So, I was on a bit of a training course yesterday, about this piece of kit that measures cholesterol, glucose etc. Must admit, am pretty stunned dickheads in leisure centres can take bloods, i was like "really?". They were like, "yeah, really, its only a little bit of blood"......really?!
Anyhoo, as a bit of an interactive seminar it was to discuss risk factors for cardio vascular disease....
I'm like a 20 tonne penguin, breaking the ice and all that, I'm like "hang on, this my workplace, manager is here, am I allowed to contribute with no fear of dismissal", Ummm, yes Wunder, wtf?
Weeeeelllll, risk factors would be gender, age, race.....bit down the line, education, social class, parents, fuck me every genuine risk factor is one of those that we are not supposed to judge on.
Ice breaker went down OK, people got it. The fella pitching his tech was very "we actually do have a bit of an issue with the gender thing, we are working it into the software", everyone got it.
Anyhoo, a bit later, (the idea is to ascertain some 'body facts', and possibly suggest what you can do about it. Doctor-lite) males and females have different 'risk scores'. So if a male has a value of X, that may be fine for your age, but if a female has it, its through the roof, please see you doctor and maybe we can prescribe something (nah, please fuck off, don't die here ffs....).
It actually happened.
Manager type was quite passionate about if someone identifies as a female they should get the female values. I'm like, urrrr, but they are actually a physiological male? My thinking is that, if you take someone's bloods and run tests, give them the appropriate data/advice (which the software does tbh). After some huffing and puffing the group 'decided' that if a tranny fuck was the subject, maybe give them both sets of a advice, and let them choose for themselves.
They didn't like the idea that I think a physiological male needs the male stats, regardless of what they 'identify' as. Now as such a small proportion of society, and seeing as this health screening is just a flagging exercise, do I give a fuck what we tell them? No, because at any juncture of importance we fuck them off to the proper doctor.
Anyway, later, came the risk factors of HIV/AIDS, different manager type was saying in the 80s it was just prejudice towards gay men being the high risk 'cause' of things. Some good stats I have in memory are that STDs in general are a woman's thing. More women get it up the arse then there are gay men and intravenous drug users combined (British Medical Journal). No you can't say that about women, even though the person i'm refuting was saying it about male homosexuals.
I thought all this nonsense (dressing up facts inaccurately in order to appease rather than inform) was a flash in the pan that only happened on TV shows, but noooooooooo. Its fucking real.