Sexism

[Kelkelen]

@JazianCo--That I can see more argument for--but I still say that if a guy can do as good a job as a female (I would imagine more work required since they don't have the bits to know how it works from personal experience, but not 100% impossible), they should be allowed to practice as long as there are patients who are comfortable with them.

Right -- I can understand a person having a preference, and deserving the freedom to *choose* to be seen by a male or female doctor -- but I absolutely do NOT support the idea of somehow enforcing that gynecologists can only be female.

[Princess Artemis]

In the US, there is the WNBA, but...how often do you see it reported on? Women's version of NFL? I'd say that there is significantly fewer jobs out there for women locker-room reporters...buuuuut, there actually are women locker-room reporters for the NFL and NBA. I understand it does make some of the men very uncomfortable, but their concerns were not as important, apparently.

[JaziandCo]

Right -- I can understand a person having a preference, and deserving the freedom to *choose* to be seen by a male or female doctor -- but I absolutely do NOT support the idea of somehow enforcing that gynecologists can only be female.

At least where I am there seems to be a very small market for male gynos, especially here in Conservative Amishville PA (aka Lancaster). I believe there is... one? In the most popular office in my city, and he has practically no patients as the clients all request women. To me it just doesn't seem fair to him or any other guy in that position.

[Obscure_Trash]

My friends actually seem to be even on the I-prefer-men front and the I-prefer-women front. o.o I'd rather just stay away from it all together, myself, lol.

[Princess Artemis]

Call this my unhappy personal experience, but while I wouldn't outright suggest that no men be allowed to be gynecologists, I really do think there is less of a place for them. It's unpleasant enough to have a stranger stick painful foreign objects inside me and try to convince me it's for my own good, I'd much prefer having one do so, if it must be done, who understands how invasive and horrible that is in a way that I suspect, biologically, only women can. Simply because men don't have the parts for it and there is no medical examination that even remotely compares. No routine medical exam for men mimics the actions of sex.

Edited April 28, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[The_Equidae]

Call this my unhappy personal experience, but while I wouldn't outright suggest that no men be allowed to be gynecologists, I really do think there is less of a place for them. It's unpleasant enough to have a stranger stick painful foreign objects inside me and try to convince me it's for my own good, I'd much prefer having one do so, if it must be done, who understands how invasive and horrible that is in a way that I suspect, biologically, only women can. Simply because men don't have the parts for it and there is no medical examination that even remotely compares. No routine medical exam for men mimics the actions of sex.

Yeah, and most hospitals and practices have extra rules regarding it. The standard seems to be similar across the board what some of the military Doctors a required to do. Male or female the OBGYN has to have second party during he entire process, usually it's one of the Navy medics who work there. You usually get a breast examination as well, and all Doctors are required to look away while they check.

[JaziandCo]

I suspect the expect person being necessary is less of a comfort thing for the patient and more of a "let's not get sued" thing for the practice itself. Less he-said she-said when there's a neutral (or not) 3rd person in the room.

 

Sorry, the last part just reminds me of this picture, lol. Old practice where the doctor could touch, but not look, during the examination.

[KageSora]

To me it just doesn't seem fair to him or any other guy in that position.

How is it not fair? As long as they are informed of the difficulty they will face, it is absolutely fair to allow them to chose that path once they know of it.

 

It would be unfair to allow them to go through their education and teach them that they will have no harder a time in the field than a female, but as long as they're aware of how it will be harder for them than a female, and the reasons WHY they will face that difficulty, I don't see how it's unfair to allow them to still try to pursue that if it's what they want.

 

 

I do agree that they have "less of a place" in the field, since they don't naturally have the equipment (those who were born female biologically being the exception, naturally), but if they're able to prove themselves as capable and can secure a client-base that will provide them with the necessary profits to remain in business, why not let 'em?

[Princess Artemis]

I do agree that they have "less of a place" in the field, since they don't naturally have the equipment (those who were born female biologically being the exception, naturally), but if they're able to prove themselves as capable and can secure a client-base that will provide them with the necessary profits to remain in business, why not let 'em?

Keeping in mind, of course, that OB/GYN is a historically male field. It's not exactly as if men have been barred from the practice.

 

This is possibly why it's so common, in the US at least, for birthing mothers to be flat on their back in stirrups--easy for the doctor--rather than in a myriad of other positions which they may find easier and more comfortable for themselves to give birth. I'd hope that if it were a historically female-dominated field, they'd bring their personal experience to it. I understand it's getting better, but stuff like that takes time.

Edited April 28, 2012 by Princess Artemis

[AngelKitty]

Simply because men don't have the parts for it and there is no medical examination that even remotely compares. No routine medical exam for men mimics the actions of sex.

I wouldn't say that there's nothing that can remotely compare: I'd say prostate exams are pretty invasive and really embarrassing things can happen that I imagine make the invasiveness feel even worse and, depending on your age, routine prostate exams are recommended.

[Fuzzbucket]

Right -- I can understand a person having a preference, and deserving the freedom to *choose* to be seen by a male or female doctor -- but I absolutely do NOT support the idea of somehow enforcing that gynecologists can only be female.

I've been to a male and to a male gynaecologist. The male was WAY better, gentler and more respectful.

 

I think I said before that I like to see people do the jobs best suited to their talents, not to their gender. I really believe me .

 

ETA and the female nurse that was present for the male when he examined me and when he did cryotherapy REALLY annoyed me; she was prissy and I wished she would Go Away. Especially when he and I were making tampon jokes (HE gets them !) and she was just pursing her lips...

Edited April 29, 2012 by fuzzbucket

[JaziandCo]

but if they're able to prove themselves as capable and can secure a client-base that will provide them with the necessary profits to remain in business, why not let 'em?

That's the point. He's capable, I've been to see him a few times and I made a passing joke about him being a guy inspecting lady-junk and that's when he said he was the only guy that worked there and that most of the people coming through don't want to talk to him over a woman. The problem is that he can't secure a client base, at least not here (and it may be different in more liberal areas), because none of the women want a man to examine them for varying (and not altogether invalid) reasons. I haven't been back in the last year and a half, so that may have changed in that time as well.

[KageSora]

That's the point. He's capable, I've been to see him a few times and I made a passing joke about him being a guy inspecting lady-junk and that's when he said he was the only guy that worked there and that most of the people coming through don't want to talk to him over a woman. The problem is that he can't secure a client base, at least not here (and it may be different in more liberal areas), because none of the women want a man to examine them for varying (and not altogether invalid) reasons. I haven't been back in the last year and a half, so that may have changed in that time as well.

Again, I don't see how that's "unfair" or anything--as long as they know that such is likely to happen, and how they will likely need to go more out of their way to find a place where they can practice to get enough clients, I don't see the issue. As long as they're aware of the difficulties, I don't see the problem.

 

 

As Fuzzy said, I'd rather see them do a job suited to their talents rather than their gender.

[JaziandCo]

I suppose I would just prefer to see a good compromise between the two, for a more than fair warning on how hard it will be to gain your average female client's trust and how hard it will be to even attract clients in the first place, especially in conservative areas and possibly even a light discouragement so that they're not setting themselves up for massive disappointment when they do have to struggle more than their female counterparts.

 

I say it's unfair because I know if I was good at my job, possibly better than the opposite gender, and no one wanted to see me over someone of their own gender because of how the work is implied to be "dirty" and "secret" (and something that will likely NEVER change due to how sex is marketed as "dirty" and "secret", at least by conservatives), I would be reeeeeeally frustrated that I'd be just spinning my wheels and getting nowhere.

 

Unlike the usual stereotypes around car mechanics, security guards, and construction workers, women who prefer female gynos typically have a valid reason for not wanting a male doctor. "You're a girl, you can't computer" is a LOT different than "I am extremely uncomfortable to have anyone other than my SO poke around down there, especially someone who is the opposite gender".

[Princess Artemis]

I wouldn't say that there's nothing that can remotely compare: I'd say prostate exams are pretty invasive and really embarrassing things can happen that I imagine make the invasiveness feel even worse and, depending on your age, routine prostate exams are recommended.

That is invasive, uncomfortable, and embarrassing, yes. The only thing that could compare, however, would be a routine medical exam where a man must have his penis inserted into a cold, lubed up, pinching, uncomfortable tube. Since there is no routine medical exam that mimics sex in this fundamental way for men, I maintain that there is nothing comparable.

[Zovesta]

I'd like to give everyone's attention to this blog:

 

http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2010/12/09...s-shaming-pony/

woah nelly that is awful in so many ways

 

Tell me - can long haired women then be anything other than straight ??   WEIRD. 

My hair goes down to the middle of my back and I'm pretty bi. =U

 

I do agree with you guys that jobs shouldn't really be gender-specific. As long as a male gyno is warned ahead of time that he won't be getting as much business as a woman would, I don't see why he can't become one anyway.

 

@Princess Artemis: ... What about gay sex for men? >_> Prostate exams seem to reflect that pretty well.

[Rosedamai]

I'd like to give everyone's attention to this blog:

 

http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2010/12/09...s-shaming-pony/

That's basically how the "Ministry for women" rolls in my country...god it's a shame for feminists everywhere.

[Fuzzbucket]

@Princess Artemis: ... What about gay sex for men? >_> Prostate exams seem to reflect that pretty well.

*cough*

 

Just feel I should point out that I read somewhere that there are a LOT of ways for gay men to have sex, and VERY MANY gay men do not happen to indulge in that particular one.

 

But most men I know do prefer a male urologist (which is what they tend to have to see for this stuff.) And I KNOW a number of men who have felt TOTALLY invaded by some of the investigations, like having a probe up your backside while the guy gropes between your legs.... OK it may not mimic sex (not that I ever thought a speculum did...) but still - invasive and then some.

 

But I also know a few women who don't want to see a female gynaecologist because they feel she will be thinking "mine is nicer than YOURS...."!!! My lovely male one did say once when I asked him that you can't actually think about sex and attractiveness when you are looking for signs of cancer and chlamydia.... I can see that. He said it must be a LITTLE like that for chefs - you can't be thinking about how everything you cook will taste in any meaningful sense or you'd feel very ill by the end of the day - especially if you are cooking something for a customer that you know YOU don't happen to like.

 

Edited for clarity.

 

ETA also - I used to BUY Ms Magazine. That blog has to be a spoof. It was always wonderfully feminist. The rest of the blogs seem to be so still.

Edited April 29, 2012 by fuzzbucket

[Zovesta]

(Haha, trust me, I know. =U I just felt that was the best way to phrase it because that tends to be the way a lot of people think of when they think of "gay men having sex")

 

That is honestly very true. And, let's face it, they look at a lot of bodies, some great, some not. If they got aroused by every single one, they'd be too frustrated to work. u__u It kind of dulls you to it after awhile.

[TikindiDragon]

(Haha, trust me, I know. =U I just felt that was the best way to phrase it because that tends to be the way a lot of people think of when they think of "gay men having sex")

 

That is honestly very true. And, let's face it, they look at a lot of bodies, some great, some not. If they got aroused by every single one, they'd be too frustrated to work. u__u It kind of dulls you to it after awhile.

Same with body searching to be fair. When you spend all day every day running your hands over other people's bodies you can't really think about what it is you are doing. It's about as arousing as running your hands over a horse to check it's legs. Your hands are looking for abnormalities, and what they're looking for them *on* ceases to register.

 

Lets face it - every gender has some pretty nastily invasive exams done on them at some point in their lives.

[Rosedamai]

Food for thought:

 

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/2...inst-women-act/

 

Apparently, 31 republican men voted against this bill, and all 5 republican women voted for it.

 

I wish domestic violence would be taken more seriously.

[Fuzzbucket]

Food for thought:

 

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/04/2...inst-women-act/

 

Apparently, 31 republican men voted against this bill, and all 5 republican women voted for it.

 

I wish domestic violence would be taken more seriously.

?????

 

Have I actually got the wrong end of the stick here ?? If I haven't, I TOTALLY don't get this...

[Rosedamai]

?????

 

Have I actually got the wrong end of the stick here ?? If I haven't, I TOTALLY don't get this...

If you aren’t familiar with the bill, it is an effective and beneficial effort to prevent domestic violence and aid victims of domestic or sexual abuse. Originally written and introduced by then-Sen. Joe Biden (D-DE), the bill has been reauthorized twice, and both times has enjoyed broad bipartisan support. Until now. This time, Republicans have decided to hold the bill hostage. Why? Because of added provisions that expand the classes of victims who would be protected — specifically, Native Americans, the LGBT community, and undocumented immigrants.

 

Apparently, the bill was passed so that the LGBTs, Native Americans and undocumented immigrants would be saved, but it faced opposition from the Republican men.

 

In short ( I seem to be confusing everyone these days ) the Violence against Women act was due to be fixed so that it included that violence against LGBT, Native Americans and undocumented immigrants would benefit from that bill. The Republicans apparently had an issue with this part, and stated that they would only pass it if such clauses were removed. However, when it came time to pass the bill in its original form, all 5 women in the Republican party voted for the bill to pass, while 31 men in the Republican party voted against it.

 

Edited April 29, 2012 by ylangylang

[Fuzzbucket]

 

Apparently, the bill was passed so that the LGBTs, Native Americans and undocumented immigrants would be saved, but it faced opposition from the Republican men.

I HAVE (but not any more) got the wrong end of the stick. This is appalling in terms of those men.

Edited April 29, 2012 by fuzzbucket

[Rosedamai]

I HAVE (but not any more) got the wrong end of the stick. This is appalling in terms of those men.

Well, you know, women don't really count in this world.

 

/sarcasm

 

But really, I do hope this bill passes so that lawmakers in my country would learn something from it.