hey, atleast he learned his lesson..

*snip*

That is...a staggering mass of misconceptions, severely faulty logic, bizarre generalizations, and immense bigotry. I don't even know where to begin to reply to this, other than to say that I think you're wrong on pretty much every count here, and that your treatment of fellow human beings as subhuman disgusts me. Yeesh.

That is...a staggering mass of misconceptions, severely faulty logic, bizarre generalizations, and immense bigotry. I don't even know where to begin to reply to this, other than to say that I think you're wrong on pretty much every count here, and that your treatment of fellow human beings as subhuman disgusts me. Yeesh.
I just explained to you my life expireinces, so how is it generalizing? I'm not omnipresent, but from what my life has shown me, that's how bis are, I could say the same about you generalizing assuming everyone is peachy.

And good, I'm glad it disgusts you, you should be thankful, I only treat a select few this way, not everyone, and besides, it's not like I'm pointing a gun to thier head, I'm allowed to hate someone if I want too.. That's why we live in America.. America wasn't built on sunshine and lollypops..

Infact, our forefathers would've been like "WTF?!" had they seen half the crap that go's on today.. Had they seen what go's on now, we would've just threw down our guns and gaveup on the war against the Brits. Because we obviously won nothing..