I work in a sexual health clinic...ama

[Hereandthereandeverywhere]

Go for it! Nothing is too much

Inclusive doesn't mean 'women only' - it means it's for everyone. 'Exclusive' might mean women only.

“Women’s health care” should be, though.

It is if you’re purporting to recognise women’s unique health care needs though

This thread is making my skin crawl a bit.

Isn't a sexual health clinic for everyone though? Yes, they should make provision for women's unique needs - and for men's.

EDI involves difficult conversations, grey spaces, balancing acts. There's a poster upthread who uses terms like "chestfeeding" as inclusive but will alter to breastfeeding if someone wants. But warns that her service prioritised "inclusive" language.
That's not what inclusivity means, though. Inclusivity involves understanding there are a range of valid views , not one correct inclusive view and you put up with the bigots too because your policy says you have to

This is post I was replying to originally.

so - apparently, being inclusive means “understanding there are a range of valid views”. And somehow using the terms “chest feeding” but changing to “breastfeeding” if necessary is doing it all wrong.

And something about bigots.

But DEI is hard but also very important.

For anyone interesting in learning more about sexual health clinics, who they see, what they offer and what happens there, see this link which also includes finding your local clinic (or one further away if you prefer).
There is also a link to support for rape and sexual assault
https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/sexual-health-services/find-a-sexual-health-clinic/

EDI does not mean that. That's precisely my point, that adopting one contentious belief and calling it "correct" and "inclusive" is not actually properly inclusive.

That is a cut-out-and-keep statement @JohnnyMcGrathSaysFuckOff Thanks for putting it so clearly & succinctly!

@HIVpos I've had some pretty painful speculum experiences with female doctors and nurses. And one particular female midwife was plain brutal!

Have you ever come across a late case of syphillis, presenting as dementia? I’m an AHP and care homes have been part of my workload in many of my jobs. There was one such elderly gentleman in one care home. I also sometimes wonder about other residents with atypical dementia ( brain scans not showing typical picture of Alzheimer’s or vascular dementia for example).

Thanks Parma. I think my post t'other night may have been less coherent, hence confusion! 😁

I notice none of the people who claim to be HCPs in sexual health have bothered answering my post about whether female SA victims deserve female-only healthcare.

Women who don't pretend to think men can be women are consistently the only exception to every wonderful quality people like this claim to bestow upon everyone. Non judgemental, honest, respectful, inclusive, for everyone... except for women who don't pretend to think men can be women.

Because they know who the women are!

Not surprised the OP has left, they came here in good faith to inform and have been ambushed in a “Terf” war. I don’t think a man who wears a dress and a string of pearls is a woman either, but sometimes one needs to accept someone else’s views ( as their own) and not be hell bent on negating/ correcting them, especially when they are offering a service as the OP was here.

I'm extremely dubious that OP was the knowledgeable expert they presented themselves to be; the questions they chose not to answer were pretty telling. Almost as telling as the asides about "vultures" and pass agg insistence on using terms that posters explained were offensive (although, as before, there's only one demographic the performatively inclusive are pleased to offend). My more cynical side even wonders if the purpose of the thread was not to have people ask anything (again, some rather key questions were consistently ignored), but to get digs in to that same one demographic.

Well I read it differently, they offered a lot of useful info and advice before the whole thread got shunted into an ideological battle. Unnecessary but sadly predictable.

Some of the advice was questionable. Still, we are all entitled to our views and opinions. Except, of course, for...

No, we don’t need to accept another persons view ever. That’s just an alternative way of telling the little women to be quiet. You’re asking women to be quiet on a thread that can’t even catergorically identify a woman?! You want to thank the OP when she plonks a pre-fix on me that I didn’t ask for? No. Oh and I’ll wear the wear the Terf badge with pride.

As well as incorrect information! Very dangerous.

Op, I'm bi and I do believe this from stuff I've heard. In your experience, are these women often bi? Or lesbian?

OP will have a cream for that!

In good faith….lol. Naive.

Hi OP, if you're still around I have another question. When you do a blood test in your clinic to check for STIs and you are aware that the person already has a BBV like HIV (controlled on meds or not controlled on meds) or Hepatitis B or C do you mark the sample any differently? I understand these are classified as Group 3 and am seeing conflicting information online. Are there any guidelines you could share on this and how are the samples marked?
Thanks

I work in a hospital. I’ve heard several (diabetic) colleagues say that they would rather have HIV than diabetes…. On the basis that HIV is so well treated these days that for many people the virus is below detectable levels because treatment compliance is so good, whilst diabetes still has devastating lasting effects. Does your clinic do HiV monitoring and do these patients really have such low levels of HIV that is no longer effects them?