Women are discriminated against in back pain treatment - Guardian woke again or am I being unfair!

From the paper the news article is based on, it seems like men were mentioned even less often than women.
3.2. Content analysis
Click to expand...
None of the nine records included the word ‘female.’ Four of the records made reference to ‘woman’ or ‘women,’ with a total count of eight mentions [Citation33,Citation34,Citation39,Citation41].
Click to expand...
The word ‘male’ was mentioned in one record, with two counts in total [Citation39]. Reference to ‘man’ or ‘men’ was made in two records, with a total of four mentions throughout [Citation39,Citation41].
Click to expand...
‘Gender’ was mentioned in one of the records [Citation34], and the word ‘sex’ was not mentioned at all.
Click to expand...
All nine records included the words ‘people(’s),’ ‘person(s/’s),’ and ‘individual(s/’s),’with 628 mentions in total (Table 3) [Citation33–41].
Click to expand...

 
If the whole point is to treat people equally then gender should not be mentioned at all, surely?
If people have more symptoms they should be treated as having more symptoms, not as women with more symptoms.
 
DHagen said:
Sorry, you were employing the term in an attempt to flag your views as something not to be taken seriously?
Click to expand...

Not quite.

I guess I am just phased by the anti-logic of justifying a claim for discrimination on the basis of anti-discrimination arguments. There are no doubt genuine cases of discrimination but it doesn't make much sense to argue that lack of discrimination is discrimination.
 
Jonathan Edwards said:
If the whole point is to treat people equally then gender should not be mentioned at all, surely?
If people have more symptoms they should be treated as having more symptoms, not as women with more symptoms.
Click to expand...
You are swinging wide with this one and clearly addressing issues far beyond the article at hand by mocking the idea that systemic injustice is something worthy of consideration.

Equity and equality are not the same.

WRT the issue this paper is attempting to address (regardless of whether or not it actually does accurately), if sex differences also result in different presentations and different treatment considerations, this clearly would be of significance, though I am sure you know that. If, as argued here, "person" is understood to be effectively synonymous with "male," then this is not being taken into consideration.

[edited for grammar]
 
Last edited:
Jonathan Edwards said:
I guess I am just phased by the anti-logic of justifying a claim for discrimination on the basis of anti-discrimination arguments. There are no doubt genuine cases of discrimination but it doesn't make much sense to argue that lack of discrimination is discrimination.
Click to expand...
I would recommend not using the same language as right wing podcasters ranting about chemtrails
 
DHagen said:
You are swinging wide with this one and clearly addressing issues far beyond the article at hand by mocking the idea that systemic injustice is something worthy of consideration.
Click to expand...

Completely the opposite. I would never mock the idea of systemic injustice. It is all around us, but it is not this.

DHagen said:
Equity and equality are not the same.
Click to expand...

Maybe I meant treat people equitably then.

DHagen said:
if sex differences also result in different presentations and different treatment considerations, this clearly would be of significance,
Click to expand...

Of course, so you treat according to the presentation, not according to the sex. It makes no sense. Or should one treat pain differently in women because 'we all know' they have so much more pain - which is the BPS line of course.

DHagen said:
If, as argued here, "person" is understood to be effectively synonymous with "male,"
Click to expand...

Who on earth would think that? I spent my life looking after 75% female patients. Did I assume they were all male before adjusting my approach?
 
Mansplaining alert.

Person not affected by issue has strong opinions on it being a non-issue.

The Guardian isn’t even woke in the original or pejorative sense. It’s a tabloid capitalist experiment floundering in the sea of new media. HTH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom