I was originally going to ask how many legal genders there should be, but I fail to see a compelling argument against 0.

  • Trad Wench
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    This assumes that men and women have the same medical needs. They don’t. Our average hormonal balances are completely different so for a doctor to be able asses doses, they need to know what the average hormonal balance is for women.

    • jpreston1986@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      but what they really need to know is the average hormonal balance for that specific person, before they started going out of whack.

      • Trad Wench
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Except women’s hormonal balances change during different phases of each month, but not for men. Thus the need to study women’s health since women and men have different phisiologies. Oh look, we’ve come full circle.

        • jpreston1986@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I mean, yes, we need to study women’s health more. It’s a big glaring hole in a ton of medical research. I’m just trying to stay with the vibe of the thread. I think that just like with cutting edge cancer research being done that focuses on tailoring the specific drug/method of action to that persons specific cancer, so too should most of our medical treatments be tailored not just to what’s between your legs, but to you, specifically. More research into everyone, but especially the largely ignored demographic of women, is needed to accomplish this. So… you’re right, but I think I’m right too.