Tara Rule claims that she was denied a prescription to migraine medication with a risk of causing birth defects due to being a woman of childbearing age, despite not being pregnant and planning to...
Tara Rule claims that she was denied a prescription to migraine medication with a risk of causing birth defects due to being a woman of childbearing age, despite not being pregnant and planning to have an abortion if she were to be pregnant. She was then asked all to familiar questions about whether she has a steady partner and encouraged to talk it over with them.
She just filed suit alleging not just this discrimination but also mistreatment and possible insurance fraud by another provider that "fired" her as a patient when her recordings were reported as "live streaming" her appointment.
The article also highlights previous cases of women being prevented from getting medication or being charged criminally for taking their medication.
The healthcare providers can be criminally charged now for anything that causes an abortion. There are so many medications that can cause problems in pregnancy that healthcare providers have to...
The healthcare providers can be criminally charged now for anything that causes an abortion. There are so many medications that can cause problems in pregnancy that healthcare providers have to protect their license and livelihood.
The problem with the anti-abortion people (I refuse to call them pro-life, as if they have some sort of monopoly on life or understand what it is) is that they don't realize that women's health falls under so many different buckets from endocrinology to neurology.
FWIW She's in New York and so abortion is a protected right and the provider should not be able to be charged. This has never entirely prohibited pharmacists, doctors, etc from discriminating however.
FWIW She's in New York and so abortion is a protected right and the provider should not be able to be charged. This has never entirely prohibited pharmacists, doctors, etc from discriminating however.
I agree that it's protected in New York, but how licensing works is that you have your originating state, and it's reciprocated in other states so you don't have to retake examinations. You...
I agree that it's protected in New York, but how licensing works is that you have your originating state, and it's reciprocated in other states so you don't have to retake examinations. You typically must maintain your originating state (like if you went to Anderson in Texas for residency) or risk losing all held licenses. And trust me, these folks are nefarious enough to figure that out and use that as a way to attack.
I think what they're saying is if the provider was originally credentialed in Texas and then moved to New York, they would have to practice this way to avoid Texas pulling their license and making...
I think what they're saying is if the provider was originally credentialed in Texas and then moved to New York, they would have to practice this way to avoid Texas pulling their license and making New York unable to reciprocate it.
Not sure how it works with medical licensure but for other state licensures once your license is reciprocated and you are now licensed in state B, State A has no say in that anymore. Not a doctor...
Not sure how it works with medical licensure but for other state licensures once your license is reciprocated and you are now licensed in state B, State A has no say in that anymore.
Not a doctor but in a profession full of state licensed people.
When I took Accutane for some pretty bad cystic acne as a teenager (and a second round of it in my mid-30s when it returned), the potential birth defects of the medication are a pretty big deal....
When I took Accutane for some pretty bad cystic acne as a teenager (and a second round of it in my mid-30s when it returned), the potential birth defects of the medication are a pretty big deal. You essentially had to affirm that you would be using two separate forms of birth control (e.g., oral birth control + condoms), and you would have to do a pregnancy test as part of the regular lab work (which included liver enzyme tests) every month during treatment (which usually lasts between 3 to 6 months). It seemed pretty dramatic, but I guess it was because there wasn't simply a "risk" of birth defects: it was a certainty.
I would assume this medication requires the same kind of prerequisite of using two types of birth control, but it strikes me as odd that there's no mention of this in the article (even though it does mention that there is an acne medicine that also carries this kind of concern around birth defects).
If the doctor really refused the medication solely on the basis of being of childbearing age—and regardless of birth control status—then there is absolutely something very wrong with this. (And the comment about discussing it with her partner was definitely out of line.)
No matter what, though, it still sucks that it's yet another way for women's healthcare to be more complicated and unequal compared to mens.
Here's another article with more specifics: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-hospital-childbearing-age-b2425613.html I found a few medications that could qualify for what...
I found a few medications that could qualify for what she was looking at but it seems like a shift in doctors turned into this "cluster" of a situation. Not sure if the medication has the same level of birth control requirements as Accutane which is one of the strictest (and maybe the lack of specifics is because it isn't as strict) but in this article she mentions both abortion and her partners vasectomy which would be two methods up top. It doesn't seem like his concern is that she isn't on a hormonal method as well, but obviously it's one sided.
It's just a pattern of reducing the autonomy of women and anyone else with a uterus. Even the Accutane requirement is above and beyond in restricting medication use due to the potential of a future fetus.
Oh, I missed the part about the partner's vasectomy! Yeah, then this is absolutely messed up. But I disagree that this issue can only be about a potential future fetus. I think the doctor's point...
Oh, I missed the part about the partner's vasectomy! Yeah, then this is absolutely messed up.
But I disagree that this issue can only be about a potential future fetus. I think the doctor's point about abortion access no longer being such a sure thing, anymore, is a valid one. We recently saw how quickly the access we once assumed was guaranteed suddenly *wasn'*t.
One of medicine's guiding principles is supposed to be about minimizing risks and avoiding harm; even putting any concerns about the fetus itself, aside, having to deal with an unexpected and defective pregnancy certainly carries its own health risks (even moreso if those defects pose risks to the mother's health), and going through the process of getting an abortion is going to be fraught with its own stresses, not to mention the risks of complications from the procedure.
So I don't think it's wrong or unethical for a medical professional to want to go a preventative, proactive route rather than rely on a potential abortion if the unlikely came to pass as a way of minimizing overall risks (but it certainly doesn't look like that was the case, here, given her partner has a vasectomy).
By that logic though, she could be assaulted and end up pregnant at any time. Anyone with a uterus would never be allowed to take any medication that could have any negative effect on a fetus they...
By that logic though, she could be assaulted and end up pregnant at any time. Anyone with a uterus would never be allowed to take any medication that could have any negative effect on a fetus they don't currently carry.
Or if the doctor had said it was important to take preventative meds, rather than not prescribe it at all there might be a case. But that doesn't seem to be what happened.
FYI of the medicines used to treat cluster headaches, I believe the one in question is topiramate which carries a 1.1% chance of causing cleft palate in the first trimester I’m still taking this...
FYI of the medicines used to treat cluster headaches, I believe the one in question is topiramate which carries a 1.1% chance of causing cleft palate in the first trimester
I’m still taking this article with FAR more salt than almost everyone else in this thread because not once was the specific medication in question mentioned, but of the prophylactic medications meant to try controlling cluster headaches, Topamax is the one most likely to cause birth defects as far as I’m aware
Why are you unable to take the article seriously without knowing the specific medication? I'm not sure that it matters, considering she's not planning on getting pregnant and even if there were...
Why are you unable to take the article seriously without knowing the specific medication? I'm not sure that it matters, considering she's not planning on getting pregnant and even if there were severe risks, there should simply be extra hoops to jump through like those described in other comments for prescribing Accutane. It just seems like an odd sticking point to me.
I'm unfortunately not surprised by this. Consider that Tara presumably explicitly asked for this medication after doing her own research -- I doubt the doctor brought it up only to poo-poo it on...
I'm unfortunately not surprised by this. Consider that Tara presumably explicitly asked for this medication after doing her own research -- I doubt the doctor brought it up only to poo-poo it on such flimsy grounds to her face. How much more common must it be for women who don't independently research medications that may effectively treat their symptoms, whose doctors simply never bring up medications that could bring them relief due to the hypothetical possibility of the fetus? Is it any wonder that those who turn to so-called "alternative medicine" are overwhelmingly women when doctors willfully avoid effective treatments like this?
The overturning of Roe is definitely making these situations more common in the US, but it's not unique to that at all. Let's not forget the WHO draft guidance, which advocated for "women of childbearing age", which WHO defines as from 15 to 50, to be the focus of alcohol prevention efforts. As always, those who can even hypothetically give birth are exclusively viewed as potential baby receptacles and are treated as such. The US abortion legislation only accentuates and amplifies what is already there underlyingly.
Honestly sometimes I wonder that young girls aren't pescribed folic acid supplements pre-emptively, just in case. I shared a second source in another post that suggests her doctor retired and the...
Honestly sometimes I wonder that young girls aren't pescribed folic acid supplements pre-emptively, just in case.
I shared a second source in another post that suggests her doctor retired and the new one is the one that had the issues, I need to re-read but I wasn't sure if the previous doc has been planning to prescribe it or not. But obviously that didn't happen.
I’m very suspicious about this article and woman to be honest Not once is the life saving medication mentioned by name, and the fact that she was “fired” from the facilities absolutely screams...
I’m very suspicious about this article and woman to be honest
Not once is the life saving medication mentioned by name, and the fact that she was “fired” from the facilities absolutely screams that she was misbehaving to me. Hospitals don’t usually just fire patients without a ton of abuse
Also the fact that she’s wearing a shirt with f*cking on it makes me suspicious of her personality, in addition to the fact that she was recording her appointments. Whether you live in a one party consent state or not, it’s just kind of rude to film a provider without asking first
I’m all for abortion rights, but this just seems like the issues are much deeper than those…
Edit: to be clear, I don’t care what gender you are. If you’re wearing a shirt with profanity then people will likely be more dismissive of you. And if you feel the need to record a medical interaction, you always have the right to look for a different provider. While I do think the provider in question made some bad judgment calls and I don’t necessarily agree with their rationale, they do still have the right to provide medical care however they see fit. If you don’t want to support physicians with mindsets such as the one in the article, then don’t use them and leave reviews and such online
Why does a woman have to fit a perfect mold to be believed? If she was wearing a traditional sundress and spoke with calm deference in the face of clear discrimination, would you then scold her...
Why does a woman have to fit a perfect mold to be believed? If she was wearing a traditional sundress and spoke with calm deference in the face of clear discrimination, would you then scold her for not being assertive enough or some other imagined shortcoming?
This happens all the time to women across America, to the point that several commenters have expressed a complete lack of surprise at this headline. It's not a far fetched claim and I could understand not being a "model patient" if I were suffering from pain severe enough to make me lose consciousness and being told I couldn't receive medication because of a hypothetical fetus. Who cares what she's wearing? She should be treated with dignity just the same.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-hospital-childbearing-age-b2425613.html This article made me actually far more certain about her. The nurse practitioner who discharged...
This article made me actually far more certain about her. The nurse practitioner who discharged her wrote contradictory information in the records (claiming she was discharged due to reduced pain and then also that she was escorted out), replied to a negative review and seems to have been found in violation by state regulators for the HIPAA violation.
It's Jezebel, so I understand being suspicious but, as someone that would wear a shirt with curse words, I think that's a particularly weird thing to determine one's character by. If it's a one party consent state, that's legal, and she was recording alleged discrimination that would otherwise be impossible to prove.
I'd add that people in acute pain episodes are often not the nicest. People who deal with chronic pain are often poorly treated by emergency rooms who see them as drug seeking. She was probably not a model patient and if she records videos, her actions may have been misunderstood as live streaming. (Or maybe she's lying about that and that was legit, still doesn't ok the HIPAA violation or the discrimination)
Edit: I generally just think that focusing on possible rudeness and a curse word on a shirt in the face of discrimination is so unevenly weighted as to be a complete red herring.
Yeah i wear obnoxious tshirts, too, but its more in response to being treated poorly. I finally realized people are dismissive of youngish women with invisible medical problems no matter what your...
Yeah i wear obnoxious tshirts, too, but its more in response to being treated poorly. I finally realized people are dismissive of youngish women with invisible medical problems no matter what your shirt says, so i may as well wear what i want.
I'd go further than that and call it misogyny. "This woman isn't presenting herself the way I think she should/in a traditional way, therefore there's clearly something wrong with her and the...
I generally just think that focusing on possible rudeness and a curse word on a shirt in the face of discrimination is so unevenly weighted as to be a complete red herring.
I'd go further than that and call it misogyny. "This woman isn't presenting herself the way I think she should/in a traditional way, therefore there's clearly something wrong with her and the system probably treated her accordingly."
Those types of people come off as rude a day unnecessarily hostile in real life regardless of gender. I mean if we had a subculture of people who wrote in only ALL CAPS WOULD THAT START TO...
It's Jezebel, so I understand being suspicious but, as someone that would wear a shirt with curse words, I think that's a particularly weird thing to determine one's character by.
Those types of people come off as rude a day unnecessarily hostile in real life regardless of gender.
I mean if we had a subculture of people who wrote in only ALL CAPS WOULD THAT START TO PREDISPOSE HOW YOU READ AND JUDGE THEM? WHEN YOU READ THIS DOES IT FEEL LIKE YOUR INNER MONOLOGUE IS SCREAMING IN YOUR HEAD? HOW ABOUT IF I START RANDOMILY MISWRITING WORDS? CUZ THISIS JUTS HOWS I WRIT?
Idk I've been reading L33T since I was a teen so that's a stylistic choice but it doesn't make you more likely to be a liar? I might find you annoying but annoying people can still be victims....
Idk I've been reading L33T since I was a teen so that's a stylistic choice but it doesn't make you more likely to be a liar? I might find you annoying but annoying people can still be victims.
I've been harassed at Costco for wearing a "Abortion is Healthcare" t-shirt but no one harassed the dude wearing a pretty blatant sexual comment on his shirt literally in the same aisle. I noticed since the irony was weird. I maintain there's misogyny involved but also just weird "act right or you deserve to be abused" attitude.
I THINK IF I TALK LIKE THIS AND WRITE LIKE THIS IT MIGHT HARM WHATEVER CAUSE IM TRYING TO SUPP9RT. YOU WOT GIT ANY ARGUMENT FROM ME THAT I CAN TOTALLY BE A VICTIM WHILE SPECKIN LIK DIS. WHEN I...
I THINK IF I TALK LIKE THIS AND WRITE LIKE THIS IT MIGHT HARM WHATEVER CAUSE IM TRYING TO SUPP9RT. YOU WOT GIT ANY ARGUMENT FROM ME THAT I CAN TOTALLY BE A VICTIM WHILE SPECKIN LIK DIS. WHEN I DEBATE PEOPLE I LIK TO WEAR MY C**T SUPTEME TSHIRT SO THEY KNOW I MEAN BIZAND IM THE B WITH THE RIZZ.
I guess what I'm trying to get at is that unfortunately even obviously correct opinions (i.e. abortion is healthcare, don't be mysoginist) requires some level of advertisement and salesmanship to convince people. Think about that man at Costco, he probably didn't have any male role model to teach him otherwise, and he's probably surrounded by like minded people. Getting into a shouting match isn't ever going to be beneficial for you or him, and to reach people like him requires a different approach.
I don't know, this has shades of "I would support their cause if only they would protest the way I want them to protest." If the cause is just, that should be enough. Anything else seems like a...
I don't know, this has shades of "I would support their cause if only they would protest the way I want them to protest." If the cause is just, that should be enough. Anything else seems like a convenient excuse to continue ignoring the issue by criticizing the marginalized group.
Also, I'd like to point out that you're pretty quick to defend Costco man but critical of a woman for wearing what's probably an equally offensive shirt (the one in the original article, not the innocuous political statement the other commenter was harassed for). What's the difference in conduct here? Why is there no defense for her via role models or like minded peers? Why is her attitude in need of adjustment if she wants her issues taken seriously, yet he's allowed to be publicly vulgar and society shrugs and moves on?
To be clear it was an older woman who harassed me (she chased me around the aisle on a scooter telling me "It's murder!". And I told her to "have a day" in response because I really just wanted...
To be clear it was an older woman who harassed me (she chased me around the aisle on a scooter telling me "It's murder!". And I told her to "have a day" in response because I really just wanted some boba ice cream bars.) There was however a teenage dude in the aisle with a sexual phrase on his shirt fully unmolested.
I am never trying to change the mind of lady yelling at someone in the Costco aisle. And trust me how aware I am of how "polite" chronic pain patients - and their families - have to be to be taken seriously. I have had to be the one that speaks with providers when my partner is no longer able to be courteous.
But neither her pithy T-shirt nor caps lock would excuse discrimination. And if a doctor decided that its ok to discriminate because of it (or because of anything) I hope the courts teach him otherwise.
I'm tired of people not being the "perfect" victims. It doesn't matter what her shirt said.
Tara Rule claims that she was denied a prescription to migraine medication with a risk of causing birth defects due to being a woman of childbearing age, despite not being pregnant and planning to have an abortion if she were to be pregnant. She was then asked all to familiar questions about whether she has a steady partner and encouraged to talk it over with them.
She just filed suit alleging not just this discrimination but also mistreatment and possible insurance fraud by another provider that "fired" her as a patient when her recordings were reported as "live streaming" her appointment.
The article also highlights previous cases of women being prevented from getting medication or being charged criminally for taking their medication.
The healthcare providers can be criminally charged now for anything that causes an abortion. There are so many medications that can cause problems in pregnancy that healthcare providers have to protect their license and livelihood.
The problem with the anti-abortion people (I refuse to call them pro-life, as if they have some sort of monopoly on life or understand what it is) is that they don't realize that women's health falls under so many different buckets from endocrinology to neurology.
FWIW She's in New York and so abortion is a protected right and the provider should not be able to be charged. This has never entirely prohibited pharmacists, doctors, etc from discriminating however.
I agree that it's protected in New York, but how licensing works is that you have your originating state, and it's reciprocated in other states so you don't have to retake examinations. You typically must maintain your originating state (like if you went to Anderson in Texas for residency) or risk losing all held licenses. And trust me, these folks are nefarious enough to figure that out and use that as a way to attack.
I think it's incredibly unethical to not provide medical care because another location might not reciprocate your license in the future.
I think what they're saying is if the provider was originally credentialed in Texas and then moved to New York, they would have to practice this way to avoid Texas pulling their license and making New York unable to reciprocate it.
Not sure how it works with medical licensure but for other state licensures once your license is reciprocated and you are now licensed in state B, State A has no say in that anymore.
Not a doctor but in a profession full of state licensed people.
Still unethical provision of care.
Anti-choice. That's what I call them.
When I took Accutane for some pretty bad cystic acne as a teenager (and a second round of it in my mid-30s when it returned), the potential birth defects of the medication are a pretty big deal. You essentially had to affirm that you would be using two separate forms of birth control (e.g., oral birth control + condoms), and you would have to do a pregnancy test as part of the regular lab work (which included liver enzyme tests) every month during treatment (which usually lasts between 3 to 6 months). It seemed pretty dramatic, but I guess it was because there wasn't simply a "risk" of birth defects: it was a certainty.
I would assume this medication requires the same kind of prerequisite of using two types of birth control, but it strikes me as odd that there's no mention of this in the article (even though it does mention that there is an acne medicine that also carries this kind of concern around birth defects).
If the doctor really refused the medication solely on the basis of being of childbearing age—and regardless of birth control status—then there is absolutely something very wrong with this. (And the comment about discussing it with her partner was definitely out of line.)
No matter what, though, it still sucks that it's yet another way for women's healthcare to be more complicated and unequal compared to mens.
Here's another article with more specifics:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-hospital-childbearing-age-b2425613.html
I found a few medications that could qualify for what she was looking at but it seems like a shift in doctors turned into this "cluster" of a situation. Not sure if the medication has the same level of birth control requirements as Accutane which is one of the strictest (and maybe the lack of specifics is because it isn't as strict) but in this article she mentions both abortion and her partners vasectomy which would be two methods up top. It doesn't seem like his concern is that she isn't on a hormonal method as well, but obviously it's one sided.
It's just a pattern of reducing the autonomy of women and anyone else with a uterus. Even the Accutane requirement is above and beyond in restricting medication use due to the potential of a future fetus.
Oh, I missed the part about the partner's vasectomy! Yeah, then this is absolutely messed up.
But I disagree that this issue can only be about a potential future fetus. I think the doctor's point about abortion access no longer being such a sure thing, anymore, is a valid one. We recently saw how quickly the access we once assumed was guaranteed suddenly *wasn'*t.
One of medicine's guiding principles is supposed to be about minimizing risks and avoiding harm; even putting any concerns about the fetus itself, aside, having to deal with an unexpected and defective pregnancy certainly carries its own health risks (even moreso if those defects pose risks to the mother's health), and going through the process of getting an abortion is going to be fraught with its own stresses, not to mention the risks of complications from the procedure.
So I don't think it's wrong or unethical for a medical professional to want to go a preventative, proactive route rather than rely on a potential abortion if the unlikely came to pass as a way of minimizing overall risks (but it certainly doesn't look like that was the case, here, given her partner has a vasectomy).
By that logic though, she could be assaulted and end up pregnant at any time. Anyone with a uterus would never be allowed to take any medication that could have any negative effect on a fetus they don't currently carry.
Or if the doctor had said it was important to take preventative meds, rather than not prescribe it at all there might be a case. But that doesn't seem to be what happened.
FYI of the medicines used to treat cluster headaches, I believe the one in question is topiramate which carries a 1.1% chance of causing cleft palate in the first trimester
I’m still taking this article with FAR more salt than almost everyone else in this thread because not once was the specific medication in question mentioned, but of the prophylactic medications meant to try controlling cluster headaches, Topamax is the one most likely to cause birth defects as far as I’m aware
Why are you unable to take the article seriously without knowing the specific medication? I'm not sure that it matters, considering she's not planning on getting pregnant and even if there were severe risks, there should simply be extra hoops to jump through like those described in other comments for prescribing Accutane. It just seems like an odd sticking point to me.
I'm unfortunately not surprised by this. Consider that Tara presumably explicitly asked for this medication after doing her own research -- I doubt the doctor brought it up only to poo-poo it on such flimsy grounds to her face. How much more common must it be for women who don't independently research medications that may effectively treat their symptoms, whose doctors simply never bring up medications that could bring them relief due to the hypothetical possibility of the fetus? Is it any wonder that those who turn to so-called "alternative medicine" are overwhelmingly women when doctors willfully avoid effective treatments like this?
The overturning of Roe is definitely making these situations more common in the US, but it's not unique to that at all. Let's not forget the WHO draft guidance, which advocated for "women of childbearing age", which WHO defines as from 15 to 50, to be the focus of alcohol prevention efforts. As always, those who can even hypothetically give birth are exclusively viewed as potential baby receptacles and are treated as such. The US abortion legislation only accentuates and amplifies what is already there underlyingly.
Honestly sometimes I wonder that young girls aren't pescribed folic acid supplements pre-emptively, just in case.
I shared a second source in another post that suggests her doctor retired and the new one is the one that had the issues, I need to re-read but I wasn't sure if the previous doc has been planning to prescribe it or not. But obviously that didn't happen.
I’m very suspicious about this article and woman to be honest
Not once is the life saving medication mentioned by name, and the fact that she was “fired” from the facilities absolutely screams that she was misbehaving to me. Hospitals don’t usually just fire patients without a ton of abuse
Also the fact that she’s wearing a shirt with f*cking on it makes me suspicious of her personality, in addition to the fact that she was recording her appointments. Whether you live in a one party consent state or not, it’s just kind of rude to film a provider without asking first
I’m all for abortion rights, but this just seems like the issues are much deeper than those…
Edit: to be clear, I don’t care what gender you are. If you’re wearing a shirt with profanity then people will likely be more dismissive of you. And if you feel the need to record a medical interaction, you always have the right to look for a different provider. While I do think the provider in question made some bad judgment calls and I don’t necessarily agree with their rationale, they do still have the right to provide medical care however they see fit. If you don’t want to support physicians with mindsets such as the one in the article, then don’t use them and leave reviews and such online
Why does a woman have to fit a perfect mold to be believed? If she was wearing a traditional sundress and spoke with calm deference in the face of clear discrimination, would you then scold her for not being assertive enough or some other imagined shortcoming?
This happens all the time to women across America, to the point that several commenters have expressed a complete lack of surprise at this headline. It's not a far fetched claim and I could understand not being a "model patient" if I were suffering from pain severe enough to make me lose consciousness and being told I couldn't receive medication because of a hypothetical fetus. Who cares what she's wearing? She should be treated with dignity just the same.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-hospital-childbearing-age-b2425613.html
This article made me actually far more certain about her. The nurse practitioner who discharged her wrote contradictory information in the records (claiming she was discharged due to reduced pain and then also that she was escorted out), replied to a negative review and seems to have been found in violation by state regulators for the HIPAA violation.
It's Jezebel, so I understand being suspicious but, as someone that would wear a shirt with curse words, I think that's a particularly weird thing to determine one's character by. If it's a one party consent state, that's legal, and she was recording alleged discrimination that would otherwise be impossible to prove.
I'd add that people in acute pain episodes are often not the nicest. People who deal with chronic pain are often poorly treated by emergency rooms who see them as drug seeking. She was probably not a model patient and if she records videos, her actions may have been misunderstood as live streaming. (Or maybe she's lying about that and that was legit, still doesn't ok the HIPAA violation or the discrimination)
Edit: I generally just think that focusing on possible rudeness and a curse word on a shirt in the face of discrimination is so unevenly weighted as to be a complete red herring.
Yeah i wear obnoxious tshirts, too, but its more in response to being treated poorly. I finally realized people are dismissive of youngish women with invisible medical problems no matter what your shirt says, so i may as well wear what i want.
I'd go further than that and call it misogyny. "This woman isn't presenting herself the way I think she should/in a traditional way, therefore there's clearly something wrong with her and the system probably treated her accordingly."
Those types of people come off as rude a day unnecessarily hostile in real life regardless of gender.
I mean if we had a subculture of people who wrote in only ALL CAPS WOULD THAT START TO PREDISPOSE HOW YOU READ AND JUDGE THEM? WHEN YOU READ THIS DOES IT FEEL LIKE YOUR INNER MONOLOGUE IS SCREAMING IN YOUR HEAD? HOW ABOUT IF I START RANDOMILY MISWRITING WORDS? CUZ THISIS JUTS HOWS I WRIT?
Idk I've been reading L33T since I was a teen so that's a stylistic choice but it doesn't make you more likely to be a liar? I might find you annoying but annoying people can still be victims.
I've been harassed at Costco for wearing a "Abortion is Healthcare" t-shirt but no one harassed the dude wearing a pretty blatant sexual comment on his shirt literally in the same aisle. I noticed since the irony was weird. I maintain there's misogyny involved but also just weird "act right or you deserve to be abused" attitude.
I THINK IF I TALK LIKE THIS AND WRITE LIKE THIS IT MIGHT HARM WHATEVER CAUSE IM TRYING TO SUPP9RT. YOU WOT GIT ANY ARGUMENT FROM ME THAT I CAN TOTALLY BE A VICTIM WHILE SPECKIN LIK DIS. WHEN I DEBATE PEOPLE I LIK TO WEAR MY C**T SUPTEME TSHIRT SO THEY KNOW I MEAN BIZAND IM THE B WITH THE RIZZ.
I guess what I'm trying to get at is that unfortunately even obviously correct opinions (i.e. abortion is healthcare, don't be mysoginist) requires some level of advertisement and salesmanship to convince people. Think about that man at Costco, he probably didn't have any male role model to teach him otherwise, and he's probably surrounded by like minded people. Getting into a shouting match isn't ever going to be beneficial for you or him, and to reach people like him requires a different approach.
I don't know, this has shades of "I would support their cause if only they would protest the way I want them to protest." If the cause is just, that should be enough. Anything else seems like a convenient excuse to continue ignoring the issue by criticizing the marginalized group.
Also, I'd like to point out that you're pretty quick to defend Costco man but critical of a woman for wearing what's probably an equally offensive shirt (the one in the original article, not the innocuous political statement the other commenter was harassed for). What's the difference in conduct here? Why is there no defense for her via role models or like minded peers? Why is her attitude in need of adjustment if she wants her issues taken seriously, yet he's allowed to be publicly vulgar and society shrugs and moves on?
You have way more patience than I do. Thank you.
To be clear it was an older woman who harassed me (she chased me around the aisle on a scooter telling me "It's murder!". And I told her to "have a day" in response because I really just wanted some boba ice cream bars.) There was however a teenage dude in the aisle with a sexual phrase on his shirt fully unmolested.
I am never trying to change the mind of lady yelling at someone in the Costco aisle. And trust me how aware I am of how "polite" chronic pain patients - and their families - have to be to be taken seriously. I have had to be the one that speaks with providers when my partner is no longer able to be courteous.
But neither her pithy T-shirt nor caps lock would excuse discrimination. And if a doctor decided that its ok to discriminate because of it (or because of anything) I hope the courts teach him otherwise.
I'm tired of people not being the "perfect" victims. It doesn't matter what her shirt said.
Hi OP, could you please tag this as USA? Thank you!
Edit: Saw it was added, much appreciated!
Pinging @mycketforvirrad usually does the job ;)
Added.
Sorry, would have taken care of when I woke up, thanks for the reminder.