IHAC sometimes

There is an initialism (technically, it is not an acronym) I use as texting shorthand and a hashtag for when I am gobsmacked by the autocorrect function on my smartphone: IHAC. I hate autocorrect.

Yes, it is supercharged to state that I hate a system for guessing words as I type. But I think it's suitable, as at times the "common" words it suggests are, well, not common at all.

I do like being able to teach autocorrect words. But that is apparently a limited trick. For my name, after I've successfully maneuvered past misspelling my own first name as John rather than Jon, my Android phone still suggests, of all the Jon people in the world, the last name Gosselin. The reality TV guy with far too many kids and an ex-wife. First, though, it suggests Stewart, as in the comic (no, his first name is not spelled with an "h").

My own name is only a mild example of my bittersweet partnership with autocorrect. As someone who believes he is a writer (I have had enough practice), catching autocorrect errors after I've sent an email, or a text message, gets on my nerves. 

For the longest time, while writing an email or online post of some sort, each time I attempted to write "people" my phone suggested the word "puerile."* Now, I may use the screen keyboard a tad differently than most because I mostly use my left hand, but I don't see how the word "people" can be overlooked by autocorrect while the comparably more obscure term "puerile" could show up, so regularly. (I am usually using a swipe-to-type function, rather than pecking at keys. The two words have similar sweep paths, but there's still the question of commonality.) For that, in some moments of brisk writing, proclaiming IHAC fits.

If the autocorrect function gets on people's nerves, why don't they just get to a real keyboard and write? Why don't I just use my laptop when it is nearby instead? It's heavier than my phone.

It's a tradeoff: autocorrect gaffes for some types of physical convenience and comfort. Or laziness.

With my own contentious history with autocorrect while using that teeny screen keyboard on my Android phone, I read this piece from WIRED.COM with interest and amusement. It's about the Microsoft Word correction system, however. But the humor and challenge of autocorrect as a software is about the same.

The History of Autocorrect
"On one hand, Word didn't want to seem priggish; on the other, it couldn't very well go around recommending the correct spelling of mothrefukcer."

Read the article :
http://www.wired.com/2014/07/history-of-autocorrect/

*puerile means "of childhood" but it also means "childish or silly"

- Jon O

Ian Thorpe, Mike Sam latest to see their sexuality a major news story, whether they want that or not

(published Aug. 30)

The news from Ian Thorpe, and the admission of NFL prospect Michael Sam, a while back were terrific. I want people to be comfortable with how they find open, positive, uplifting affection from others. Life's too hard to judge people merely for being homosexual. Now let's move on, shall we? The noise in media about Sam, especially, had been obnoxious.

Like the best-ever saying from the "Gay Pride" movement says: "We're here, we're queer, get used to it!" Eeexactly. And there's lot of people who wish non-heterosexuals would get over it. Those who are homosexual and incapable of not obsessing over it, and the media that covers it like the very subject is a crass reality show could lower it several notches.

Those who are not heterosexual are about 2.3 percent of the population, according to a recent poll. That shocked me.

The popular impression has been that LGBT, etc, are about 5-10 percent of Americans. But by the news coverage and noise about it, you'd think those who engage in non-heterosexual relationships were nearly 50 percent of the population. To say the "gay movement" has become overblown in the media, and amongst political correctness and grievance peddlers, is a gross understatement. It's downright imbalanced and brainwashing. It seems. Intentional or not. The knee-jerk response to my perspective for those whose views are driven chiefly by emotion, and not sense, will scoff and conclude I just don't like gays, etc. Yeah, not.

Being gay, lesbian, bisexual or otherwise is a deviation from the norm, it's reasonable to say. It strays from the essential sexual attraction and resulting activity that winds up in procreation of the species, and all that. But that's all. We shouldn't read more into it than that. There are despicable gays, etc, sure. There's a hella-lot of deviant, perverted, despicable straight people, too. But the mere fact of not being heterosexual is not a horrible thing. Humans are rather complex beings, and no matter what religion or conventional thinking tells us, deviations (scientific usage of the word) occur. So can we move on?

Homosexuality, or bisexuality, or the other sexual identity deviances can be awkward -- to understate it, in the cases of those who harshly struggle with it within themselves -- for those who realize it is part of what they are. People handle it, like any other challenge, in different ways. I assure you, for a lot of people so inclined, even in a very accepting environment, it was and perhaps always will be tumultuous from time to time. But that isn't to say being heterosexual isn't contentious, too. Sexuality is the great challenge of all teenagers. And it continues after that.

What's the norm is the norm. Not being of the norm can be tough when you realize a part of what you are is way off the beaten path. When it's something you realize cannot be changed. When you recognize that you need to accept it. I am fairly sure no one (without a very, very fractured grasp on existence) gets up one morning and decides, "I'm going to shock and upset my parents, confuse my siblings, relatives, and friends, make some people feel betrayed by me, and admit that I'm gay [lesbian, etc.]. I'm in the mood to create an emotional and psychological maelstrom for myself and others!"

Deviant, non-perverse sexuality -- which normal homosexuality is -- isn't automatically bad, it's just rare and different. It is extremely odd to some people, of course, and others regard it as simply devil's behavior. Well, it isn't the usual, but evil is a whole other category of stuff. Simply being gay is not evil and is not reason for being mistreated. (If things were that simple, there'd be no lawyers left on Earth, we'd have done away with the good along with the bad long ago.)

There are lots of things out of the norm that freak out people, though. The strange is a part of this life. We gotta deal with it.

I think those who TRULY fear homosexuality are a danger, not the common homosexual. (That might require some clarification, but I'll simply note that fearing homosexuals is not the same as fearing pedophiles or sexual predators. One is inherently dangerous to innocents, one is not.)

But look, homosexuals, start shutting up about it, won't you? Many have serious issues, some far more "closeted" within the whole society than a unusual sexual identity, far more disabling than it, too. And your obnoxious behavior is surely an insult to them. So, man - or woman - up, and be who you are without making it something worth brainwashing the mainstream about. The way it's gone about is unfairly offensive to many, and preachy. The media generally adore you, and the media don't adore anyone unless they are pet project such as kids who make funny noises (or presidents whose biggest credential is his skin color isn't white). They choose the wrong things about people to focus on far too often, that is. Too often too many in news media go for the head-patting, easy story. And they think gays are like the kooks on reality shows. Fun to pet. Shallowness. You should be avoiding it, but many instead are gravitating towards it.

Why is it always about accepting one's self, and not accepting the abuse others put upon people? We all struggle to accept ourselves. Our sexuality, our skin color (pasty ain't great, either, just ask around), physical attractiveness, etc., etc., aren't the big hurdles in life, except in spoiled first world thinking. Man up!

Make the same noise about true victims now and then. Most can't, because they're emotional wusses. Where are the parades for rape victims? for victims of pedophilia? for child abuse victims? Where are prancing sillies celebrating good families and happy homes? Why does 2.3 percent of the population deserve such an overblown sense of victimization and propping up by pandering cheerleader pundits?

It's a shame we don't hear volumes of babbling adoration about the public admissions of victims of horrors imposed upon them by bad people. How about going crazy with happiness over the following: "I'm the survivor of a failed abortion and I am glad I lived and so is my mom" (once: a Miss America contestant, and it was not very loud), or "I was emotionally abused by both my parents and attempted suicide, but after decades of emotional darkness and therapy, I'm OK,"  or "I'm a victim of pedophilia and after a lifetime of deep shame and emotional misery, hating myself, and wishing for death, I'm finally comfortable admitting it," or some such.

I guess people prefer a less bold form of cheerleading those who have unusual life experiences. They prefer the comfort of that over having good feelings about people overcoming the greatest of emotional adversities.

Ian Thorpe: I'm finally comfortable saying I'm a gay man | Sport | theguardian.com

 - Jon O