You weren't digging. You were giving examples of why women's health centres are needed. "symptoms of heart disease", "musculoskeletal injuries". Because of differences between men and women, and both of those examples can be treated at a hospital or specialist clinic without the need for a Billion Dollar sign on the door saying "women only".
Then in the very next sentence you compounded that these can only be treated at woman's clinics, "Until recently men didn't need a sign that said 'Men's Clinic' to know that they would be treated for their issues.". I think you're attempting to suggest that we still live in the 1600's?
That's maybe why they're dropping funding, because the majority of the things can be treated at a regular hospital, or specialist clinic, and a large chunk of funding goes solely into women's healthcare anyway. If you want to see a gynaecologist that's a woman because you don't want a man down there, ask for one. I'm also quite sure that a woman asking to see a gynaecologist, they won't muddle it up and send you a gynaecologist that specialises in men's health, or even a veterinary gynaecologist specialising in Dolphins. There will be one available at request.
Homelessness, men cover above 70% of that in any given year. More funding is given to women's homeless shelters, and to get women off the streets. That's hardly equality.
There are many dumb articles juggling numbers to paint women as the true victijms of homelessness.
Article: https://www.bigissue.com/news/housing/how-does-homelessness-differ-for-women/
"Out of the 2,440 people estimated to be sleeping rough, 320 were women, making up just 13 per cent of the overall total. The 1,699 women seen rough sleeping in 2020/21 in London amounted to around 16 per cent of the total."
"It is an area in which the Westminster government has been focusing on in recent years.
Ministers have announced a £4m pilot to create a network of ‘respite rooms’ to provide specialist support for homeless women."
The answer? We need to get more women off the streets! Open more womens shelters!
Why aren't you shouting about that little inequality rather than about a miniscule amount of CEOs in the population? Reason, you don't care about equality. All you care is counting your victim points, so you can shove them in people's face and humblebrag about how hard a woman's life was in 1860, completely unrelated to your pampered life. Comparing yours to a woman's in 1860 when you couldn't vote, patriarchy forced you to stay at home while your husband was enjoying himself down the coal mine for 16 hours a day, died 20 years before his time, and your male son was shoved up a chimney to clean it out at 6 years old for pennies. Many male children died. While your daughter the poor soul had to endure patraicrchy full force because she was cleaning their socks, and putting a meal out for when they came back. At home in front of a warm fire comapred to working hard, very dangerous jobs, lungs filled with crap and exhausted at the end of the 12+ hours. That's IF they came back alive that day. But in your mind these people left the women at home to "slave" all day, while they went out to dance around on a little jaunt where all the men hi fived each other, joked around and danced back home to get their belly filled by their women "servants" who did all the "hard work" back at home.
The suicide rate for men by far outweighs the suicide rate for women. Nobody is crying out for funding male mental health clinics. Like you say, men and women's brains are wired differently, so you would assume there would be separate specialist clinics, and more funding for education on mental health for men.
Wrong. Way less funding.
If you google "men's mental health clinic locations united states", you can barely find any clinics or even spaces in hospitals.
Google "women's mental health clinic locations united states" and a giant list of locations appear of clinics, spaces at hospitals, and universities.
Most years, there are more cases of prostate cancer than breast cancer. Yet a fraction of funding is given to prostate cancer.
If you take a look at this article (it's old, but I doubt much has changed)
https://prostate.org.nz/2014/01/men-die-earlier-womens-health-gets-four-times-funding/#:~:text=Breast%20cancer%20received%20%2460%20million,compared%20to%2084.2%20for%20women.
women’s health gets four times more funding
And don't try and tell me that as a woman you CANNOT be treated at a general hospital or specialist clinic without a sign that says "WOMANS CLINIC" outside, because modern medicine, medical science, health care is designed, and built around men's health in the year 2022. Complete hornswaggle.
reply
share
sslssg (34249)
3 years ago
Okay, I think I get your issue. I was going to reply with confusion as to why you would be so against people going to a clinic that specialises in their health care needs? I mean are you against Cancer Institutes? Or should cancer patients just go to a hospital?
I also should point out that no where I said that I needed a female gyno, or that women's health clinics don't employ male gynos, so that must be an American thing.
Where my confusion was coming in is that I'm not American. Health care where I live is obviously different. We generally don't go to hospitals for everything. Women's health centres get the same funding from the government because all of our doctors get paid from the government. Yes I am simplifying things, but for me, I have a different perspective on women's health centres. One of the major ones here is attached to a hospital. With Roe v wade overturned I'm sure you'll get your wish though, and women's clinics will disappear along with funding.
Men's health is obviously just as serious as women's health. I have not disputed that at all. There is a cry here for mental health funding in all capacities. That's an issue for sure. I don't think suicide rates should be ignored in men.
Nor do I think that women's issues should be ignored.
https://www.northwell.edu/katz-institute-for-womens-health/articles/gaslighting-in-womens-health
https://www.mcgilltribune.com/sci-tech/sick-and-tired-how-the-medical-field-neglects-womens-health-03232021/
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/03/well/live/when-doctors-downplay-womens-health-concerns.html
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/dec/18/women-have-been-woefully-neglected-does-medical-science-have-a-gender-problem
I think you get the point.
My only point is that I want people to be able to be treated for what ails them. I don't think that anyone should have to suffer because care is not available to them. I don't care if that means that Men's health clinics need to pop up all over the place that deal with men specific issues. This isn't a sex thing. If it was 4 years ago when I first made the comment, maybe, I don't even remember what I was saying.
reply
share
mitzibishi (1857)
3 years ago
>Nor do I think that women's issues should be ignored.
Me neither. But you're not always the ultimate victims of all things, everything, ever, at all times if four times the amount of funding goes to women's health care. Stop whining.
>Where my confusion was coming in is that I'm not American.
Me neither, I assumed you were and used US numbers. But even in my country it's exactly the same deal. More healthcare spending goes to women than men. Mental health clinics for men are scarce, very little funding, male suicide rates through the roof, and underreported depression and mental health problems. Prostate cancer is more common than breast cancer, and way more money goes to breast cancer. Same old story.
Maybe people should voice a concern over that inequality or let it be as it's gone on for years anyway and if anybody dares to question it or they are labelled an MRA incel terrorist who hates women. I'm sure if it was swayed in men's favour, there would be a massive outcry of victimhood in the wrong would swiftly be righted.
reply
share
sslssg (34249)
3 years ago
This is a case of whataboutism though.
'A' does not stop being an issue just because 'B' is an issue. They can both be very valid issues. I simply explained why there is a need for women's health clinics. I didn't say that men's health should be ignored, I've just said that men's health issues are usually able to be dealt with by more doctors in more places so that men's clinics haven't been needed. I didn't say that their issues were fewer, nor did I say that there aren't issues that aren't being dealt with.
I can't think of a single mental health clinic for women where I live, so the lack of mental health clinics for men, doesn't concern me as much as the lack of mental health supports and clinics and why mental health isn't covered by universal health care.
I just looked up stats for cancer, and the CDC says that 13% of American men get prostate cancer, and cancer.org says that 13% of women will get breast cancer. So... How much of that money is government allocated or is it from fundraising?
But you're not always the ultimate victims of all things, everything, ever, at all times if four times the amount of funding goes to women's health care. Stop whining.
I'm just going to say that I haven't said women are victims here at all. I've explained the need for women's health centres. I've even pointed out that there are men's health clinics popping up and that I have no issues with that. You are the one acting like a victim.
reply
share
mitzibishi (1857)
3 years ago
Your whole discussion here is based on whataboutsism.
The discussion was about Mavericks behaviour being seen as creepy now, and you swiftly turned it into:
>Women hold less than 5% of fortune 500 CEO roles. In the US women still don't get any sort of maternity leave, and yet governments keep restricting access to women's health centres.
And ranting on the dreaded "pay gap".
Completely derailing the topic.
reply
share
sslssg (34249)
3 years ago
Yeah, but if you went back to my original comment on the topic...
[–] sslssg (18683) 4 years ago
Compared to other 80's movies Mav is a perfect gentleman.
Pop culture is one of the reasons why we are in the situation that we are currently in. It's not that men are all creeps. I really don't believe that at all. I do think however that women are not putting up with behaviours that were previously seen as perfectly fine. I grew up with movies like 16 Candles, Revenge of the Nerds, and even the scene in The Breakfast Club where Judd is under the table looking up Molly's skirt. It was all seen as perfectly fine.
Men have had it reinforced over and over that this behaviour is fine. Women do not always like being wooed. In the movies they did, mostly because men wrote them. That all it took for a woman to change her mind on a man was for him to have sex with her and prove himself (Revenge of the Nerds) In life, not so much. Men don't always like being pursued either. It's perfectly normal for both sexes to want to choose who they wish would pursue them.
Choosing random responses from a conversation that has veered in different directions over 4 years is disingenuous. My discussion with you was on health clinics for women, as you cherry picked from my previous comments and ignored the comment before I mine which said that women were the superior gender.
[–] mitzibishi (1081) 15 days ago
>yet governments keep restricting access to women's health centres.
And raising it for men's health centres? Oh, I forgot, there are no men's health centres.
So if this is how you discuss, I have no desire to continue this conversation.
reply
share
mitzibishi (1857)
3 years ago
>Choosing random responses
Nope. Your first responses, and how you derailed it into the lack of female CEO's, and the pay gap, which you're reading directly from a script.
Yeh you keep fight dat pay gap, and women not receiving maternity leave when the discussion was about Tom Cruise in a woman's toilet.
Smash the patriarchy!
reply
share
sslssg (34249)
3 years ago
Not actually wanting to converse with you. But since you are incapable of reading.
First response
[–] sslssg (18746) 4 years ago
Compared to other 80's movies Mav is a perfect gentleman.
Pop culture is one of the reasons why we are in the situation that we are currently in. It's not that men are all creeps. I really don't believe that at all. I do think however that women are not putting up with behaviours that were previously seen as perfectly fine. I grew up with movies like 16 Candles, Revenge of the Nerds, and even the scene in The Breakfast Club where Judd is under the table looking up Molly's skirt. It was all seen as perfectly fine.
Men have had it reinforced over and over that this behaviour is fine. Women do not always like being wooed. In the movies they did, mostly because men wrote them. That all it took for a woman to change her mind on a man was for him to have sex with her and prove himself (Revenge of the Nerds) In life, not so much. Men don't always like being pursued either. It's perfectly normal for both sexes to want to choose who they wish would pursue them.
Second Response
[–] sslssg (18746) 4 years ago
I hope that most of those instances aren't true. Women aren't perfect either and there certainly are some double standards. I do hope though that this really is a learning point in society for all.
And the response that made me bring up the pay gap
[–] [deleted] 4 years ago
Women at the moment are the superior gender. They can do no wrong at all and can ruin a man with accusations alone. We are not in a learning point at all. But many are waking up.
And now I am done.
reply
share
mitzibishi (1857)
3 years ago
Then you blast off with the CEO and the thoroughly debunked pay gap script after the topic was of men entering toilets, where they may face accusations. Then CEO's, to maternity leave in the USA, a pay gap that has been thoroughly DEBUNKED like the guy said. You're thinking of the earnings difference. Which you relate to "patriarchy". If "patriarchy" relates to women having more days off, working less hours, less overtime then you win. The earnings gap is real.
Whataboutisms to the max. Please explain how YOU can apply for a job and your pay will be less than a males, like it actually advertises two different pay rates, one for males and one for females????? Which country do you live in? In my country, that is ILLEGAL.
I'm reading from the script and your next reply will be "When negotiating salaries men......"
I thought you didn't live in the USA? How many jobs have you been in when you had to "negotiate" your salary" I've never known anybody "negotiate" their "salary" in my many years in the work place. In any workplace I've been at, from management to the bottom, it's always been a set pay structure, based on seniority. Not "negations", nor pay based on race, nor, GENDER. IT IS ILLEGAL to have a pay structure based on GENDER.
Are you talking about the 1% of jobs in your country where "salary" may be "negotiated", or the other 99% of jobs where "salary" is SET IN STONE NO MATTER THE Gender and women work less hours. Thus earn less.
>I have no desire to continue this conversation.
Well..........you keep replying.
reply
share