The influential idea that in the past men were hunters and women were not isn’t supported by the available evidence

  • ultranaut@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    It is correct that the worlds of science and medicine have not studied female bodies as well as male bodies. It’s not as bad as it used to be but I think it’s often true that things like recommended doses for drugs are based on assuming “a woman is a small man” rather than actual drug trials involving a significant number of women or any other kind of real data.

    I agree though, if they are making up data to support their claims they have allowed their ideology to corrupt their integrity. It seems like an editor really should have fact checked this before publishing but maybe that’s not how it works these days.

    • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 months ago

      That is 100% true. Medical science treats the male body as “normal” and does most studies on males, and women as the outlier and if the male-designed treatment doesn’t work the same way on women then it’s the woman’s problem. It’s a real fucked up situation and it’s still going on.

      I just don’t think it’s the same for athletics. I’ve done athletics and worked with athletic people of both genders, and it’s absolutely not true that women athletes are just treated as small males. I mean, if that were true and significant, all it would take is one coach who trained women properly and female athletes under their supervision would have a huge advantage over all the other improperly-trained female athletes.

    • MigratingApe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      recommended doses for drugs are based on assuming “a woman is a small man”

      That’s especially true for contraception pills.