this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
39 points (62.6% liked)

Interesting Global News

2602 readers
409 users here now

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 formatPost title should mirror the news source title.
URL formatPost 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] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone 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 attacksAny 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 tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I did read the article. Calling her a man is being a dick. Asking for services while being trans is not being a dick.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There is no indication in the article that he called her a man before she flew of the handle.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

He literally told her "i only treat women."

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"I only treat real women" - that's what French gynaecologist Victor Acharian told a 26-year-old transgender woman he refused to treat in his clinic in the south-west of the country recently.

The transgender woman, accompanied by her boyfriend, went to a gynaecological appointment when, after minutes of waiting, the secretary told her that the doctor had refused to see her.

There's the article...

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

“I only treat real women” - that’s what French gynaecologist Victor Acharian told a 26-year-old transgender woman he refused to treat in his clinic in the south-west of the country recently.

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".

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Just because it's a story you don't like doesn't make it shock journalism...

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

True, my personal feelings about the story do in fact not change how this article was written.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right...instead you just "interpret" it as shock journalism...

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

"identified as" would be more appropriate. But it's really almost all journalism these days.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

She was upset and kind of having a bad fucking day, and then instead of de-escalating he makes it worse.

And maybe he was also having a bad day, probably because of her. Why is this on him in the first place?

[–] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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.

Why is this on him in the first place?

  1. He's supposed to be the professional.

  2. There's never an excuse to be transphobic. Being rude is a mistake. That wasn't a mistake.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.