A Question
Oct. 12th, 2007 08:04 pmI have seen, as I travel to and fro in the net I keep seeing something I don't understand.
Women telling men they really don't want to look behind the curtain at TMI posts about menstruation.
Now, I understand warning people about TMI posts. Descriptions of the details of surgeries, accidents and all manner of gruesome goings on are not for everyone.
What I don't understand is why that single topic gets that warning.
Are men, as a class, that easily squicked?
Women telling men they really don't want to look behind the curtain at TMI posts about menstruation.
Now, I understand warning people about TMI posts. Descriptions of the details of surgeries, accidents and all manner of gruesome goings on are not for everyone.
What I don't understand is why that single topic gets that warning.
Are men, as a class, that easily squicked?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:16 am (UTC)I just don't get it.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:24 am (UTC)As a woman, I've always gotten that impression. I always secretly wonder if, unlike surgeries and accidents which could happen to anybody, it's really more fear of the blood-like unknown.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:40 am (UTC)...or was that TMI?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:44 am (UTC)TK
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 04:35 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 04:47 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 05:19 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 06:01 am (UTC)And I think there's a streak of the fear of sexual activity in their reaction. Look at how such topics have been tagged as pornography by net-filter services.
I think it's a consequence of a wider pattern of broken thinking about sexual matters. Not all men, maybe not even many men, but too many to be ignored. A mixed blessing of the Internet is that it lets groups of statistical freaks get together and get attention.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 06:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 06:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:01 am (UTC)It's surprising. And it can be surprising who reacts like this. And the tone can vary.
One can say - I mean, I run my life in general on the principal of avoiding people who'll behave like that, so as to spend less time taking them into account, but in the event it's just surprising who feels entitled NEVER to hear about feminine hygiene.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:15 am (UTC)Sometimes I think the assumption that men will be squicked is more a reflection of how women feel about it themselves, than how men feel about it. I know that when I put something TMI behind a cut (not very often, admittedly) I'm aware of feeling vaguely embarrassed about the TMI stuff, along with the wish to give readers a choice about whether they want to read it or not.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:14 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 02:49 pm (UTC)Speaking for myself, women tend to be more comfortable discussing ob/gyn issues.
A lot of military men, at least the ones I've worked with, seem to be really squicked by it.
DV (who used it recently)
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:10 pm (UTC)Even more annoying to me is how clueless some guys are about the indignities and discomforts of gynecology. They claim they know exactly what a Pap smear is like because they have prostate exams. Um, no, not the same.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 03:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 06:33 pm (UTC)I had a drill Sgt who insisted that feminine hygiene products, while required for our wall locker display, had to be displayed in such a way that he couldn't see them, ever. Of course, I also met a sisterless man who seriously thought that hygiene pads went sticky side up. At least he had thought about it.
I will agree it isn't men *as a class* but the class of people who are seriously squicked beyond bearing is mostly men.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 07:43 pm (UTC)I don't deny that men's experiences with doctors can sometimes be uncomfortable and humiliating, but I've never heard a guy talk about being slut-shamed, lied to, overruled about his own body, leered at or disbelieved about his own medical history as much as all the women who talk about their hellish experiences with gynecology in these 2 posts.
http://naamah-darling.livejournal.com/284513.html
http://naamah-darling.livejournal.com/285263.html
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 08:15 pm (UTC)At least he didn't think tampons were for wearing all the time. There's a lot of unclear on the concept going around, sadly.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:13 pm (UTC)I think that in some cases, there are men who really can't deal with the fact that women's bodies are -women's- bodies and that there's a lot more to having girlparts than being... umm... fuckable? I've met folks who just don't want to hear about it because it takes away from their comfort in not knowing what many women deal with every single month. There's an odd combination of guilt and anger mixed up with each other that turns into something of a taboo around it. It's frustrating to be around this, because it's so taboo that it's invisible, and you can't talk about what you're not talking about, eh?
I used to coddle men about this, until a former partner of mine made such a big deal of it and carried on so much about it that I lost my patience for good. He'd carry on and on and on about how "noone" wanted to have relations when they were bleeding, which is simply and plainly not true. (Hint... try asking people and listening to them - it's a great way to learn facts. Some women do want to, some women don't want to. Some might not know till the day is there. People vary in what they wish.)
After enough of this nonsense, I lost it. I mean, everyone came into the world through a woman's blood, and none of us would be hear without women's blood. So people who get weird and nasty about it are people I don't coddle anymore. People who get weird about this tend to have other behaviors that I do not wish to be around, so if I lose contact with them for lack of coddling them, I end up coming out ahead anyway.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 09:41 pm (UTC)Sadly, it generally does at least a tiny bit of what it's intended to do, which is make the woman in question feel nasty, shameful and gross.
Also, a small percentage of those who are NOT squicked about it use it as an excuse to talk about how much they don't mind having sex during their partner's period. Which under those circs is basically another form of sexualising women's bodies: "well, hey, I've got cramps so bad I can't breathe but at least now I know it wouldn't put you, Mr Almost Total Stranger, off fucking me. How ... nice."
no subject
Date: 2007-10-13 11:38 pm (UTC)The problem for women, is indeed, as you say that they are frequently lied to, disparaged and so on And that is hellish.. Yet men can find themselves humiliated, insulted and so on by physicians too. Not necessarily sexually -- it being assumed that you have the IQ of a rock when your skin is darker than pink is not sexual -- but humilation just the same.
I can remember one physical where the physician, after asking me what I did and being told decided that I couldn't be a college professor and must be a student and put that in his notes. This was after he got very upset when he came in saying 'Hello, Fragano, I'm Dr X' (I forget his name) and I said, 'In that case, I'm Dr Ledgister'. He seemed to think that I was presumptuous or dishonest. I thought he was patronising and rude. It didn't make for a pleasant experience. Certainly not as harrowing as the ones descibed in those posts, nowhere near, but very uncomfortable.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 05:47 am (UTC)In my experience it only takes one or two instances of being loudly and publicly treated like you've rolled in dog shit to make you very leery of letting any man anywhere near you when you feel vulnerable.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 07:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 07:21 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-14 11:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 03:23 am (UTC)I went behind the cut, and it was just stuff. There wasn't anything to add, so I didn't, but it was one of those things were I realised how often I saw it, and how it never was off-putting.
TK
no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 03:27 am (UTC)In some cases (esp. as relates to non-rheumatologists dealing with my auto-immune disorder) this leads to them asking me questions.
The only physician I've ever had treat me as an object was the internist who diagnosed my Reiters. The second, and third time I saw him he was more human (though both times he treated me, sort of, as property).
And yeah, I expect a reciprical level of respect. In military hospitals it's actually pretty good. Doctors tend to not wear rank as much as they could, and to have what, appears, to be a real repsect for the patient (as a rule).
TK
no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 05:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 05:25 am (UTC)Degrees of Attitude seem to vary greatly by individual, locale (Kaiser HMO apparently puts its MDs & Nurses through a stiff PR indoctrination course), MedSchool & Internship, and era -- the past twenty years have seen a big change in the expected Style in which the doctor-patient relationship is handled. Mostly for the better, I think, though I've had a couple of doctors who didn't ask enough questions, or the right ones, and many patients have even less medical/health awareness than I do. (And then there was the one doctor who didn't realize that a pain in the arm-pit might suggest angina even if it didn't "radiate down the arm" [which seems to be the key phrase from the textbooks].) Mind you, I'm okay with doctors who look at me and see only the symptoms/disease, as long as they do a good repair job. One of the reasons I like Kaiser HMO is that anything serious gets several doctors in on it, and they pay more attention to the welfare of the patient than to the Face of any of themselves.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-15 06:00 am (UTC)