naught but naught

however. if I hadn’t gotten the hysterectomy back then and was trying to get one now, it would be harder. after becoming recognized as trans in medial systems, legally I would need two separate psychiatric professionals to write letters affirming I’d been under their observation, that I was mentally stable enough to know I wanted the surgery, and that they also believed it was necessary. and I would need to find a surgeon willing to operate on trans people.

like this is the difference. the literal procedures involved in medical transition are not exclusive to trans people. the difference is that these procedures are gatekept from us.

that’s why all the laws banning trans healthcare (in the US, I haven’t read legislation elsewhere) are framing it as only banned when someone has a “gender dysphoria” diagnosis. the point isn’t to stop performing the actual procedures, the point is to deny trans people healthcare because we are trans.

okay so i think i found the article op's (and me in my tags) talking about. being exposed to over 40 celsius (120 farenheit or so) for the whole day means youre sweating a LOT (the article says rashid- the farmer at the centre of the text- drinks around 17 liters a Day. humans usually only need 3, so i presume the rest is mostly used for sweat). so much so that the organizm reroutes water from other parts of itself to not die of heatstroke - salivary glands included, which means that 1. they have very little saliva in comparison to a healthy human being 2. what little their bodies DO produce is incredibly acidic, falling to ~5.5 ph from the ideal of 7ph. Teeth dissolve. Quickly. There's a mention of someone losing 8 teeth in two years

im not reading the whole article now (headache -_-), but later on the author of the article says about 30 million people (employed in agriculture) are at risk for extreme dental health problems. 30 million people at risk of not being able to eat solid food. 30 million people at risk of not being able to find work. being able to marry. being able to be part of their community. being able to speak clearly

Okay, imagine your family or your best friend is going through this right now. They're losing their teeth and hair because they've had to spend most of their time farming under the scorching sun. Do you understand where I'm going with this? Stay with me.

You're worried, so you write a blog post to tell your online friends and community what's happening.

Then someone comes along and says, "Hey, I could get a good grade in my class if I use the information you just shared!" without saying anything else. Without even an ounce of sympathy.

How would you feel if you saw that?

Now imagine you're already familiar with how impudently many people around the world have reacted to the suffering of your people. There are millions of people, both online and offline, who treat your people's suffering as nothing more than collateral damage simply because they live outside Europe and what the rest of the world calls the West.

Could you really respond positively when someone comes to you and says they want to use your suffering to get good grades or as material for their fiction which has happened here?

I don't think it's inappropriate. Desmond Tutu first coined the term "adaptation apartheid" to describe countries' unequal ability to cope with climate change. It's a concept that later became widely known as "climate apartheid."

This man

“there’s a restaurant two miles from my house called—” nope

“today I learned [celeb] went to my high school—” nope nope nope nope nope

these are all real posts I’ve seen on the internet that allowed me to identify a user’s hometown instantly. if it’s a small town, that’s doubly dangerous, because a bad actor could trace you just by a unique first name or selfie you once posted. in an age where doxxing and stalking are some of the worst I’ve ever seen it, you HAVE to think twice about what you’re posting online.

i once saw a 13-year old post an image they noted as being “a few miles from their house.” it had a theater in the shot with a unique enough name to be local. one google maps search, now everyone knew not only what city they lived in, but the possible neighborhoods in that radius too. and they had a HUGE following…who all knew this was a 13-year-old child.

so yeah. not to sound like a 90s internet safety PSA…but I’m gonna be that PSA for a minute.

if you’re posting an image, there is NO need to say that you live there. you could just be traveling. “saw this in Montana” is better than “saw this by my house!”

before you post about a venue, especially a restaurant or small store, check and see if it’s local—CRUCIALLY if it has only one or two locations. people might travel to arenas or convention centers, but they’re far less likely to be traveling to Bartleby’s Fish and Chips. if it’s an anecdote and you still live nearby, you can honestly just leave the name out entirely.

if you’re sharing a news story, it can just be a story you found and wanted to share. you don’t have to clarify “it happened in my town,” because even if you don’t mention your town name, an easily-googled news article will.

if you’re seeing a concert or meeting a celebrity on a tour that’s stopped locally, wait until they’ve hit a few more venues before you post about it, or at the very least wait until you get home. this is honestly a smart move for any event you attend: unless you’re marketing yourself, there’s no need to advertise your location in real time.

check your selfie backgrounds for anything identifying. this includes city names on venues, school names, street signs, and house numbers.

this stuff is flexible if you no longer live in your hometown, or if your city is particularly big, but there’s STILL no reason to tie yourself to your school, your workplace, or your street. you can call it paranoid, but as someone who’s seen my friends get literal death threats over fictional characters before, the last thing I want is someone willing to act on those threats finding out where they live.

I once had a friend post a photo while visiting me with both a unique local business and a set of street signs in the background, while they knew I was being stalked by someone who knew and potentially followed their account. I wasn't in that photo, but other posts from that weekend made it obvious they were staying with me. They hadn't yet been in a position where they regretted having that information publicly available, so it didn't occur to them to avoid sharing it.

Which is to say that I expressed lack of interest in her proposed treatment plan, then she decided without my input that this was a symptom, decided without any evidence that this was a particular symptom that I could not be aware of, and began using the same treatment I doubted to try to resolve the symptom and change my mind