Also Someone Goes To The ER And Cries Because It Would Impact His Standing In The Show.

@rebellum​ said

So, I am confused about 1 thing, maybe OP can explain it. I googled "female urinary system" because I was confused about why you said the uterus was part of it. And some diagrams pointed out the uterus, while others didn't. So what's up with that? How is the uterus considered part of the urinary system?

I have no idea if the uterus is ‘officially’ part of the urinary system. I came across enough sources that described it as such I didn’t think twice about that sentence.

But when I say ‘uteri are part of the urinary system’ the point is that urologist are familiar with the uterus and treat urinary conditions that involve the uterus.

For example, various aspects of “female” anatomy can develop fistulas with the bladder, including the urethra, vagina, and uterus. This problem is most often fixed by urologists.

By the way, fistulas can also develop between the colon and these anatomies, which are corrected by rectal surgeons.

Urologist treat women, trans and cis alike. And someone pointed out in a re-blog that women also have kidneys.

Trans women who have had surgery still need to visit the urologist, not the gynecologist, because the former is familiar with our surgeries and the latter is not. You need to stop lying and spreading misinformation which could get someone killed.

Wow, everything you said is completely wrong. So it's very funny that you think my 'misinformation' is going to 'get someone killed'. That hyperbole is fear mongering and also that's just a really aggressive way to speak to a complete stranger. Especially to accuse me of 'lying'.

So let me clear up your misunderstandings.

Firstly, urologist specialize in the urinary system, which include the bladder and kidneys and also the uterus. They aren't like the male version of gynecologists. For example, urologist treat organ prolapse, where the bladder, uterus, or colon "fall" into the vagina, or will treat fistulas, especially bladder fistulas. (Which is a hole connecting the bladder and vagina.)

Secondly, Vaginoplasties are preformed by reconstructive surgeons not urologist or gynecologist in the vast, vast majority of cases. Also, vaginoplasties are not a trans specific surgery. Severe vaginal injuries, such as those caused by childbirth or disease, are also treated with a vaginoplasty.

It's laughable any ol' off the shelf urologist is "familiar" with the surgery. Plenty of doctors still refuse to preform even the simplest trans-specific healthcare 'because it's not a usual part of their practice they are comfortable preforming' let alone complex reconstructive surgery.

But my original comment wasn't about vaginoplasties, it was about checking the cervix for cancer.

So, thirdly, trans women aren't the only women with neo-cervixies. In addition to the above, people who have undergone hysterectomies of one kind or another often have a neo-cervix as well. Or, for example, if someone has cervical cancer, and needs their cervix removed, they give that person another cervix.

Because the cervix is a very important part of that set of anatomy. It keeps the uterus and other organs from prolapsing (just falling out) and is also something of a barrier that keeps junk out of the uterus. And if you don't have a uterus, it keeps junk out of the abdominal cavity.

The procedure to check a cervix for cancer is the same regardless of if its a neo-cervix or a cervix-cervix.

Meaning, gynecologist are also familiar with the cervix aspect of a vaginoplasty. As well as the rest of the vaginoplasty. Because they treat people who've had vaginoplasties. So, you know, it's perfectly normal to go see a gynecologist to have your vagina looked at.

A basic pap smear is actually simple enough it can be done with an at home kit (though if anything needs to be biopsied they'll need you in the stirrups for that).

So uh, recommending you see a gynecologist for a vaginal specific issue isn't horribly dangerous misinformation, it isn't even misinformation. It's a perfectly normal thing to do.

If a surgeon made you a vagina, that surgeon should tell you what vagina problems to look out for, what health screening you need, and what specialists you should have preform those tests for you. They'll also likely be able to refer you to someone trans friendly if needed.

Getting an at home pap smear test from a general practitioner is not a big deal. There's no need to see a urologist for that. If you need your neo-cervix biopsied there's no reason not to go see a gynocologist since trans women aren't the only ones with neo cervix.

And also most urologist offices aren't going to have speculums and stirrups.

Trans health care is not some big secret only select medical disciplines are let in on.

A general practitioner can prescribe hormones and keep you up to date on the tests you need for that. A plastic surgeon with experience is going to preform the surgeries, MtF or FtM. A general practitioner can send you home with a pap smear kit, or preform one in the office, even. A gynecologist can look at your vagina, because it's not a special or trans exclusive vagina. A urologist can look at a urinary tract or bladder infection or what have you.

Acting like trans health care is some super secret complicated thing is transphobic. That's something transphobic doctors say as an excuse not to treat trans people.

A friend of mine had a complication develop after surgery and needed a local urologist to fix it. The long term fix was surgical, but the urologist could have drained the painful mass that developed while she traveled to see her surgeon. But he refused. So did the doctors at the Emergency Room.

So she got to enjoy a very painful very long very bumpy bus ride from her rural college to the city where her surgeon was so he could take care of it for her.

YOU'RE the one who needs to 'stop lying and spreading misinformation' because your misinformation perpetuates the excuse transphobic doctors use to avoid treating trans people at all.

It is not a trans need to have a painful surgical complication corrected and it is not complicated to drain an abscess. But that doctor refused her, not because the abscess was caused by an unfamiliar surgery, but because she required that surgery because she was trans.

You are telling trans people that our medical needs are complex and overwhelming and scary. That's discouraging. And it's just not true.

Urologist don't have exclusive rights to vaginoplasties. Urologist aren't extra familiar with trans women's health needs. The cervix isn't part of the Urologist's specialty.

Calm down. Going to see a gynecologist for a pap smear isn’t going to kill anyone. And the gynecology field as a whole is making an effort to be more welcoming to trans women because it’s perfectly normal for trans women to see a gynecologist.

Fae is such a beautiful puppy, thank you @doberbutts for sharing her joy with the rest of us.

I need to be able to play Cullen’s “to work” from Dragon Age Inquisition before I sit down to do something productive and then have it transition seamlessly into my productive music.

Also, as a MINOR she has the right to break the contract she signed regarding the goat at any time. So in trying to "teach her a lesson about following the rules" they broke rules regarding contract laws protecting minors.

I watched lawtube covering this when it went down and oh my god I'm still so angry about it.

@kvothbloodless It will not be overturned in court as this is a change in law not a policy. The ADA has nothing to do with air travel. The Air Carrier Access Act is the law which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability. This change has been broad cast for nearly a year in advanced. There was an Advisory Committee which arranged a period where anyone could comment on the proposed changes and which also met with service dog advocacy committees to draft these changes.

Part of the reasoning behind giving ESA pet statues was informed by the ADA.

As for the requirement to fit in the passengers’ foot space, I actually consider this issue to be one of training rather than the size of the dog. The most common service dog breeds are Labradors, Golden Retrievers, and Standard Poodles, all of which can fit in the required space and are trained to do so as a matter of course.

Service dog handler’s with larger dogs already book bulkhead seating. I do not think it is a reasonable accommodation from a person’s medical equipment to intrude on the space another person has paid for on a flight.

As for service animals being limited to dogs, the only other consideration was for miniature horses. Miniature horses don’t reasonably fit even in bulk head seating either. And the organizations which train miniature horses to be service animals, as well as those handlers, attest that flying with a miniature horse is stressful for the animal and poor practice. No other animal is federally protected as a service animal.

well. ESAs are no longer allowed on airplanes and service animals are required to fit within the handler’s footspace.

So glad to see the weight loss encouragement in literally the most unexpected place. It’s been a difficult battle but ever pound loss reduces my pain. I want being pain free to be possible and I’m pursuing every possible solution.

I get variations on this comment on my post about history misinformation all the time: "why does it matter?" Why does it matter that people believe falsehoods about history? Why does it matter if people spread history misinformation? Why does it matter if people on tumblr believe that those bronze dodecahedra were used for knitting, or that Persephone had a daughter named Mespyrian? It's not the kind of misinformation that actually hurts people, like anti-vaxx propaganda or climate change denial. It doesn't hurt anyone to believe something false about the past.

Which, one, thanks for letting me know on my post that you think my job doesn't matter and what I do is pointless, if it doesn't really matter if we know the truth or make up lies about history because lies don't hurt anyone. But two, there are lots of reasons that it matters.

It encourages us to distrust historians when they talk about other aspects of history. You might think it's harmless to believe that Pharaoh Hatshepsut was trans. It's less harmless when you're espousing that the Holocaust wasn't really about Jews because the Nazis "came for trans people first." You might think it's harmless to believe that the French royalty of Versailles pooped and urinated on the floor of the palace all the time, because they were asshole rich people anyway, who cares, we hate the rich here; it's rather less harmless when you decide that the USSR was the communist ideal and Good, Actually, and that reports of its genocidal oppression are actually lies.

It encourages anti-intellectualism in other areas of scholarship. Deciding based on your own gut that the experts don't know what they're talking about and are either too stupid to realize the truth, or maliciously hiding the truth, is how you get to anti-vaxxers and climate change denial. It is also how you come to discount housing-first solutions for homelessness or the idea that long-term sustained weight loss is both biologically unlikely and health-wise unnecessary for the majority of fat people - because they conflict with what you feel should be true. Believing what you want to be true about history, because you want to believe it, and discounting fact-based corrections because you don't want them to be true, can then bleed over into how you approach other sociological and scientific topics.

How we think about history informs how we think about the present. A lot of people want certain things to be true - this famous person from history was gay or trans, this sexist story was actually feminist in its origin - because we want proof that gay people, trans people, and women deserve to be respected, and this gives evidence to prove we once were and deserve to be. But let me tell you a different story: on Thanksgiving of 2016, I was at a family friend's house and listening to their drunk conservative relative rant, and he told me, confidently, that the Roman Empire fell because they instituted universal healthcare, which was proof that Obama was destroying America. Of course that's nonsense. But projecting what we think is true about the world back onto history, and then using that as recursive proof that that is how the world is... is shoddy scholarship, and gets used for topics you don't agree with just as much as the ones you do. We should not be encouraging this, because our politics should be informed by the truth and material reality, not how we wish the past proved us right.

It frequently reinforces "Good vs. Bad" dichotomies that are at best unhelpful and at worst victim-blaming. A very common thread of historical misinformation on tumblr is about the innocence or benevolence of oppressed groups, slandered by oppressors who were far worse. This very frequently has truth to it - but makes the lies hard to separate out. It often simplifies the narrative, and implies that the reason that colonialism and oppression were bad was because the victims were Good and didn't deserve it... not because colonialism and oppression are bad. You see this sometimes with radical feminist mother goddess Neolithic feminist utopia stuff, but you also see it a lot regarding Native American and African history. I have seen people earnestly argue that Aztecs did not practice human sacrifice, that that was a lie made up by the Spanish to slander them. That is not true. Human sacrifice was part of Aztec, Maya, and many Central American war/religious practices. They are significantly more complex than often presented, and came from a captive-based system of warfare that significantly reduced the number of people who got killed in war compared to European styles of war that primarily killed people on the battlefield rather than taking them captive for sacrifice... but the human sacrifice was real and did happen. This can often come off with the implications of a 'noble savage' or an 'innocent victim' that implies that the bad things the Spanish conquistadors did were bad because the victims were innocent or good. This is a very easy trap to fall into; if the victims were good, they didn't deserve it. Right? This logic is dangerous when you are presented with a person or group who did something bad... you're caught in a bind. Did they deserve their injustice or oppression because they did something bad? This kind of logic drives a lot of transphobia, homophobia, racism, and defenses of Kyle Rittenhouse today. The answer to a colonialist logic of "The Aztecs deserved to be conquered because they did human sacrifice and that's bad" is not "The Aztecs didn't do human sacrifice actually, that's just Spanish propaganda" (which is a lie) it should be "We Americans do human sacrifice all the god damn time with our forever wars in the Middle East, we just don't call it that. We use bullets and bombs rather than obsidian knives but we kill way, way more people in the name of our country. What does that make us? Maybe genocide is not okay regardless of if you think the people are weird and scary." It becomes hard to square your ethics of the Innocent Victim and Lying Perpetrator when you see real, complicated, individual-level and group-level interactions, where no group is made up of members who are all completely pure and good, and they don't deserve to be oppressed anyway.

It makes you an unwitting tool of the oppressor. The favorite, favorite allegation transphobes level at trans people, and conservatives at queer people, is that we're lying to push the Gay Agenda. We're liars or deluded fools. If you say something about queer or trans history that's easy to debunk as false, you have permanently hurt your credibility - and the cause of queer history. It makes you easy to write off as a liar or a deluded fool who needs misinformation to make your case. If you say Louisa May Alcott was trans, that's easy to counter with "there is literally no evidence of that, and lots of evidence that she was fine being a woman," and instantly tanks your credibility going forward, so when you then say James Barry was trans and push back against a novel or biopic that treats James Barry as a woman, you get "you don't know what you're talking about, didn't you say Louisa May Alcott was trans too?" TERFs love to call trans people liars - do not hand them ammunition, not even a single bullet. Make sure you can back up what you say with facts and evidence. This is true of homophobes, of racists, of sexists. Be confident of your facts, and have facts to give to the hopeful and questioning learners who you are relating this story to, or the bigots who you are telling off, because misinformation can only hurt you and your cause.

It makes the queer, female, POC, or other marginalized listeners hurt, sad, and betrayed when something they thought was a reflection of their own experiences turns out not to be real. This is a good response to a performance art piece purporting to tell a real story of gay WWI soldiers, until the author revealed it as fiction. Why would you want to set yourself up for disappointment like that? Why would you want to risk inflicting that disappointment and betrayal on anyone else?

It makes it harder to learn the actual truth.

Historical misinformation has consequences, and those consequences are best avoided - by checking your facts, citing your sources, and taking the time and effort to make sure you are actually telling the truth.

Hi. What the fuck.

And why did I, an artist, who went to art school, not know this?

Describing gender as a spectrum implies that there are people whose gender cannot correctly be displayed in digital media because it falls outside the RGB colour gamut.

a VERY funny take on book 1 would be that up until Holly’s capture, Butler saw Artemis’ desire to kidnap a fairy and ransom them for gold as like, the 12-year-old equivalent to how Angeline had sunk into a fantasy world to avoid confronting the fact that her husband was most likely dead. The eventual failure of Artemis’ mission (in Butler’s eyes) would bring catharsis and usher in the healthy realization that it was time to move on, and although this was on track… BOOM they get mind-boggling lucky and run into holly, suddenly its_all_frighteningly_real.png, and Butler is embroiled in an inter-civilizational conflict that leads to him having to melee fight a troll at 2 am

"it's okay, i can peel back the layers of you until i find the soft and gentle core of you you've had to work so hard to hide"? no. no, it's okay, i know you're hollow; i'm here anyway. you don't have to pretend it isn't masks the whole way down. whatever face you want to wear, i still love you. i don't need you to be good or unflinching or the antonym of violence. if i did, i wouldn't be here. i wouldn't ask that of you.

EMT: Do you know what causes your seizures

Me: *Struggling to find a way to explain psychogenic non epileptic seizures while my brain is fried and the world is spinning*

Me:

Me: Bullshit.