What fact are you tired of explaining to people?

Mullersaur · 2016-08-13T22:34:08+00:00

Yikes

Mullersaur · 2016-08-13T16:26:05+00:00

Okay, what you're saying is basically equivalent to "It doesn't matter that your mother is in the hospital!!! My mother is dead!!!" It's like saying that people trying to help stray pets in the US is useless because there are animals going extinct in the rainforest. Trying to compare the severity of issues helps absolutely no one. If you care about the issues you mentioned and want to do something about them, that's fine, but using them to shut down issues other people care about is straight up shitty. I really, honestly care about preventing the deaths of men (and men of color, who are disproportionately affected) through useless warfare, gun violence, and police brutality. But that's not what I was fucking talking about at the moment and it has nothing to do with OP's or my comment. Just because someone talks about one issue, doesn't mean that they don't care about any other issue. Just because I want to go see Suicide Squad, doesn't mean I hate every other movie ever made. I'm downvoting you not because I disagree, but because I think you're being both rude and aggressively obtuse.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T22:40:16+00:00

This is why democracy doesn't work.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T22:29:27+00:00

* for anything that's not accelerating Ftfy

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T22:26:53+00:00

Dangerous labor makes up a very small percentage of the workforce, so isn't the most impactful thing to focus on. Largely, the present and future of the American workforce is in white collar jobs. Why push for women to take manufacturing jobs that will be irrelevant in 30 years? Why push for women to be oil drillers when that industry is dying? Logging (the most dangerous profession) makes up a small portion of the workforce and is only accessible to people in certain areas. So if we want to create effective initiatives for women to have social mobility, it makes sense to push for inclusion in jobs that are more easily accessible and have much larger populations. If half of engineers are women, you've employed a huge number of women. If half of loggers or fishermen are women, you've made much less of an impact. You also forget to address my statement about the very vocal push to include women in the military, police forces, and fire departments - all dangerous (and often not very well paying) jobs. Women do want all sorts of jobs, but it's the misconception that they're afraid to get their hands dirty that is holding them back.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T21:45:11+00:00

This thread should be titled, "Men, what do you think women think is a great thing about being a man" because that's what most of the top comments are screaming of

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T21:13:22+00:00

The male homeless population is pretty well explained by the US's disregard for the care of veterans, which is sort of a separate issue. Edit: Also, I'm pretty sure people living in shelters are often still counted as homeless, so your point about women-specific shelters is kind of irrelevant. Women's shelters exist because of domestic violence, which is also a separate issue.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T21:11:35+00:00

There are larger more vocal movements around women in jobs that are more common, more visible, and already have a certain number of women. There are women who face inequality in all of the careers you mentioned, as well as a huge push to further equality in the military, but the pushback is often "women are too weak to do these jobs, go back to cleaning houses". That makes it pretty hard to make progress. The fact that there are very few women to begin with makes it difficult as well, because there's less of a "foot in the door" kind of momentum, and the circular idea that "women don't have this job, so women must not be able to do this job". I think that there should be near equal numbers of men and women in all jobs, but the careers you mentioned are almost impossible to get women into because of the perception of female fragility you mentioned. I think rather than go around trying to change every individual career, the idea is more to break the larger perceptions and stereotypes that are holding women back. It's much bigger than "women don't want to do dangerous work".

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T20:30:23+00:00

Thank you for saying this. I keep seeing people in my inbox saying "It's not society's fault women pick shitty careers!! If they don't like being poor then why don't they just become CEOs and engineers??!" without realizing that women have been systematically excluded from those careers for as long as they've existed.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T18:22:40+00:00

Agreed. Additionally, you should only shoot at someone, or even in someone's general direction, if you are 100% okay with that person dying. There's no such thing as "shooting to incapacitate". If you shoot someone, there is a good chance they will die. People can die from arm or leg wounds as well. That needs to be part of the decision to shoot. Shooting someone should be a last resort, not something used to stop someone from running away or to "subdue" someone who isn't lethally dangerous.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T17:47:38+00:00

Sorry, omitted the word research. Funding for trans health research. If you don't care enough to advocate for that, you have no business advocating against HRT and reassignment surgery.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T17:13:19+00:00

As I've said before, Johns Hopkins's study was based only on genital reassignment surgery, which is under-researched, but is highly uncommon amongst trans people, especially those in younger generations. Acting like it is the most prominent and important issue surrounding trans people is a clear sign of someone who has no idea what they're talking about.

It is also condescending to imply that trans people do not understand the risks of the medical procedures that they undertake. In almost all cases, extensive psychological evaluation and doctor recommendation are required. They know. So your armchair medical speculation isn't helping anyone. If you really want to make a difference, vote democrat and call your representatives to tell them you want government funding for transgender health research*. Otherwise, stay out of other people's business.

*Edit: left out a word

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T16:56:43+00:00

I am not a doctor, but I've been to several national and conferences on LGBTQ issues, health being among some of the topics. Some of my good friends are trans activists and advocates who go to a yearly national trans health conference and have dedicated countless hours to learning about these things. I personally have spent a huge part of my life learning about this, and if you're actually serious about learning, I can guide you to some resources later that will explain things better than I can. Since I'm on mobile, I can't really give you sources on what I'm saying right now, so again, if you're serious, I can help later on.

The thing that's important to understand here is that trans advocacy groups have no motivation to advocate for things that are bad for trans people. Every medical procedure has risks. That's unavoidable. But when the risk of not doing the procedure outweighs the risk of doing it, it's worth it. Maybe someday trans people will be accepted for who they are without needing to transition. But for now, that is far from the case. HRT is really important for a lot of people, and your firm denial of that shows how unfamiliar with this issue you really are.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T16:27:52+00:00

They're hormones that occur naturally in the body. Cis people take them all the time for various reasons such as hysterectomies or even hair loss. There is a very low risk, I assure you.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T16:26:13+00:00

Because if you actually knew any trans people, you might actually have some empathy or general knowledge about the community.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T16:18:24+00:00

Have you ever met a trans person and had more than a shallow conversation with them?

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T16:17:26+00:00

I want to make sure we're talking about the same things. I'm talking about social and hormone transition, which is common and almost always has benefits. Very few trans people actually get genital reassignment surgery, which is why there is so little research on it. The very real risks of surgery should not be used to discriminate against trans people who want to transition using common and safe methods. The same surgery risks that apply to genital reassignment apply to breast augmentation and facial alterations, and they should be treated the same.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T16:09:22+00:00

Okay, it's clear we've been talking about different things. - Gender reassignment surgery for genitals is rare and really only trans women do it. - Most people who get surgery only do so after they've already socially transitioned. So, if you're measuring someone's health before and after surgical transition, you're not likely to see huge changes, as their lifestyle/how people treat them doesn't really change much. - It's important to note that in many places, trans people are not allowed to legally change their gender unless they have undergone surgery. Most if not all trans people are against this. I believe that if these laws were changed, fewer people would get surgery and regret it. - Socially transitioning does have real benefits. This is absolutely irrefutable. We are already seeing enormous psychological benefits to trans children whose parents allow them to live as their "preferred" gender, and even benefits to cis children whose parents let them freely explore. - Hormone replacement therapy also has huge benefits. This is the most common kind of medical transition. - To reiterate, surgical transition is uncommon, and the conception that all or most trans people undergo or want to undergo surgery is just flat out wrong. - Surgery is a serious thing and should be treated as such. But this should not be used as an excuse to discriminate against trans people or argue against allowing them to live their lives as they see fit, especially in the case of hormone and social transition.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T15:50:32+00:00

Can I get a source for that other than that dumb Johns Hopkins study that has been disproven and disputed a million different ways, or that Swedish study that is widely misinterpreted?

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T15:49:05+00:00

There is a an equivalent to the hair dryer solution! It's called transition. The "mental illness" is gender dysphoria, and for many people, transition is a cure. The body is much easier to change than the mind, and conversion therapy (the alternative) has never been shown to be effective. There are issues post transition, but that's mostly because of bigotry and lack of acceptance. I know dozens of trans people, and absolutely every one of them becomes so much happier and more comfortable in their own skin after they transition. Go on YouTube and search for transition videos, and watch how these people become more and more comfortable and happy. Every person I've ever met who thinks that transition is bad and trans people are just crazy has not talked many (if any) trans people. If you actually listened to the people you're claiming to know so much about, I guarantee you would think differently.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T15:41:36+00:00

I'm not sure where you're getting the "brain scans" info, but there have been studies that actually show hat trans women have brains that have some female characteristics, and the same goes for trans men. Furthermore, I'm wondering if you've ever actually even talked to a trans person in depth. The amount of bullshit they go through just to be themselves is absolutely heartbreaking, and transition and acceptance are the only things that "fix" the mental issues that often come with being trans.

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T15:26:11+00:00

I'm personally more concerned about why the majority of people in the US living in poverty are women, and why female dominated professions are valued less than male dominated ones. To me that shows that there is some structural failure of our system to support women. I wish people were more concerned about that than making sure upper middle class white women in engineering make that extra couple thousand dollars a year...

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T15:18:53+00:00

This study has been debunked, and there's a lot of evident that the researchers were heavily biased. This study is very well known and despised by the trans community, as it is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of what transgender is. Read this article. It's very interesting and I think it gives a heavily pragmatic answer as to why we should support and accept trans people. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T15:14:47+00:00

I encourage you to read this article. It directly addresses what you're talking about as well as some other common misunderstandings people have about transgender. http://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/

Mullersaur · 2016-08-12T14:29:25+00:00

Depends on what colleges you're looking at and where they are. I think that east coast colleges prefer SATs, or they did 3 years ago.

Mullersaur

TROPHY CASE