That’s way too broad of a statement, and one that I would question is true in even a small minority of cases. You’re thinking of Republicans.
As for the quality of care, there are many systemic issues with women’s health. Since this is a procedure that is exclusive to women’s anatomy, we can confidently exclude factors like women being excluded from the trials.
There is, however, a very simple explanation: Medical staff cannot sympathize with a pain they’ve never experienced. Men have no personal experience with the anatomy/physiology involved, on any level. We cannot truly understand how a vagina feels, nor any of the other parts. The best we can do is infer based on our own parts and experiences. The same is true in reverse.
But what about the women involved? They have the parts, but maybe not the experience. If they have never had an IUD, or the pain described in the article, they must also infer from their own experiences.
That’s way too broad of a statement, and one that I would question is true in even a small minority of cases. You’re thinking of Republicans.
While it’s true that Republicans would get off to a video of someone stomping a kitten, it goes beyond that. Men never take women’s health issues seriously. That’s why I exclusively seek out women doctors.
While I agree it’s too broad of a statement, I doubt it’s really split along party lines. I feel like most people irl don’t really lean heavily into politics while doing jobs and probably even have well-defined politics. I also don’t think you need to have experienced something firsthand to sympatheze better
You seem to not understand that empathy actually does work even if you’ve never personally experienced something… maybe you don’t have empathy if you think this is how everyone else works because you apparently can only learn from or extrapolate from your own experience and you figure if you can’t do it no one can. Beyond that why would you assume none of the medical staff are women?
That’s way too broad of a statement, and one that I would question is true in even a small minority of cases. You’re thinking of Republicans.
As for the quality of care, there are many systemic issues with women’s health. Since this is a procedure that is exclusive to women’s anatomy, we can confidently exclude factors like women being excluded from the trials.
There is, however, a very simple explanation: Medical staff cannot sympathize with a pain they’ve never experienced. Men have no personal experience with the anatomy/physiology involved, on any level. We cannot truly understand how a vagina feels, nor any of the other parts. The best we can do is infer based on our own parts and experiences. The same is true in reverse.
But what about the women involved? They have the parts, but maybe not the experience. If they have never had an IUD, or the pain described in the article, they must also infer from their own experiences.
While it’s true that Republicans would get off to a video of someone stomping a kitten, it goes beyond that. Men never take women’s health issues seriously. That’s why I exclusively seek out women doctors.
While I agree it’s too broad of a statement, I doubt it’s really split along party lines. I feel like most people irl don’t really lean heavily into politics while doing jobs and probably even have well-defined politics. I also don’t think you need to have experienced something firsthand to sympatheze better
You seem to not understand that empathy actually does work even if you’ve never personally experienced something… maybe you don’t have empathy if you think this is how everyone else works because you apparently can only learn from or extrapolate from your own experience and you figure if you can’t do it no one can. Beyond that why would you assume none of the medical staff are women?