I’m afraid AI written books are being published and put into library shelves too.

Women: socialized from a young age to uphold beauty standards or else be treated worse for being ‘ugly’

Men: 6 in 1 shampoo go brrr

Calling out the systems discrimination of girls and women with ADHD symptoms isn’t knocking others down. That’s like treating feminism as a personal attack on you because speaking up about women’s issues is an act of putting men down.

Think of how little leniency you get as a boy with ADHD. Now think about how girls and women don’t even get that, and are even more frequently punished for ‘acting out’ their ADHD symptoms due to a failure to conform to their gender roles.

There are many widely cited studies proving the prevalence of underdiagnosis of girls with ADHD, partly because the guidelines are decades old and derived from studies that deliberately excluded girls.

We also don’t give Adderall to people with ADHD.

Girls used to be diagnosed 25x less often than girls, now it’s only 3x less often. ADHD occurs at the same rates between genders. Girls are just more heavily conditioned and disciplined into gender conforming behavior, which involves sitting still, being quiet, paying attention, and ‘behaving well’. Girls with ADHD symptoms are treated as troublesome kids, without the leniency towards boys with ADHD.

This doesn’t cure girls of ADHD, it just makes them internalize their suffering at the cost of their mental health. Speaking as a woman who wasn’t diagnosed and medicated until my late 20s.

This is only true until you realize that a lot of modern science is built upon foundations of systemic discrimination that excluded women and minorities. Only new researching can prove old research wrong, and the lack of funding for catching up in inclusivity in science has led to the status quo of outdated beliefs permeating STEM but dressed in a lab coat of credibility.

Research on women’s health and medicine lags behind men’s by decades due to the historical exclusion of women in studies and the refusal to treat them as credible witnesses to their own bodies’ symptoms. Magnitudes of more money has been poured into ED than endometriosis, an agonizing condition that gets dismissed as ‘just a period’ by doctors.

Arguments like yours are hurting, not helping, women’s advocacy in modern medicine.

When you throw out all nuance, it opens the door for misogynists to dismiss every valid concern that women have when it comes to systemic discrimination in medicine. You are also alienating men who support male birth control in the process.

As someone who has had life threatening issues dismissed by doctors, been gaslit about the efficacy of my medications, berated for going to the ER when my doctor instructed me to, gone through an excruciating IUD insertion, trust me when I say I am the last person to defend sexism in medicine.

However, male birth control isn’t as that simple of an issue. There are legitimate scientific barriers to developing male birth control. It doesn’t erode away the slow pace and funding in developing male birth control that is made worse by sexism, but sexism isn’t the full story.

Medical science is not that black and white.

Think about birth control in terms of preventing death and disfigurement. Men don’t die from pregnancy, women do.

When women take birth control, it has the upside of not dying in pregnancy, having horrific pain in the process, or permanent changes to their body. Birth control has a lot of side effects, but at the end of the day, the maternal mortality rate of women who take birth control is far lower.

The reason why medical trials for male birth has been put on hold before, is because when weighing the side effects vs benefits of male birth control, men did not have to weight against death and suffering through pregnancy. Thus, the justification for male birth control requires a much higher bar.

While discrimination against women is prevalent in medicine, this isn’t as simple as an instance of dismissing male birth control because men didn’t like it. The process through which new modern medicines are vetted requires comparing the positive and negative outcomes of a medication, and that doesn’t necessarily take gender dynamics into account.

The brevity of police training program is definitely a major contributor.

While there are mental health programs present, the stigma of mental health has rendered many of them unused. Police surveyed in North Dakota found that an overwhelming majority will not disclose their mental health issues to their colleagues or supervisors, most expect to be discriminated if they do, and see mental health issues as a personal failure.

Of the services provided, only debriefings and weight rooms saw significant use. Outside of that, few used therapy, peer support groups, mental health checks, and resilience therapy.

That’s a good point. Conservatives often excuse the abuse of power because the scope of police work demands it, without acknowledging that there are non-police alternatives that are likelier to descalate a situation.

I think this ties into their inability to acknowledge mental health as a real and treatable issue. Perhaps because doing so would require acknowledging their own while being inhibited by the shame and cultural conditioning they grew up with.

It is horrifying for so many to fail their psych exam. However, I would also question if this is the most effective approach to better policing outcomes.

Psych exams in volatile workplaces are contradictory due to self reported elements in the exam. In aviation, there is a phenomenon where pilots historically masked mental health issues because a diagnosis was a death sentence to their careers. Paradoxically, acknowledging and allowing pilots to fly with these issues while being medicated has led to better outcomes.

The police who answered truthfully in the exam were fired, but that begs the question of whether the remainder were mentally sound or simply knew how to mask themselves in the psych exam.

No, I am speaking about the police specifically.

The advancements being made to mental health care in the military are meaningful, and the reduction of homeless veteran through housing programs speaks to the progress and recognition of difficulties in reintegrating into civilian life.

Well ackchyually, that’s anti-semitism. /s

History is path dependent. Not every country has the same literacy rates, civic participation, income inequality, intergenerational wealth, social inertia, and so on.

What is rational and common place in one country is radical progressivism in another.

You can do what is ideal, or you can do what works. You can deny a reality of systemic barriers to affordable housing, or accept that they are real and must be tackled one at a time.

In an ideal world, yes, there would be no landlords. In the real world, property, laws, the economy, and people are so deeply intertwined that to propose the elimination of landlords is about as facetious as eliminating bankers because of exploitation in banking.

Home insurance does not cover costs associated with maintenance and negligence.

Your sewer line failing because it’s 50 years old and made of cast iron is not a valid home insurance claim.

Socialized housing isn’t an overnight project. It starts with regulating the current housing marketing and prioritizing the take down of corporate slumlords. It starts with revising zoning laws, promoting higher density housing and multifamily homes, and creating walkable and accessible neighborhoods for all.

I get the idealism from Lemmy, but this is also it’s pitfall. Anything less than a leftist utopia is not worth working towards, and so we sit in righteous inaction.

Pretending that small landlords and corporate landlords are the same is like saying your local grocer is as bad as Walmart.

Renting is an essential part of the housing market. Not everyone wants or can commit to home ownership and all it’s unpredictable maintenance costs. A plumbing failure can be as cheap as $200 to fix or cost you $10,000+ for a full replacement and restoration from the biohazards of black water damage.

The reason why the housing market is fucked is because poor regulation allows corporate landlords to buy up tons of investment properties and control the housing costs and supply.

It’s clear from the moment you called anti-natalism fascism that words don’t mean anything to regressive fuckwits like you anymore.

How about you “go join q-anon and suck Charlie Kirk’s decomposing dick while you tout your ‘family values’ and pump out kids with room temperature IQ.”? See? I can also use words the same way you use ‘fascism’ to make a meaningless word salad.

Just because you can’t handle valid criticism it doesn’t make others fascist for calling you out. Go sit down and think of something original to write instead of copying everything I said with a flimsy ass ‘no u’. Everything you deflect is just another projection of yours.

Lmao complaining about my reading comprehension when you confused ‘sterilize’ with ‘euthanize’ is a whole other level of hypocrisy.

Keeps complaining after claiming after you’re ‘done responding to this thread’.

Words just don’t mean anything to you. You like to say whatever soothes your precious little ego and then backtrack when you get called out on it.

Removing humans? Again, shows how little you understand about anti-natalism. There is no ‘removing humans’ involved if they aren’t born in the first place.

I love how you substituted ‘sterilize’ with ‘euthanize’ as if they were the same thing, and then claim that I was the one who didn’t try to engage.

If you don’t care to learn you should have said so earlier. Anti-intellectuallism, bad faith arguments, pronatalism, false attribution, deflection, and projection are all hallmarks of conservatism. Go and take your conversative shit somewhere else.

That’s wild of you to think that not wanting kids is facism. Read up on the Cross of the Honour of the German Mother.

Anti-natalism is pro-working class because it goes against pronatalist ideologies. Working class women without affordable access to birth control are often trapped in a cycle of poverty, lack of higher education access, and financial dependency. Pronatalism is often presented under the guise of family values but actually aims to encourage the birth of more minimum wage workers and cannon fodder for the military industrial complex.

I’m not the one advocating the Great Man theory here, I’m merely emphasizing the ridiculous of your claim that one can only improve the world by birthing kids and raising them to do good. You don’t have to birth kids to do that, just fuckin do it yourself.

Your arguments are not written in good faith because to go as far as claiming that anti-natalism is facist shows how little you care to learn about the topic. You don’t actually care about anti-natalism, you care about being called out because you can’t emotionally handle the idea of being wrong.