Interesting Global News
What is global news?
Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media posts
Avoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
- [email protected] - International and local legal news.
- [email protected] - Technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.
- [email protected] - Interesting articles, projects, and research that doesn't fit the definition of news.
- [email protected] - News and information from Europe.
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
view the rest of the comments
He offered to, but the person ran off and raised a stink online instead of following the rational recommendation. Ahhhh, the 2020s. Good ol' keyboard warriors and their cancel culture.
The person ran off and raised a stink online because the doctor was a being a fucking dick. If he just politely refused and referred them to another doctor, there would be no story.
But that's literally what happened. Her response to that was calling the doctor a transphobe and insulting his staff. She was being a dick first.
Did you even bother to read the article?
I did read the article. Calling her a man is being a dick. Asking for services while being trans is not being a dick.
There is no indication in the article that he called her a man before she flew of the handle.
He literally told her "i only treat women."
Ok, so you didn't read the article.
Yes, he wrote that. As a response to the google review her boyfriend left after the encounter.
There's the article...
Yes ... that's what we call "editorialized". He did say that, but not when he refused her treatment, but way later. You need to read the whole thing.
What actually happened (as per reading the FULL adticle):
Women enters doctors office
Doctor politley refused her and offers to refer her
Women throws a fit, insults staff
Boyfriend writes google review
Doctor replys with the "I only treat only real women".
This is very different from what the editorialized title and first paraghraph imply, which is
Women enters doctors office
Doctor tells her "I only treat only real women".
If the story is "editorialized", then you don't know exactly what happened just as much as I do. So your interpretation is just that...an interpretation. But we do know that the doctor was a dick about it after the fact, so he likely was a dick about it when it happened.
Sure, we don't know what actually happened because everyone interview could have been lying. That's not the point.
The headline and first paragraph, which acts as a summary are editorialized. That means they are inentionally hyperbolic and try to make the story as "shocking" as possible, because that gives you clicks.
Unfortunatly that is all most people read as is evident by this comment section.
Just because it's a story you don't like doesn't make it shock journalism...
True, my personal feelings about the story do in fact not change how this article was written.
Right...instead you just "interpret" it as shock journalism...
"identified as" would be more appropriate. But it's really almost all journalism these days.
There is never an excuse to be transphobic. The story doesn't get better for him if she was belligerent first. Let's keep in mind how upsetting this situation is for her, and then instead of de-escalating he makes it worse.
I disagree. That's a much better story for him. Not even sure if he's transphobic or just not trained in PC language. If he meant "I only treat biological women", he'd be correct.
And maybe he was also having a bad day, probably because of her. Why is this on him in the first place?
Calling a trans woman a man is transphobic, and it's clearly not a matter of training because he knew not to do that before she was rude. He was angry at her for being annoying and wanted to hurt her.
He's supposed to be the professional.
There's never an excuse to be transphobic. Being rude is a mistake. That wasn't a mistake.
But walking into an Doctors office and insulting staff is excusable? He also apologised for it. Seems just like people are very quick to gloss over anything she did.
They were both being assholes.
Transphobia isn't just annoying. He wasn't just rude to her. His behavior and words hurt all trans women.
If he just called her a dumb asshole I wouldn't even be mad. He could insult her without insulting all trans women.
Right. He used a phrasing that has been deem socially unaccaptable in the western world for less then 10 years after he, for good reason, got angry at someone. Bring out the gallows.
Can you seriously just ignore the other side of the story because of that? Because I find her action much more baffeling.
That is a very reasonable response he gave at first. Now, what kind of person would insist to be treated by a doctor that just said he's not qualifed? And then get angry at the doctor for it?
It's so absurd, I'm seriously considering if this whole thing wasn't just staged, literally real life trolling. Otherwise she'd have to be some kind of super Karen.
It's considered socially unacceptable because transphobia hurts other trans women, completely unrelated to their little conflict. The collateral damage is the problem.
I want you to think about how other trans women feel about his comments on trans women in general. He didn't just retaliate against a rude woman. He hurt us all.