Historically? Based on my browsing history, couldn’t be more wrong.
Probably need to read Lancet article to get context for front page statement, but I would have thought many blokes have been fixated with bodies with vaginas for much of there lives.
1 Like
It seems a pretty reasonable statement to me.
I reckon there are guys who think a fallopian tube is the train ride to Manila.
1 Like
Me neither, but there are many who are “ outraged “
The full quote in context:
“Historically, the anatomy and physiology of bodies with vaginas have been neglected—for example, the paucity in understanding of endometriosis and the way women’s pain has been seen as more likely to have an emotional or psychological cause, a hangover from centuries of theorising about hysteria.”
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)01962-0/fulltext
How to highlight and bring attention to an issue and the article you want read?
Give it a catchy title sure to get outrage publicity.
Works everytime.
Ohh, The Lancet can get away with doing questionable things - they have an insane amount of prestige within the research community. They are the ones who initially published the Wakefield paper, and just last year (along with another one of the big four, NEJM) were caught up in a data fabrication controversy re: hydroxychloroquine.
But. they still have an insane impact factor (>50), will still need to reject >95% of submitted research and will be able to continue charging US$5000 per publication.
I mean…aren’t they being more careful by being that specific?
Damned if you do…
Not by me, I’ve always been keen to examine.
For context they had something about prostates cancer the week or 2 before and the headline was “men with prostate cancer”
So men are men and women are “bodies”. If they were aiming gender neutral the word is “people”
1 Like
Bodies isn’t a great word to use, agreed.
Unless they’re being even more specific and obvious than I first imagined.
It is a very poor choice of words. In fact, human female are not the only species to have vaginas, and most mammals fo, and some marsupials have two. So who-ever fails biology.
I reckon we know some males who seem to have two dikks, as they are so stupid !!
1 Like
Is it offensive? Yeah, maybe. But I can’t help but focus on what an odd choice of words it is. Why use that term? Makes no sense.
1 Like
Well, some can take offense at almost anything, and while not trying to upset the feminists on Blitz or in my life, the outrage shown by a statement that was not really thought out can often be fightening. Probably it was some silly pommy medico trying to be cute.
1 Like
Always remember BF, the more outrage you show and the more you bully the ‘bigot’ the more noble you are and the greater the applause from your kin. Especially when it’s concerning trivial bullshit. That’s the way these people work. It’s their soul food. This outlook sees otherwise nice, normal people act like total jerks. Sad, really.
2 Likes
How long do you reckon until they give in??
Never i hope
Me too-you only have to ignore them for a little while and the WOKE brigade move onto their next conquest. Everyone does understand that if they are not stopped they will eventually come for something that you hold dear. For example the Bombers might be considered too violent and promoting war by somebody, somewhere!
“Twitter isn’t real” lmfao
1 Like