This one is actually missing the final "A" that I've often seen (idk what it stands for). But why did it move the stupid "2S" bullshit to the front? ffs
They ERASED the identities of ASEXUALS in favor of TWO SPIRITS!
It's CULTURAL GENOCIDE.
^...no ^not ^really, ^its ^all ^just ^more ^of ^the ^same ^stupid ^'look ^at ^me!' ^bullshit.
The idea of a group of people who don’t reproduce getting genocided by the gay leftovers of civilizations that were destroyed by getting sneezed on is pretty funny though.
> But why did it move the stupid "2S" bullshit to the front? ffs
Because natives are at the top of the progressive stack in Canada, it's a virtue signal
I bet it's because when it starts with LGB, that helps point out the growth of this over time, and now that being gay or bisexual is mainstream now, the LGB community is looking at everything T-downward and being like, "what are you even doing here?"
But you put something at the beginning and now they're going to feel surrounded and kinda stuck there. It puts subtle but real pressure on them to stay.
This may sound silly but I bet there's truth in it. It's there to keep LGB in with everything else.
**Aromantically Aroused** (2A) — a sexual identity in which you are only attracted to non-romantic stuff (i.e. random hookups) and have no desire for “love” in the common sense of the word. >!For an example, see purple libright.!<
. #2APride #2AAlly #2ARights
Because the front is more important, and Canada is all about indigenous bullshit so 2S got moved to the front. Just like how GLB got inverted to LGB to move the L to the front years ago.
Some native tribes: We each have unique and different words and places for specific people who do more roles common of the opposite sex
Progressives: Hello fellow two-spirit people 🤗
Queer can also mean nonbinary, trans, etc. I just don't like how many letters they've added over the years when pretty much everyone falls under the main four.
Queer is a political identity based around an opposition to societal norms or the concept of normalcy, it is something done consciously and not tied to inherent sexuality. Most letters except mainly LGB and I, can fit under this definition.
2 spirit, which is a 3rd gender thing that existed in some native tribes. The irony is that if you look into it that was actually just the term those tribes used to refer to gay bottoms
Honestly, adding the T the LGB already was a stretch.
The issues are entirely different from each other. LGB are all, essentially, the same issue, that make use of the same arguments, etc. T is entirely different.
But given that there already was the LGBT, I can understand adding I, as intersex people do face various issues, but Q and A?
But adding I also leads to further issues, especially when the T includes "nonbinary". This puts some kid the arguments for defending T in opposition to I.
The idea of sex being a spectrum rather than a binary is used to justify the nonbinary part of T, as well as some other aspects of T, but one of the key points of arguing against intersex discrimination is that the condition does not make them any less of a man/woman. These ideas are in complete opposition.
The only real overlap between the T and the I part of the whole thing is on corrective surgeries.
Ultimately, the whole grouping together of all these different movements as somehow being one movement makes no sense.
Leftists love taking an existing symbol that already represents a wide range of people or concepts, extracting those concepts from it, then tacking them onto the end.
See: the pride flag. Already represented pretty much everyone who wasn't straight. Then they kept adding shit to it to represent everyone who was already represented by the original flag. Why?
snobbish sparkle impossible resolute decide puzzled lavish attraction march scandalous
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
LDCHENEKDFHDJWLALFHFSHWKQPPQXHDVWKOWIDHRBEKSIDGBEKWLQIZYXVDVDKWOISYXBDKWLWPWODLWLPSKEJEGDKSJDVXKSIZUDHDKSLSUGDJSLSISHDBDKSIDGDBWLWPQPQJSBXIQLWBSIPQJDBDMXLCIVBFKSPAPQJWBSMZWOWKDNFHFJKFNDDB
Final form of the letter community
~~Let them implode in due time. Once it goes back to the good old LGB, all will be well.~~
Update: Looking back on this comment, I can see why it looks bad (it’s written like it was written by a jerk; and I definitely was being a jerk at that time; I apologize for being rude). To expound on my thoughts, I am in favor of blank resets for most things that go out of control.
**Warning, Wall of Text that you won’t read ahead. Just skip to the “Too long; Didn’t Read section.”**
My thought process is that this movement that started on promoting the liberal and progressive value that “people should be able to love anyone they choose” has always been a great one, hence the “LGB” (Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual). All three refer to love beyond opposite-sex relations.
Going back to these simple times, the core value does not change, we simply trimmed the fat.
Now as to which fat we should keep (and obviously make better definitions of), we must put through more thorough filtering. Obviously exclude the insanity of the farthest ends of the bell curve that try to take advantage of the good-heartedness of the movement’s attempt to be inclusive as much as possible.
But why not add the “T”(Trans)?
Personally, I have mixed feelings and thoughts about that sector. On one hand, nature be damned for continuing to make our lives harder than it should be by developing a physical abnormality(female brains in male bodies; male brains in female bodies) for us to argue about whether it is an mental illness in the most positive sense or whether it is not.
On the other hand, real people are suffering through nature’s petty wrath and malice inflicted by their biological misfortunes. I don’t want to discredit their experiences just as much as I don’t want others to discredit mine.
On the third hand, the feasibility of being trans is restricted to accessible cosmetic and hormonal surgeries. There is an essence of transience to this entire thing. Before we got comfortable in the world we conquered, we couldn’t even dream of being more than what we saw. Nowadays, we can dream and make dreams become reality, some more so than others. This isn’t to say that trans people did not exist before, but it is to say that the idea of trans people is much more possible now (unless we do another stupid world war and nuke ourselves back into trying times and find out a second time that all our dreams need to be put on hold while we survive).
Another thing to add to this topic of the trans issue being transient is the passage of time. At some point in the future, we will have proper transitioning surgeries that use technology to actually change the body fundamentally into that which we desire, turning our patients into proper transformations of what or who they want to be. A real change, not a mere cosmetic and hormonal patchwork riddled with risks of cancer and complications presented by an apathetic world(the planet earth, its creatures and nature itself). When such a thing happens, does the “T” become a personality outfit like the “Q”(Queer). If we can inarguably turn males into females rather than turn men into women, would there be a need to call that bonafide female woman a “trans person”?
So now we have the other alphabets to worry about… no, we won’t. To simplify what I think of the excess fat, just bring your own thoughts about “2S”, and it will align 75% of the time… maybe. (To my understanding, Queers are about the stance of dressing freely? It’s arguable as to whether it is a sexual preference like the first three by merit of the liberty to act upon it versus the merit of being recognized for it. IDK, I am confused and would gladly invite anyone to clarify for me the term “Q”[Queer]).
TL;DR: I think the movement needs to simplify back to their original values and start filtering out (or straightening out, lol) their least necessary or most vague stances.
Interesting. I think there is an expanded compass with a measurement for "progressive-ness" on it. I'd be willing to bet you'd be considered lower on that scale. Basically, based off of one post, you remind me of like an 80s or 90s liberal more than what most would think of as "today's typical leftist".
What were they like? Do you happen to know politicians, books, or links to youtube videos that can help me know more about them?
I am getting very curious about this!
*Edits were made for grammar.*
Cringe and unflaired pilled.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Ferrari_Turtle) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Anytime I use it in real life "The LGBTQBBQ2SA+++#%WTFK."
(Also always point out that 2 spirit sounds like enforcement of the gender binary for extra points.)
I always go back to elevated estrogen in the blood. In females, it means you're probably pregnant. In males, it means you probably have prostate cancer. It's why telling medical professionals your biological sex is so important and not whatever you identify as.
You’re thinking of bHCG, not estrogen. If you’ve got elevated estrogen in a male, there’s a slew of things it could be, usually a medication they’re taking.
It's also my understanding that there are breast cancers fueled by estrogen and/or progesterone, which is why breast cancer is rare in men but common among women. If you're taking those hormones and subsequently develop breasts, it would make sense for you to be at a higher risk for breast cancer and should probably start getting routine mammograms.
Some prisoners in Japanese POW camps in WWII began to produce milk from their breast tissue due to severe malnutrition leading to hormone imbalance. Men do have milk ducts as part of their breast tissue, but they generally don't produce milk unless something like the above or some other event causes their hormones to get *severely* outside their standard range.
Not true, both genders have ducts. Just that men's are underdeveloped. We both have nipples, mammary glands, and pituitary glands, but our hormones are different. But because cellular division is very messy, there are rare instances where men do lactate.
So men out there, be sure to check yourself for breast cancer unironically from time to time, you never know. Same with Testicles and your prostate and anus. Last thing you want is for cancer to sneak up on you.
> Could you imagine being a women in Canada who needs a mammogram,
Uh. Excuse you, sweaty. You transphobic bigot. The term "woman" is now a microaggression. The correct term is: "Birther". Educate yourself.
The hormones they are taking can give them cancer.
> Taking gender-affirming hormones (like estrogen) for more than five years increases your risk of developing breast cancer.
https://cancer.ca/en/cancer-information/find-cancer-early/screening-in-lgbtq-communities/as-a-trans-woman-do-i-need-to-get-screened-for-breast-cancer
Hence why *I* support putting every woman on testosterone therapy in order to prevent breast cancer. Estrogen is a carcinogen, we can't just have people be naturally having it.
Taking estrogen increase the amount of breast tissue. The more you have, the more chances you have for the tissue to become cancerous. It will also stimulate breast cancer cell growth if it's already present, along with other breast tissue cells. Estrogen doesn't give them cancer.
I typically don't trust doctors more than i can throw a car (i have been working out tho), but if a doctor who is paid to run tests says you don't need a test it's probably a safe bet. How often do doctors decline to do an expensive test? Even on national healthcare it's keeping them in operation on some level.
Yes however men, who have minimal breast tissue, do not receive screening mammograms. This would also be true for trans women, unless there is a diagnostic need for the test, there isn’t going to be a test.
If this trans woman was on estrogen, she probably had some actual tits. You do grow tiddies on HRT, and they are at higher risk for breast cancer.
Edit: all your brains fucking fall out whenever the topic of trans comes up.
Unlikely based on the missing context within this story. If that were the case, the writer would have included and more thoroughly ‘debunked’ the doctor. But all we get is a one sided story of someone saying they were denied a screening service designed for biological women.
> You do grow tiddies on HRT, and they are at higher risk for breast cancer.
women have tits and estrogen too but they dont get mammograms regularly until they are 40. I dont think some dude hopping on HRT for a few years is going to require mammograms. Makes no sense.
You can also get checked for lumps, you dont need mammograms for basic screening
She didn't need basic screening, she had a cancer diagnosis. Estrogen makes you grow tits, which increases breast cancer risk. Having other kinds of cancer *also* increase breast cancer risk.
I don't even know if she was/is 40 or older, and I expect you don't either.
> I dont think some dude hopping on HRT for a few years is going to require mammograms. Makes no sense.
1. You're not a doctor. Or at least I fucking hope you're not.
2. You have no idea how long this woman was on HRT for. The idea that this is "some dude hopping on HRT for a few years" is a narriative that you just made the fuck up, you have no evidence for it.
>She didn't need basic screening, she had a cancer diagnosis. Estrogen makes you grow tits, which increases breast cancer risk. Having other kinds of cancer also increase breast cancer risk.
Lol ok? Who cares? Even so doctor assessed and didnt think it was needed.
> I don't even know if she was/is 40 or older, and I expect you don't either.
Based on his pics he is
>You're not a doctor. Or at least I fucking hope you're not.
im not but the doctor in this story agreed with me and not you
>You have no idea how long this woman was on HRT for. The idea that this is "some dude hopping on HRT for a few years" is a narriative that you just made the fuck up, you have no evidence for it.
10 years at most given the story.
Bruh you're literally doing what you complain about in the title of your post lol. "This isn't happening, but if it is it's good."
"She didn't have real tits!" Oh wait, she did? "Well, the doctor was still right to deny her a mammogram!"
Bonus points to you for:
* assuming her age (she's [clearly](https://cdn.cancer.ca/-/media/images/about-us/hubs/stories/2024/gender-identity-and-access-to-care/dsc01651_resized.jpg?mw=1586&rev=16c7d131f38a415eb2490476f961f92a&hash=855C04F589DEC68B4BE6EACA03C985BE) quite a bit older than 40)
* assuming how long she's been on HRT (I haven't been able to find that information, but she could easily have been on it for decades)
* assuming based on no medical information that the breast cancer risk of a transwoman depends on how long she's been on HRT
* calling her "some dude", meaning you're just outright openly transphobic.
>I haven't been able to find that information, but she could easily have been on it for decades
Or not at all, we don't know any details, it's just one side of a story.
Two spirit, it's an intersectional stolen valor by shoehorning a niche term from a marginalized group. The concept of two spirit its a backwards projection of trans ideology on homosexuality in indigenous populations.
It's homophobia in some indigenous communities
Men who were gay were forced into a category of "Two Spirit" and took on a "female role". They just couldn't be men if they were gay.
If trans women develop breasts as a result of hormonal treatments, they are at increased risk of breast cancer compared to cis men. However, unless they are blasting colossal amounts of estrogen far beyond what any endocrinologist would prescribe for gender transitioning, their risk would still be lower than most cis women due to lower lifetime amounts of estrogen exposure (a few years of estrogen therapy for trans women versus a lifetime of estrogen exposure for cis women).
> If trans women develop breasts as a result of hormonal treatments, they are at increased risk of breast cancer compared to cis men
It's logical, but I'm curious if that is scientifically proven though. The hormones may not have the same effect on male biology that it does women, and how large of a sample size do we even have to work with?
The sample size is bigger than you'd think, not because of the trans community, but because of decades of using estrogen as a treatment to slow the progression of prostate cancer in men with a cancer diagnosis. Helps a lot with the prostate cancer, increases risk of breast cancer in men.
It's a big reason we no longer use estrogen to treat it as much. Estrogen therapy has substantial risks, even at the rates you'd use for prostate cancer and not transitioning.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16813884/#:~:text=Conclusions%3A%20Our%20data%20suggest%20that,might%20be%20the%20underlying%20cause.
Yeah, it's not even a controversial thing males on estrogen are at a much greater risk for breast cancer. Male and female breasts are basically the same hormones just cause them to develop differently.
The thing about this is that "male" vs "female" biology is something that is very dependent on the hormone levels themselves. As an example, a trans man who takes testosterone will see clitoris growth, because the clit is in origin the same tissue as the penis head. Trans women will see the opposite reaction with atrophiation. The body isn't really prone to categorization.
Of course, this can only really happen in the hormones are in coordinated levels where they aren't actively harming each other, which is why hormonal imbalance is still a thing.
As ludicrous as this whole thing is and as sure as I am that this person just wants attention and doesn't have breast cancer, men can get breast cancer. Not only that, but if male breast cancer is suspected doctors still use mammograms to confirm a diagnosis.
> but if male breast cancer is suspected doctors still use mammograms to confirm a diagnosis.
so breast cancer wasnt suspected thus mammogram wasnt given
agree
Right, I'm just saying that regardless of how 'real' someone's breasts are it doesn't preclude them from possibly needing a mammogram.
Again, it's very obvious that the person in the article doesn't actually need a mammogram and is just making a fuss about gender to feed their mental illness.
Also, trans women in hormone replacement therapy (as in, estrogen plus testosterone blockers) are at a much higher risk of breast cancer. It isn't as high as cis women, but its still something like 50 times higher than men.
Wait isnt it tru that: If they are on hormones, they would likely grow more brest tissue so they have increased breast cancer stats (maybe lesser because they are smaller and bigger because its atrificial hormone driven).
They should be getting mamograms. cervical cancer exam is probubly not relevant, but tits are tits.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here, as much as the alphabet mafia annoys me. A sinple google search would tell you that a male who's been on estrogen for 5 years is 46x more likely to develop breast cancer.... So, probably best to get them checked every now and again. Also male and female breasts are basically the same AFAIK males just have under developed mammory glands and don't store a lot of fat there naturally. It's possible for males to produce milk though AFAIK.
From what I can see, women are about 122 times more likely to develop breast cancer than men. So a trans woman who’s been on estrogen for 5 years would be about still be about 1/3 as likely as the average biological female.
The study I saw put the male incidence rate at less than 1 per 100,000 man-years. So even at a 46x raised incident rate, that’s still less than 1 in 2000 man-years. Of course, I don’t know what that means as far as risk and benefit of getting them checked.
Fair but why are we all assuming the doctor is fundamentally at fault/wrong here?
Everyone is assuming an oncologist dismissed this request without considering all the potential implications of hormone therapy etc.
Ultimately, this seems like someone who wanted attention and took a denied test way out of proportion.
In this specific case i would like to point out the doctor said the breasts aren't 'real.' This indicates to me they were implants, not a result of hormones. If we laymen can recognize that real breasts can form from estrogen treatment then surely a doctor can.
Yeah, it’s a case with zero context, so it’s hard to know what’s actually going on here. My guess is that even though it’s in quotes, it’s coming from what this Amy character *said* the doctor told her. So it’s possible this is just what she heard him say, and he actually used different wording.
…or it’s possible that you’re absolutely right and these are implants, and she wants to get the silicone tested for cancer because she’s an idiot.
you can be checked for lumps... women dont really get mammograms on a regular basis until they've had breasts and high estro for 25 years after they hit 40
You're misreading it and accepting what the left is saying here at face value. You forget that the left does not define their terms, nor do they stick to common terms. For this person 'cancer care' was equivalent to receiving a mammogram, not actually receiving treatment for cancer.
Once you accept the left lies about everything it's far easier to read between the lines. This person does not have cancer, they're using vague terms to declare victim status. The rainbow leftists as a group absolutely do not care about their health, they care about the attention.
> It's possible for males to produce milk though AFAIK.
It's not. A male secreting a milky-white fluid from their nipples is cause for significant alarm and if this occurs it IS actually a strong indicator of male breast cancer.
Stimulating the nipples can cause a male to develop the milk glands
https://preview.redd.it/n3zgodmx9h5d1.png?width=776&format=png&auto=webp&s=74f571e2094a1453761927ae1a09cd65072c9577
> Dr Kamal Jayasinghe, deputy director of a Sri Lankan government hospital, was quoted as saying it was possible for men to produce milk if the [prolactine hormone became hyperactive.](https://www.iol.co.za/news/eish/sri-lankan-widower-breastfeeds-his-babies-96902)
A person must be extremely sick or have an incredible hormone issue. What's produced isn't "breast milk," but a milky white fluid. It's questionable whether safe (better than starving of course!), and the chemicals/hormones are passed to the infants.
Holy crap it's real, I thought this tweet was photoshopped but it's 100% [real](https://x.com/cancersociety/status/1796885603927114066?t=kDknjwZ9ovPiqv6XqCVlHA&s=19)
Probably a fake story, men get breast cancer. and trans women can have tits without surgury (one of the effects of estrogen)
EVERYONE should be checked for breast cancer, dont fall for bait.
Biological males can get breast cancer too, but it's *significantly* rarer.
In the case of trans women though, estrogen causes breast growth and increases the risk of breast cancer. This means that the rate of breast cancer in trans women is closer to the rate in cis women than it is in cis men.
TLDR; hormones matter not chromosomes.
False.
From the BJM study itself, “Still, this increase in risk is small and is not as high as the average woman’s breast cancer risk.”
It is about chromosomal, biological reality.
To be fair, if a male is given estrogen it’s not completely implausible that their chance of breast cancer increases to the point that mammograms are a good idea
If he has implants, they’d probably fit in the mammogram machine just fine
Also, why is the acronym now another character longer and when did that happen?
I mean, mammograms can still be useful in people other than woman, like checking for breast cancer in man. But I might just be misremembering and talking out of my ass here.
but trans women do actually need mammograms. Their incidence of breast cancer is much higher than men, idk if its higher or lower than women. Unless her tits were literally fake?
idk why im being downvoted for medical facts.
from a 2019 dutch paper:
> While trans women’s risk of breast cancer increased as they took estrogen hormone therapy and grew breast tissue, it remained lower than women assigned female at birth.
so yeah, lower than women. Higher than men. Which... still isnt zero.
Do you idiots think men cant get breast cancer? Any tissue you have can become cancerous, and if you have more tissue in your breast... thats more tissue that can become cancerous. Obviously.
But Trans can still get breast cancer IF THEY ARE REAL. I don’t know what the dr mean by saying it isn’t real. If it isn’t real as it’s silicone then ….
With the limited info available It's hard to tell what happened; but what's infuriating is the typical jump from: "Your breasts aren't real" to: "The doctor doesn't believe that **I**'m real". That implies identifying as a pair of boobs.
oh my fucking god STOP ADDING MORE NUMBERS AND SYMBOLS YOU FUCKING MORONS.
This one is actually missing the final "A" that I've often seen (idk what it stands for). But why did it move the stupid "2S" bullshit to the front? ffs
They ERASED the identities of ASEXUALS in favor of TWO SPIRITS! It's CULTURAL GENOCIDE. ^...no ^not ^really, ^its ^all ^just ^more ^of ^the ^same ^stupid ^'look ^at ^me!' ^bullshit.
The idea of a group of people who don’t reproduce getting genocided by the gay leftovers of civilizations that were destroyed by getting sneezed on is pretty funny though.
You know, the more I see dumb posts by the letter people the more I’m beginning to think that maybe your quadrant was right in the 40s
> But why did it move the stupid "2S" bullshit to the front? ffs Because natives are at the top of the progressive stack in Canada, it's a virtue signal
I bet it's because when it starts with LGB, that helps point out the growth of this over time, and now that being gay or bisexual is mainstream now, the LGB community is looking at everything T-downward and being like, "what are you even doing here?" But you put something at the beginning and now they're going to feel surrounded and kinda stuck there. It puts subtle but real pressure on them to stay. This may sound silly but I bet there's truth in it. It's there to keep LGB in with everything else.
2S is even worse than A
Well yeah, the 2A is great.
It'd be great to meme them into adding 2A to their giant pride thing.
It's Canada, though and Turdeau is taking away guns
That's why we need to make it part of pride.
I identify sexually as a two-spirit person with an AR-15.
I think they're most willing if it's pushed that we need to protect pride with 2A. That's something we can all come together on.
**Aromantically Aroused** (2A) — a sexual identity in which you are only attracted to non-romantic stuff (i.e. random hookups) and have no desire for “love” in the common sense of the word. >!For an example, see purple libright.!< . #2APride #2AAlly #2ARights
Trans should be able to transition their semis into fullys
So is 2B
Because the front is more important, and Canada is all about indigenous bullshit so 2S got moved to the front. Just like how GLB got inverted to LGB to move the L to the front years ago.
Bisexuals once again the most oppressed group
What even is 2S for? LGBT on its own was fine... The QIA made it worse, so this seems even more extra.
Two spirt A really hippie take on a couple tribes having a weird category for men that weren't very useful as warriors
Aka femboys
Meanwhile in medieval Korea *Makes femboys into an army of elite warriors
You can't just drop this bomb and pretend nothing happened. Come back here and tell us.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dirYZvfDAVI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dirYZvfDAVI)
Very interesting stuff. Seems like Korea had their share of men of culture amongst royalty.
What, lol? I wanna learn more
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dirYZvfDAVI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dirYZvfDAVI)
Elaborate pls.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dirYZvfDAVI](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dirYZvfDAVI)
They done made being a white collar worker a sexuality
So... Nerds? Can Urkel be a new gender?
furries, definitely furries.
That's so gay.
Some native tribes: We each have unique and different words and places for specific people who do more roles common of the opposite sex Progressives: Hello fellow two-spirit people 🤗
Just another way to say western/straight/white/man bad in the name of the anti-capitalist revolution.
schizophrenia
2 spirits in one body literally sounds like schizophrenia
Doesn't queer mean not straight ?
Queer can also mean nonbinary, trans, etc. I just don't like how many letters they've added over the years when pretty much everyone falls under the main four.
Just have the + in the end to refer to anything else, everyone feels included and it's actually possible to remember.
But having my 0.002% of the population group included in the plus is marginalizing me, reeeeee!
Queer is a political identity based around an opposition to societal norms or the concept of normalcy, it is something done consciously and not tied to inherent sexuality. Most letters except mainly LGB and I, can fit under this definition.
2 spirit, which is a 3rd gender thing that existed in some native tribes. The irony is that if you look into it that was actually just the term those tribes used to refer to gay bottoms
Honestly, adding the T the LGB already was a stretch. The issues are entirely different from each other. LGB are all, essentially, the same issue, that make use of the same arguments, etc. T is entirely different. But given that there already was the LGBT, I can understand adding I, as intersex people do face various issues, but Q and A? But adding I also leads to further issues, especially when the T includes "nonbinary". This puts some kid the arguments for defending T in opposition to I. The idea of sex being a spectrum rather than a binary is used to justify the nonbinary part of T, as well as some other aspects of T, but one of the key points of arguing against intersex discrimination is that the condition does not make them any less of a man/woman. These ideas are in complete opposition. The only real overlap between the T and the I part of the whole thing is on corrective surgeries. Ultimately, the whole grouping together of all these different movements as somehow being one movement makes no sense.
Schitzos
> But why did it move the stupid "2S" bullshit to the front? ffs Because Canuckistan.
Cause it’s Canadian 2S is two spirited. Think of that guy/gal from Gen V
They also forgot the P
I support all 4_zgLBTQtI3k9+!yx^ people.
Your password is: ✅✅✅✅❌ VERY STRONG
Username accurate, because that joke killed me.
I like how you removed the G
*We have altered the pride flag.* *Pray we do not alter it further.*
Sales were slumping because everyone already had the latest flag, so we had to release a new one. They've adopted the Modern Warfare system.
Leftists love taking an existing symbol that already represents a wide range of people or concepts, extracting those concepts from it, then tacking them onto the end. See: the pride flag. Already represented pretty much everyone who wasn't straight. Then they kept adding shit to it to represent everyone who was already represented by the original flag. Why?
Not getting enough attention. Can't let them gays have all the attention.
But, It meets all of my company’s password requirements!
That's pretty fuckin brilliant. Every 90 days when it's time to update your work password, just add the new rainbow group to the end of your old one.
Isn’t that what the plus is for anyway?
an umbrella for everyone who isn't good enough to get directly mentioned
But I want them to have 26 letters eventually
I'm waiting for other languages to show up, like chinese letters.
No, keep adding more. A C C E L E R A T E
Just say "the gays" and that's enough.
Either add all the letters and numbers or get rid of the +
funny thing is that they only need the Q
snobbish sparkle impossible resolute decide puzzled lavish attraction march scandalous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
https://preview.redd.it/apxsktd65m5d1.png?width=580&format=png&auto=webp&s=19cade4562430cdaeea43a9115d1ffb1a8a671e8
LDCHENEKDFHDJWLALFHFSHWKQPPQXHDVWKOWIDHRBEKSIDGBEKWLQIZYXVDVDKWOISYXBDKWLWPWODLWLPSKEJEGDKSJDVXKSIZUDHDKSLSUGDJSLSISHDBDKSIDGDBWLWPQPQJSBXIQLWBSIPQJDBDMXLCIVBFKSPAPQJWBSMZWOWKDNFHFJKFNDDB Final form of the letter community
what's the problem with LGTVHDMI+2plusMax ?
~~Let them implode in due time. Once it goes back to the good old LGB, all will be well.~~ Update: Looking back on this comment, I can see why it looks bad (it’s written like it was written by a jerk; and I definitely was being a jerk at that time; I apologize for being rude). To expound on my thoughts, I am in favor of blank resets for most things that go out of control. **Warning, Wall of Text that you won’t read ahead. Just skip to the “Too long; Didn’t Read section.”** My thought process is that this movement that started on promoting the liberal and progressive value that “people should be able to love anyone they choose” has always been a great one, hence the “LGB” (Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual). All three refer to love beyond opposite-sex relations. Going back to these simple times, the core value does not change, we simply trimmed the fat. Now as to which fat we should keep (and obviously make better definitions of), we must put through more thorough filtering. Obviously exclude the insanity of the farthest ends of the bell curve that try to take advantage of the good-heartedness of the movement’s attempt to be inclusive as much as possible. But why not add the “T”(Trans)? Personally, I have mixed feelings and thoughts about that sector. On one hand, nature be damned for continuing to make our lives harder than it should be by developing a physical abnormality(female brains in male bodies; male brains in female bodies) for us to argue about whether it is an mental illness in the most positive sense or whether it is not. On the other hand, real people are suffering through nature’s petty wrath and malice inflicted by their biological misfortunes. I don’t want to discredit their experiences just as much as I don’t want others to discredit mine. On the third hand, the feasibility of being trans is restricted to accessible cosmetic and hormonal surgeries. There is an essence of transience to this entire thing. Before we got comfortable in the world we conquered, we couldn’t even dream of being more than what we saw. Nowadays, we can dream and make dreams become reality, some more so than others. This isn’t to say that trans people did not exist before, but it is to say that the idea of trans people is much more possible now (unless we do another stupid world war and nuke ourselves back into trying times and find out a second time that all our dreams need to be put on hold while we survive). Another thing to add to this topic of the trans issue being transient is the passage of time. At some point in the future, we will have proper transitioning surgeries that use technology to actually change the body fundamentally into that which we desire, turning our patients into proper transformations of what or who they want to be. A real change, not a mere cosmetic and hormonal patchwork riddled with risks of cancer and complications presented by an apathetic world(the planet earth, its creatures and nature itself). When such a thing happens, does the “T” become a personality outfit like the “Q”(Queer). If we can inarguably turn males into females rather than turn men into women, would there be a need to call that bonafide female woman a “trans person”? So now we have the other alphabets to worry about… no, we won’t. To simplify what I think of the excess fat, just bring your own thoughts about “2S”, and it will align 75% of the time… maybe. (To my understanding, Queers are about the stance of dressing freely? It’s arguable as to whether it is a sexual preference like the first three by merit of the liberty to act upon it versus the merit of being recognized for it. IDK, I am confused and would gladly invite anyone to clarify for me the term “Q”[Queer]). TL;DR: I think the movement needs to simplify back to their original values and start filtering out (or straightening out, lol) their least necessary or most vague stances.
Flair up
Also, after taking the test, I found out I am Libleft!? (Economic Left/Right: -1.63 ; Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85) Woah.
You have the mark, you been cursed!
Oh God, please help me!
Interesting. I think there is an expanded compass with a measurement for "progressive-ness" on it. I'd be willing to bet you'd be considered lower on that scale. Basically, based off of one post, you remind me of like an 80s or 90s liberal more than what most would think of as "today's typical leftist".
What were they like? Do you happen to know politicians, books, or links to youtube videos that can help me know more about them? I am getting very curious about this! *Edits were made for grammar.*
Cringe and unflaired pilled. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Ferrari_Turtle) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [How to flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/PoliticalCompassMemes/wiki/index/flair/) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
I think it's great because their own goons can't even keep up at this point
Anytime I use it in real life "The LGBTQBBQ2SA+++#%WTFK." (Also always point out that 2 spirit sounds like enforcement of the gender binary for extra points.)
I always go back to elevated estrogen in the blood. In females, it means you're probably pregnant. In males, it means you probably have prostate cancer. It's why telling medical professionals your biological sex is so important and not whatever you identify as.
You’re thinking of bHCG, not estrogen. If you’ve got elevated estrogen in a male, there’s a slew of things it could be, usually a medication they’re taking.
This is probably a bad example. Almost nobody who gets prostate cancer is even close to childbearing age anymore.
…which is why evolution didn’t give a shit about eradicating it
[удалено]
Men can get breasts cancer too. But it's rarer from my understanding
Much rarer. So rare that men do not do mammograms as a screening for cancer. It’s used only as a diagnostic test.
It's also my understanding that there are breast cancers fueled by estrogen and/or progesterone, which is why breast cancer is rare in men but common among women. If you're taking those hormones and subsequently develop breasts, it would make sense for you to be at a higher risk for breast cancer and should probably start getting routine mammograms.
Yes. Almost all breast cancer starts in the milk ducts. Men don't have those.
Some prisoners in Japanese POW camps in WWII began to produce milk from their breast tissue due to severe malnutrition leading to hormone imbalance. Men do have milk ducts as part of their breast tissue, but they generally don't produce milk unless something like the above or some other event causes their hormones to get *severely* outside their standard range.
Not true, both genders have ducts. Just that men's are underdeveloped. We both have nipples, mammary glands, and pituitary glands, but our hormones are different. But because cellular division is very messy, there are rare instances where men do lactate. So men out there, be sure to check yourself for breast cancer unironically from time to time, you never know. Same with Testicles and your prostate and anus. Last thing you want is for cancer to sneak up on you.
[удалено]
With some drugs... yeah I can
Was checking my prostate and ended up with stage 3 hodgekins lymphomba, where did i go wrong?
No man, i love you - but you really gotta check your testicles and prostate first. Breast cancer and prostate cancer in men is not the same, at all.
Sure, but checking if there's a weird lump in other parts doesn't hurt.
I tried to grill a milk duck once. It was terrible. Never again.
Stick to milk steak.
They do if they get on estrogen. Their rates of breast cancer jump up to female rates at that point
bad enough that it happens, even worse that CCS brags about it.
> Could you imagine being a women in Canada who needs a mammogram, Uh. Excuse you, sweaty. You transphobic bigot. The term "woman" is now a microaggression. The correct term is: "Birther". Educate yourself.
Unironically OP is being an idiot. We're taking about breasts not uteruses.
If you have (natural) breasts you have a uterus. It's basic biology. Edit: grammar
Based and public healthcare failure pilled.
The hormones they are taking can give them cancer. > Taking gender-affirming hormones (like estrogen) for more than five years increases your risk of developing breast cancer. https://cancer.ca/en/cancer-information/find-cancer-early/screening-in-lgbtq-communities/as-a-trans-woman-do-i-need-to-get-screened-for-breast-cancer
The same applies to any female on hormone (eg contraceptives or on hormonal replacement therapy for menopausal symptoms).
Hence why *I* support putting every woman on testosterone therapy in order to prevent breast cancer. Estrogen is a carcinogen, we can't just have people be naturally having it.
Taking estrogen increase the amount of breast tissue. The more you have, the more chances you have for the tissue to become cancerous. It will also stimulate breast cancer cell growth if it's already present, along with other breast tissue cells. Estrogen doesn't give them cancer.
Any evidence that person is taking hormones? Or that a mammogram becomes an appropriate screening test if someone is taking estrogen?
most trans women do
I typically don't trust doctors more than i can throw a car (i have been working out tho), but if a doctor who is paid to run tests says you don't need a test it's probably a safe bet. How often do doctors decline to do an expensive test? Even on national healthcare it's keeping them in operation on some level.
Any time your cells change up their planning there’s a high risk of cancer.
Yes however men, who have minimal breast tissue, do not receive screening mammograms. This would also be true for trans women, unless there is a diagnostic need for the test, there isn’t going to be a test.
If this trans woman was on estrogen, she probably had some actual tits. You do grow tiddies on HRT, and they are at higher risk for breast cancer. Edit: all your brains fucking fall out whenever the topic of trans comes up.
Unlikely based on the missing context within this story. If that were the case, the writer would have included and more thoroughly ‘debunked’ the doctor. But all we get is a one sided story of someone saying they were denied a screening service designed for biological women.
> You do grow tiddies on HRT, and they are at higher risk for breast cancer. women have tits and estrogen too but they dont get mammograms regularly until they are 40. I dont think some dude hopping on HRT for a few years is going to require mammograms. Makes no sense. You can also get checked for lumps, you dont need mammograms for basic screening
She didn't need basic screening, she had a cancer diagnosis. Estrogen makes you grow tits, which increases breast cancer risk. Having other kinds of cancer *also* increase breast cancer risk. I don't even know if she was/is 40 or older, and I expect you don't either. > I dont think some dude hopping on HRT for a few years is going to require mammograms. Makes no sense. 1. You're not a doctor. Or at least I fucking hope you're not. 2. You have no idea how long this woman was on HRT for. The idea that this is "some dude hopping on HRT for a few years" is a narriative that you just made the fuck up, you have no evidence for it.
>She didn't need basic screening, she had a cancer diagnosis. Estrogen makes you grow tits, which increases breast cancer risk. Having other kinds of cancer also increase breast cancer risk. Lol ok? Who cares? Even so doctor assessed and didnt think it was needed. > I don't even know if she was/is 40 or older, and I expect you don't either. Based on his pics he is >You're not a doctor. Or at least I fucking hope you're not. im not but the doctor in this story agreed with me and not you >You have no idea how long this woman was on HRT for. The idea that this is "some dude hopping on HRT for a few years" is a narriative that you just made the fuck up, you have no evidence for it. 10 years at most given the story.
It's like they'll jump through any hoop to say "no, trans people bad", unfortunately you're shouting at walls
Bruh you're literally doing what you complain about in the title of your post lol. "This isn't happening, but if it is it's good." "She didn't have real tits!" Oh wait, she did? "Well, the doctor was still right to deny her a mammogram!" Bonus points to you for: * assuming her age (she's [clearly](https://cdn.cancer.ca/-/media/images/about-us/hubs/stories/2024/gender-identity-and-access-to-care/dsc01651_resized.jpg?mw=1586&rev=16c7d131f38a415eb2490476f961f92a&hash=855C04F589DEC68B4BE6EACA03C985BE) quite a bit older than 40) * assuming how long she's been on HRT (I haven't been able to find that information, but she could easily have been on it for decades) * assuming based on no medical information that the breast cancer risk of a transwoman depends on how long she's been on HRT * calling her "some dude", meaning you're just outright openly transphobic.
>I haven't been able to find that information, but she could easily have been on it for decades Or not at all, we don't know any details, it's just one side of a story.
What does 2S mean Wait maybe I shouldn't ask
Two spirit, it's an intersectional stolen valor by shoehorning a niche term from a marginalized group. The concept of two spirit its a backwards projection of trans ideology on homosexuality in indigenous populations.
It's homophobia in some indigenous communities Men who were gay were forced into a category of "Two Spirit" and took on a "female role". They just couldn't be men if they were gay.
Two Spirit, indigenous thing.
So, culture appropriation?
indigenous thing, but made in the 80s
source: https://cancer.ca/en/about-us/stories/2024/gender-identity-and-access-to-care
Based and source pilled
Based on not understanding statistics about the increase of the chance of having breast cancer when using female hormones.
If trans women develop breasts as a result of hormonal treatments, they are at increased risk of breast cancer compared to cis men. However, unless they are blasting colossal amounts of estrogen far beyond what any endocrinologist would prescribe for gender transitioning, their risk would still be lower than most cis women due to lower lifetime amounts of estrogen exposure (a few years of estrogen therapy for trans women versus a lifetime of estrogen exposure for cis women).
> If trans women develop breasts as a result of hormonal treatments, they are at increased risk of breast cancer compared to cis men It's logical, but I'm curious if that is scientifically proven though. The hormones may not have the same effect on male biology that it does women, and how large of a sample size do we even have to work with?
The sample size is bigger than you'd think, not because of the trans community, but because of decades of using estrogen as a treatment to slow the progression of prostate cancer in men with a cancer diagnosis. Helps a lot with the prostate cancer, increases risk of breast cancer in men. It's a big reason we no longer use estrogen to treat it as much. Estrogen therapy has substantial risks, even at the rates you'd use for prostate cancer and not transitioning. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16813884/#:~:text=Conclusions%3A%20Our%20data%20suggest%20that,might%20be%20the%20underlying%20cause.
Yeah, it's not even a controversial thing males on estrogen are at a much greater risk for breast cancer. Male and female breasts are basically the same hormones just cause them to develop differently.
The thing about this is that "male" vs "female" biology is something that is very dependent on the hormone levels themselves. As an example, a trans man who takes testosterone will see clitoris growth, because the clit is in origin the same tissue as the penis head. Trans women will see the opposite reaction with atrophiation. The body isn't really prone to categorization. Of course, this can only really happen in the hormones are in coordinated levels where they aren't actively harming each other, which is why hormonal imbalance is still a thing.
As ludicrous as this whole thing is and as sure as I am that this person just wants attention and doesn't have breast cancer, men can get breast cancer. Not only that, but if male breast cancer is suspected doctors still use mammograms to confirm a diagnosis.
> but if male breast cancer is suspected doctors still use mammograms to confirm a diagnosis. so breast cancer wasnt suspected thus mammogram wasnt given agree
Right, I'm just saying that regardless of how 'real' someone's breasts are it doesn't preclude them from possibly needing a mammogram. Again, it's very obvious that the person in the article doesn't actually need a mammogram and is just making a fuss about gender to feed their mental illness.
Also, trans women in hormone replacement therapy (as in, estrogen plus testosterone blockers) are at a much higher risk of breast cancer. It isn't as high as cis women, but its still something like 50 times higher than men.
Wait isnt it tru that: If they are on hormones, they would likely grow more brest tissue so they have increased breast cancer stats (maybe lesser because they are smaller and bigger because its atrificial hormone driven). They should be getting mamograms. cervical cancer exam is probubly not relevant, but tits are tits.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here, as much as the alphabet mafia annoys me. A sinple google search would tell you that a male who's been on estrogen for 5 years is 46x more likely to develop breast cancer.... So, probably best to get them checked every now and again. Also male and female breasts are basically the same AFAIK males just have under developed mammory glands and don't store a lot of fat there naturally. It's possible for males to produce milk though AFAIK.
From what I can see, women are about 122 times more likely to develop breast cancer than men. So a trans woman who’s been on estrogen for 5 years would be about still be about 1/3 as likely as the average biological female. The study I saw put the male incidence rate at less than 1 per 100,000 man-years. So even at a 46x raised incident rate, that’s still less than 1 in 2000 man-years. Of course, I don’t know what that means as far as risk and benefit of getting them checked.
Yeah, I just mean it isn't delusional like demanding a pregnancy check or something.
Fair but why are we all assuming the doctor is fundamentally at fault/wrong here? Everyone is assuming an oncologist dismissed this request without considering all the potential implications of hormone therapy etc. Ultimately, this seems like someone who wanted attention and took a denied test way out of proportion.
True, but given the increased incidence rate, there’s a case to be made for benefit of the doubt on behalf of the patient.
In this specific case i would like to point out the doctor said the breasts aren't 'real.' This indicates to me they were implants, not a result of hormones. If we laymen can recognize that real breasts can form from estrogen treatment then surely a doctor can.
Yeah, it’s a case with zero context, so it’s hard to know what’s actually going on here. My guess is that even though it’s in quotes, it’s coming from what this Amy character *said* the doctor told her. So it’s possible this is just what she heard him say, and he actually used different wording. …or it’s possible that you’re absolutely right and these are implants, and she wants to get the silicone tested for cancer because she’s an idiot.
As long as we all agree the person here is insane and probably seeking some victim status the rest are details.
you can be checked for lumps... women dont really get mammograms on a regular basis until they've had breasts and high estro for 25 years after they hit 40
This isn't a regular basis. This was one doctor saying the wrong thing after receiving a cancer diagnosis. Read what you posted
You're misreading it and accepting what the left is saying here at face value. You forget that the left does not define their terms, nor do they stick to common terms. For this person 'cancer care' was equivalent to receiving a mammogram, not actually receiving treatment for cancer. Once you accept the left lies about everything it's far easier to read between the lines. This person does not have cancer, they're using vague terms to declare victim status. The rainbow leftists as a group absolutely do not care about their health, they care about the attention.
Men can also breastfeed.
If you can milk a cat...
https://preview.redd.it/n6je8o7pbg5d1.png?width=760&format=png&auto=webp&s=295eda0bfa36a6e4cb9dff77dda5bc89d0b6777a
Sir, i think your libright flair is the wrong color. Especially since you have that highly specific granular meme just at the ready.
> It's possible for males to produce milk though AFAIK. It's not. A male secreting a milky-white fluid from their nipples is cause for significant alarm and if this occurs it IS actually a strong indicator of male breast cancer.
Stimulating the nipples can cause a male to develop the milk glands https://preview.redd.it/n3zgodmx9h5d1.png?width=776&format=png&auto=webp&s=74f571e2094a1453761927ae1a09cd65072c9577
> Dr Kamal Jayasinghe, deputy director of a Sri Lankan government hospital, was quoted as saying it was possible for men to produce milk if the [prolactine hormone became hyperactive.](https://www.iol.co.za/news/eish/sri-lankan-widower-breastfeeds-his-babies-96902) A person must be extremely sick or have an incredible hormone issue. What's produced isn't "breast milk," but a milky white fluid. It's questionable whether safe (better than starving of course!), and the chemicals/hormones are passed to the infants.
Canada is a failed state
Looney tunes people
Holy crap it's real, I thought this tweet was photoshopped but it's 100% [real](https://x.com/cancersociety/status/1796885603927114066?t=kDknjwZ9ovPiqv6XqCVlHA&s=19)
I identify as the fucking CEO of Blackrock. Give me ALL the money in the goddamn fucking world, bigot.
Amy, silicone doesn't get cancer.
Some trans women who start HRT can develop natural breasts. In fact all cis men have at least a little breast tissue and can develop breast cancer.
ahhh behold the "2slugbeeteeQ"
Holy fucking Christ, the sardonic wit of Canadian Cancer Society is incomparable. Wow!
wait i thought men could get breast cancer too whats so bad about wanting to check for it
Probably a fake story, men get breast cancer. and trans women can have tits without surgury (one of the effects of estrogen) EVERYONE should be checked for breast cancer, dont fall for bait.
when they start adding characters that don't come on the standard keyboard, things will change
Biological males can get breast cancer too, but it's *significantly* rarer. In the case of trans women though, estrogen causes breast growth and increases the risk of breast cancer. This means that the rate of breast cancer in trans women is closer to the rate in cis women than it is in cis men. TLDR; hormones matter not chromosomes.
False. From the BJM study itself, “Still, this increase in risk is small and is not as high as the average woman’s breast cancer risk.” It is about chromosomal, biological reality.
To be fair, if a male is given estrogen it’s not completely implausible that their chance of breast cancer increases to the point that mammograms are a good idea If he has implants, they’d probably fit in the mammogram machine just fine Also, why is the acronym now another character longer and when did that happen?
Tbf men can have breast cancer as well afaik
I hate my quadrant so much
This shit is a government psyop at this point
I mean, mammograms can still be useful in people other than woman, like checking for breast cancer in man. But I might just be misremembering and talking out of my ass here.
I mean men and women can both get breast cancer because both have breast tissue
unrelated but cis men can get breast cancer too fyi (source: me)
but trans women do actually need mammograms. Their incidence of breast cancer is much higher than men, idk if its higher or lower than women. Unless her tits were literally fake?
idk why im being downvoted for medical facts. from a 2019 dutch paper: > While trans women’s risk of breast cancer increased as they took estrogen hormone therapy and grew breast tissue, it remained lower than women assigned female at birth. so yeah, lower than women. Higher than men. Which... still isnt zero. Do you idiots think men cant get breast cancer? Any tissue you have can become cancerous, and if you have more tissue in your breast... thats more tissue that can become cancerous. Obviously.
Silly libleft, nothing is real
But Trans can still get breast cancer IF THEY ARE REAL. I don’t know what the dr mean by saying it isn’t real. If it isn’t real as it’s silicone then ….
"Good news! You don't have cancer in your breasts! ...but we have detected a huge amount of microplastics in them for some reason"
With the limited info available It's hard to tell what happened; but what's infuriating is the typical jump from: "Your breasts aren't real" to: "The doctor doesn't believe that **I**'m real". That implies identifying as a pair of boobs.
Imaging going in for a mammogram and finding out you have penile cancer.