all 11 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 42 points 1 year ago (1 child)

So men can’t get breast cancer because they don’t have breasts?

*Looks in mirror : what the hell are these then?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 36 points 1 year ago

    As a child of a man who had to get a mastectomy because of breast cancer: Fuck Trump.

  • source
  • [–] 30 points 1 year ago*

    TIL men don't have breasts because MAGA said so.

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Support the troops!

    Until they need help. Then fuck ‘em.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago

    Boy I really hope a certain President of a certain USA doesn’t get breast cancer in his very noticeable bitch tits.

  • source
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    When you think there is no sinking lower:
    Cutting people's benefits - despicable but kinda predictable.
    “restoring biological truth” what the actual hell?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    We really need Sterling Archer to go on a rampage right now.

    He didnt take shit about his own breast cancer.

  • source
  • 13 comments in c/politics@lemmy.world view that post
    [–] 38 points 1 year ago

    "I've got nipples, Greg. Can you medically obfuscate my diagnosis?"

  • source
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago

    This is why anti trans ideology hurts everyone eventually

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Men have mammary glands. They are just underdeveloped. If given the right combination of hormones, a man would be able to produce milk, albeit very little. We all have breasts. Some are just bigger than others. Cancer doesn't care how big your mamms are, though.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    Cancer doesn’t care how big your mamms are, though.

    It kind of does, but only quantitatively. The bigger the more likely. But yeah even cis males with relatively normal hormone levels do get breast cancer sometimes.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    The article seems to be saying that the VA is no longer classifying breast cancer in men as a "reproductive organ" cancer, and therefore it's no longer eligible for automatic coverage in some contexts the way that other cancers of the reproductive system are. I'm not sure why this is an issue, because I've never heard of any ideological claims about male breasts which the Trump administration might wish to oppose.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Trans people can't get their documentation reverted in many cases, leaving them in limbo. Women have dead babies rotting inside them, and no matter how bad you might imagine that to be... It's probably worse

    These aren't intended consequences... They're terribly written laws full of threats. They're made to hurt people, so when they write something like "the VA will not treat sexual organs not present in the birth sex or face 2 years of jail time", that's vague enough that second sexual characteristics might apply

    The laws are unclear, because obviously males can have boobs... It's a thing that happens regardless on gender or HRT. It's uncommon, but way more common than being intersex. And men can get breast cancer without their boobs developing... The odds are way lower, but it happens

    So combine the fact they don't want to acknowledge anything that calls into question the binary nature of sex (leading to wordings that don't conform with reality) and the punishments they put in there...

    You get very nervous legal compliance people erring on the side of caution, which means even more people not getting treatment than intended

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    Especially when, even if you're not found guilty of actually breaking the law, you can still be brought to your medical board over these laws. They're MEANT to be vague, meant to be open to a million interpretations, just like old poll tests, just like Jim Crow laws, just like a hundred other things.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    From what I could find, gynecomastia (the medical term for breasts on amab people) is not required for breast cancer. Therefor any human can develop breast cancer, as long as they are born with mammary glands, which is essential everyone.

    Gynecomastia is linked with an increased chance of breast cancer in males though.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I suspect they're dumb enough to think the combination of the word "male" with "breast" is radical woke leftist trans DEI feminist gay communist ideology that threatens the very existence of real traditional straight cis white Christian wife-beating beer-guzzling gun-toting truckosexual men.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    the VA is no longer classifying breast cancer in men as a “reproductive organ” cancer

    That's a political, not a scientific, classification. Women without breasts can still reproduce, so breasts are not reproductive organs in a strict sense for either of the main genders.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    I lost a close male relative to breast cancer and he had been in the US Navy. It can happen to anyone and with men, it's often not diagnosed until it's too late due to the stigma and general lack of awareness that it's a thing.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Mom, a former-nurse, who ended-up working in Canada's federal-disability program as its chief file-fixer,

    told me that breast-cancer gets both women & men,

    but because in men it's got sooo little distance to critical-organs, it is much less survivable, for men, on average.

    By the time you discover it, .. usually it's too-late, & you're a goner.

    Typical sadism, by the ideologues' part, it is..

    This is going to get FAR worse, & it isn't going to "get better".

    Humankind's running-away-from responsibility is an addiction, & it'll just keep fighting for its totalitarian-dominion.

    Ever seen a addict fighting against their unconscious-mind's junk-addiction, when their unconscious-mind's addiction's committed to breaking their life, to "prove who's BOSS", & they .. just get destroyed, & dead?

    Humankind's doing that, globally..

    it isn't quite obvious-enough, yet, but in a few more years, there won't be any more "time for thinking", because it'll all be reacting-time, to the rampaging ideologies that are highjacking everything..

    People who reject evidence, gaslighting about "biological truth"..

    Typical..

    _ /\ _

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 9 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [+] 74 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago

    It's obnoxious that this was all brought about from a law using "reproductive" to describe cancers rather than just saying "cancers in the breasts or genitals". Lawyer seems to be one of the go to professions for aspiring politicians and then they just fuck up people's lives with imprecise language.

    Also, trans women can breast feed their children. Are they women in the eyes of the VA? And if not aren't their "male" breasts reproductive?

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    While the "reproductive cancer" thing is ridiculous, I want to know why the fuck the VA is pointing cancer treatment at all???

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment