282
no rule
(lemmy.nz)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Nov 2026
282 points (98.6% liked)
196
7205 readers
2135 users here now
Community Rules
You must post before you leave
Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).
Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.
Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.
Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".
Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.
Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.
Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.
Avoid AI generated content.
Avoid misinformation.
Avoid incomprehensible posts.
No threats or personal attacks.
No spam.
Moderator Guidelines
Moderator Guidelines
- Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
- Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
- When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
- Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
- Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
- Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
- Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
- Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
- Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
- Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
- Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
- Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
- First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
- Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
- No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
- Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
- Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah, from working in a medical field - your sex can have a huge effect on the way your body interacts with certain medicines/drugs - and as such I find the trend of conflating Gender and Sex to be rather dangerous.
And it's not just people that started doing it either. I've worked on multiple studies where data entry points have asked for Gender when they very much meant Sex. Again dangerous, because the answer to both is only the same for cis identifying people - and you really don't want to get that wrong.
What you do with your Gender is nobody's business but your own. Express yourself however you please - but if a medical professional is asking your assigned sex at birth, consider they may be doing so to keep you safe.
(For the record I'm not stating either as a binary, I'm aware intersex people exist, and do believe more should be done to accommodate them in medical settings which mostly currently act like they don't exist)
Edit: Somehow the end of my second to last paragraph got replaced by a fullstop. Weird stuff
I have some antitrust issues with Epic (the EMR) but they have a literal checklist option where you literally just check which organs the pt had at birth then can specify whether or not they still have them. Super simple, cuts straight to the medically relevant info, and covers all areas from binary cis to cancer to intersex to pre, mid, and post transition. Best way I've ever seen it done. Epic is one of those things that's dominating the market by just being on a different level from everybody else but I gotta admit I'm a little worried about how much influence they have when they finally (as all large corpos do) go full supervillan.
The thing that impacts care more than sex is the hormones in the blood. If care is based on gender assignment rather than the hormones in their body, it can be equally disastrous.
You're kinda right, but unless you're on a gender affirming therapy (like HRT), then those hormones are going to be linked to your sex assigned at birth.
(Though there are plenty of non-hormonal sex-linked differences in drug interactions as well)
And if you are, that's a whole other layer of complication that your medical caregiver would also need to account for when prescribing you certain drugs/medical products.
Edit: Added bracket part.
Yeah the "in a perfect world" medical solution would be for emergency caregivers to have rapid access to "apparent sex at birth" and "current hormone levels and when they were started," but everyone here knows a lot of evil people (especially in the US in 2026) would love to have a government record of transgender people for nefarious purposes, so that's probably unwise.
I expect hormones-at-birth have effects on medical care as do hormones-at-present, and I'd bet anything transgender people (or anyone that has a difference between hormones-at-birth and hormones-at-present, including cis menopausal women for example) have adverse medical outcomes due to that confusion.
Babies don't have hormones like that, holy fuck what is the education like where you are. Puberty! What's puberty! Think McFly Think!
No need to be insulting towards them, especially when they weren't insulting you.
Also, you're technically wrong. There definitely are hormones flying about your body even before you're born. All fetuses start as female, and its literally testosterone that causes differentiates towards male (or intersex in some cases). The only reason you don't start puberty as an infant is because those levels normally diminish within the first year after birth, returning again just before puberty begins.
Sex chromosomes at birth, then?
Are you being pedantic and adding ad hominem just to pick a fight?
If someone tries to explain something to you, you have a lot of trouble listening for someone who considers themselves an ally.
You've answered my second question at least. As I said in the other reply to your hostile reply elsewhere, enjoy the block.
I'm sorry buddy that's really not a thing. At all.
Yes, it is. As an example, trans women have an increased risk of breast cancer over cis males. The risk is not as high as cis women, but there is a statistically significant increase in risk amongst that demographic.
The risk is simply from having developed breast tissue, you can spot check that one by just looking and seeing if they have breast tissue
Gynecomastia can also progress to male breast cancer
Yes, and the breast development is stimulated by HRT.
I'm a data analyst for a research facility doing genetic analyses on rare variants of cancer. My PI specializes in breast cancer. We regularly have discussions about the research we're involved in.
I know breast cancer still develops in cis men.
Except the drugs are originally always tested on men for efficacy, anyway so moot point.
https://medicine.yale.edu/news-article/a-drug-for-women-tested-on-men/
Yes you need to tell a doctor if you might have different organs than you apear to have, maybe there's an ectopic pregnancy, but medications, yeah not so much.
I don't disagree with you - American pharmaceuticals in particular still seem weirdly gung-ho about excluding female participants from studies. Coming from Europe we routinely have to tell them they're not allowed to do that.
... but I think it's bad faith to say that bad study design makes my point moot, especially when it takes only a few seconds of Googling to find plenty of papers discussing sex-linked effects on drugs/medicinal products.
Heck, here's a literature review of sex-linked effects on the pharmakinetics and pharmacodynamics of various drugs, which even acknowledges the bias towards males in various clinical trials you referred to.
I don't think the paper mentions it, but I imagine throwing intersex people into the mix would render even more related differences. Which is why your assigned sex at birth matters medically, and I think it is dangerous to conflate it with gender identity (which again is your's to express as you please)
Which is why we need to put M/W/N/(etc.) on driver's licenses while medical professionals have access to M/F/I/(etc.)
Even from the ostensible purpose of M/F on a driver's license of efficient identification, it's lacking. Then there's the medical downsides you state - I'm sure you're aware many medical professionals check IDs rather than sequencing someone's sex chromosomes before performing emergency or other care.
Honestly, yeah.
Gender is someone's outward, public-facing expression. Having it on there to aid identification is not a bad thing IMO.
Whereas sex really feels like more private knowledge that should be restricted to where medically necessary to avoid complications, rather than being forced on your identification for everyone to see.
It's certainly better than the status quo in many areas including mine (i.e. your apparent sex at birth is tied to your gender forever), that's for sure.
Woah, why would you need gender markers on your ID, wtf.
Because it's a valid method of identification linked to one's personal expression.
Versus the current scenario of sex being on there which can lead you anywhere from awkwardly being outed as trans, to medical complications arising from being misidentified.
I'm 90% sure LavaPlanet is just trying to stir people up to have an argument; all of their comments in this thread are at least lukewarm if not outright hostile.
not everyone has a gender, so at best it should be an optional marker for those who consent.
but also gender is not always a good method of identification because
birthdate, place, and full name should be sufficient id and if they are not, add a uuid in the mix. no need for gender really, which just complicates things.
of course alternative is not to use sex for id, but no one except bigots is asking for that. but also, i believe that many places, such as that whichs nationality i hold, say sex on the id, but effectively treat it as gender, at which point it's really just semantic
You prefer sex assigned at birth to be on someone's ID?
Neither wtf. Wtf is wrong with you you have to diminish and argue with everyone who tries to talk to you. You're answering comments i haven't even said to you. You're really not cool.
I offer a better situation than the current situation and your response is to vilify me for it. Between this thread and the other semi-hostile replies, you're obviously just here to fight.