[-] dandelion 5 points 5 hours ago

I'm not sure I'm old enough to answer this, but retirement scares me, and I basically don't know if retirement is financially likely or reasonable. Even if you invest enough into a 401k early enough, you have a pretty good chance of having serious health problems at some point in life that will probably take most of that money.

Basically the situation is bleak, so I try to focus on doing what I can to improve my situation without dooming about what I can't control.

[-] dandelion 5 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

My depression was lifted dramatically, but not by anti-depressants (I had a hormone issue), so for me a bunch of symptoms went away at once and in it's place I felt normal, effortlessly happy more frequently, and life just wasn't as hard - I felt more motivated to do things, I didn't need weeks of recovery after a stressful event, I didn't need a weekend of social isolation after going to a grocery store. I had less of a tendency to need or crave simple rewards, like food or video games. Food became less necessary as a reward, and my behavior towards food became less obsessive.

There was a sense of feeling so "normal" and like what you imagine other people must feel like. You start to understand why your colleagues and others in your life don't seem to be struggling so much, how they can fit so much into their lives.

I didn't really understand depression until these experiences - I thought what I experienced was just normal up until then, and blamed myself for being lazy or grumpy or ill-tempered by nature, rather than suffering from depression and other issues.

I have taken buproprion before, and it made me have mood swings where I became manic and filled with energy, then inevitably I would crash and feel awful. It also gave me TMJ from all the extra grinding my teeth were doing, so I had to quit (so painful!).

38
submitted 5 hours ago by dandelion to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

been thinking about all the little moments tucked away in my memories that are a world unknowable to those younger than me, so consider this an opportunity to reminisce over old times, but also to ask those about the times you did not live through.

I guess my question for those older than me is: before computers, how did you learn to do something?

Did access to knowledge change your life, was a constraint lifted when you no longer depended on having found the right books or people to learn tips on how to cook a new dish, or how to fix a plumbing problem, or how to plant a garden?

Was life more simple, did you have fewer problems to solve without technology in your life, or did technology make life easier?

[-] dandelion 1 points 6 hours ago

it's horrible, I agree 😄

[-] dandelion 6 points 9 hours ago

There are like 1 in 100 people born trans, a similar number born intersex. It's as common as having green eyes or having red hair.

Regardless, I figure the scientists are probably looking at this with more detail and seriousness than either of us.

[-] dandelion 5 points 9 hours ago

wasn't aware the sexism was intended as a light-hearted joke, my bad apparently

[-] dandelion 3 points 9 hours ago

gender dysphoria is not what I'm talking about, since not all transgender people have dysphoria

right, I get that, but most research has not treated being trans outside the context of gender dysphoria, so when talking about studies or the clinical and scientific context usually non-binary and non-dysphoric trans folks are left out of the picture.

It is good to be expansive in our concept of being trans for social justice reasons, and to not gatekeep for harm reduction reasons, but since scientists and clinicians are gatekeepers, what we can say about their findings are limited to the criteria they use. It is usually more accurate to say "a study found X or Y about people with gender dysphoria", even though it's not uncommon for that to be presented as "a study found X or Y about trans people" in more mainstream contexts.

To be clear -- "transgender" the noun is not referring to a person ("that person is a transgender"* -- proscribed) but rather as a substitute for "transgenderism"* (proscribed).

I have never seen this usage, and like you I'm skeptical that is right. I could see "being transgender" as a substitute for "transgenderism", but not just "transgender".

but it's also clearly not purely genetic, given there are identical twins where one is cis and the other not.

The presence of identical twins where one is cis and one is trans is not proof that gender identity is not genetic - there are many reasons people do not transition or acknowledge their gender identity, such as the strong social pressure to not be trans. There can also be epigenetic differences so while identical twins may share a genome, how it is expressed differs based on a variety of conditions that alter epigenetics, such as stress or illness.

We see the same with sexual orientation by the way.

[-] dandelion 5 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

I think in clinical and scientific contexts the term "gender dysphoria" is used, but the trans community would probably prefer trans be used as an adjective and not a noun, someone is transgender, but not "a transgender", if that makes sense.

also, the twin studies show gender identity is genetic and heritable:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_gender_incongruence

The significant percentage of identical twin pairs in which both twins are trans and the virtual absence of dizygotic twins (raised in the same family at the same time) in which both were trans would provide evidence that transgender identity is significantly influenced by genetics if both sets were raised in different families.

In 2018 a review of family and twin studies found that there was "significant and consistent evidence" for gender identity being genetically heritable.

[-] dandelion 23 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

ironically philosophy majors perform better on graduate school entrance exams like the LSAT and GREs than most other majors, and philosophy graduates tend to be more successful and be better earners than other majors, notably than business major graduates

arugably, philosophy is one of the better majors in terms of outcomes

https://philosophy.unc.edu/undergraduate/the-major/why-major-in-philosophy/

[-] dandelion 5 points 12 hours ago

just a reminder that Newsweek is a conspiracy-peddling, right-wing rag that we should not be driving traffic to

[-] dandelion 6 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

look, we work very hard on being reactionary here in the U.S., we're a world leader in reactionary politics, and not teaching math well is crucial to keeping a vibrant ~~slave~~ worker population, otherwise they might start, you know, thinking for themselves

19
submitted 15 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) by dandelion to c/askscience@lemmy.world

Hi, I've maintained and used a sourdough starter many years of my life, and I've tried different methods of making the stater. For a while, I would make my bread and then pinch a piece of it off (a "levain") and let that function as my sourdough starter for the next loaf.

More recently, I feed a cup of sourdough starter with flour and water each day, and after a few days when it gets old enough, I start a new one using a small amount of the sourdough as a "seed" and discard the rest (usually I make bread with it).

My question is about the seed - if a sourdough starter has a variety of microbes, the way I seed the next starter might have an impact, it's a form of selection.

Since they are microbes, I assume there are many of them in the sourdough and I don't need much to get "enough" of a sample to keep a healthy culture going - I just stir a spoon in the old sourdough, then use that same spoon (with the little bit of sourdough stuck to the spoon) to stir the new sourdough's flour and water together, and that's it.

But I keep thinking about how this might be a kind of selection - and I was wondering if there is a significant difference in, for example, a levain method of pinching off a piece of the whole and the microbial sampling that has vs the sampling from just not cleaning off the spoon when stirring the old and then the new.

I would imagine the levain has a greater likelihood of all the microbes being present, while a single spoonful might constitute a more narrow subset of microbes? Or maybe the microbes are distributed evenly enough in the sourdough that a spoonful represents as broad a sample as a pinched off piece?

I haven't noticed any obvious, practical differences in how the starter is made, but I'm wondering if a theoretical, significant difference exists.

I guess some of this paranoia comes from thinking about Zeno's paradox, the 100 prisoner problem, and the Monty Hall problem.

A levain seems more likely to contain a small amount of each kind of microbe (since the whole is incorporated and then mixed well before being divided into a part) than the approach of starting a new starter from a single spoonful (which necessarily selects only a subset first from the whole - a subset which may or may not be as evenly distributed as from a levain).

In practice this probably makes no difference, but maybe there could be minor ways a spoon would preference some kinds of microbes over others (maybe if the spoon were made of silver, for example, the microbes that survive contact with the silver would be more likely to carry on to future generations?).

Anyway, thoughts? (Other than about my mental fitness, lol.)

[-] dandelion 21 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

The peaks do not designate "cis", you can be cis and fall anywhere on the chart - being cis is about the sex you were arbitrarily assigned at birth (and whether that assignment aligns or conflicts with your actual gender identity).

And when doctors change assignments, it's really unclear whether you're cis or not if you transition - e.g. a baby assigned female at birth who is then weeks later assigned male at birth later transitions to be a girl, she was originally assigned female at birth - is she trans or cis?

Instead the peaks represent the most common combination of male and female sex traits in humans, with the slopes representing less common combinations of traits, e.g. to the left of the male peak might be men who experience excessive androgenization like lots of body hair, maybe precocious puberty, early balding, and so on (more male traits than average).

This chart as a model of sex actually doesn't make much sense, since sex has been redefined in light of how complex sex is and the differences in sexual development that occur.

Where on the chart would we put someone with complete androgen insensitivity syndrome (CAIS)? With CAIS a person is born with XY chromosomes and thus has a typical male karyotype, but their androgen receptors do not respond to androgens, so none of the masculinization is able to occur - leading the person to look, develop, and usually live as a woman.

The chart implies a spectrum, when the reality of biological sex is much more complex than a simple spectrum would allow - more like a constellation. Each sex differentiated trait is an axis / spectrum of its own, and there are thousands of ways differentiation can happen.

EDIT: oh, and to answer your question, it sounds like your question is really whether the peaks on a bimodal distribution represent a smaller number than the tails in aggregate, and the answer is that it depends on how you select your aggregates and how much of the peak you lump together. I think the entire point of the bimodal distribution, though, is to show that the majority fall on the peaks while the tails represent a minority.

That said, a MRI study found that when examining brain sex, >90% of people (mostly cis) were not able to be classed as having fully male or female brains, so realistically I think it's fair to say most people are sexually divergent in some way.

[-] dandelion 25 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

sort of like the reactionary trend of pulling your kids out of school because Common Core has changed how math is taught so critical thinking and conceptual understanding is incorporated, rather than teaching math by rote memorization?

303
butter rule (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 day ago by dandelion to c/onehundredninetysix
195
glass ceiling (lemmy.blahaj.zone)
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by dandelion to c/witchesvspatriarchy@lemmy.ca
98
submitted 3 days ago by dandelion to c/mtf

I've been saying, "I was born without a uterus", which so far seems to answer honestly without directly outing myself as trans.

Any thoughts on how to best navigate this? Ideally without disclosing I'm trans 😅

139
submitted 1 week ago by dandelion to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Might help also to describe what you think feminism is, since it's one of those terms that is overloaded.

I once had a physical therapist tell me she wasn't a feminist because she thought women couldn't be as physically capable as men when serving as soldiers, and seemed to believe feminism requires treating women exactly like men.

I told her I was a feminist because I believe in equal rights for men and women, an idea she did not seem so opposed to.

55
submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by dandelion to c/trans

The way I understand my feelings and experiences has changed so much pre vs post transition.

I wanted to see what other small misconceptions you all had from pre-transition that you see differently now, or that maybe you wish you had understood before.

There are so many to choose from, but I'll start:

Probably as a coping mechanism I never saw the gendered components to my self-loathing.

For example, I hated my breasts because they were malformed-looking, to me. I would sometimes think, if I were a woman it would be worse (like the same, but larger), but I never once thought having a flat chest would be better. Instead I seemed to need to feel having female breasts would be worse, so I could feel better about my situation.

Or how I always loved how little hair was on my body, but never thought that was abnormal. I never got back hair and only had thin hair on my belly and a small, thin strip on my sternum. I never thought of this in terms of gender, I never thought about how my body ideal was curvy and hairless, or feminine. It bothered me when I was compared to male beauty icons, but I never could quite be honest with myself as to why.

I ignored (or repressed) the gender in everything, but it was still there.

So my misconception was about gender itself, I thought of it as primarily social and malleable, and thus was some great social evil, gender was The Enemy or The Problem.

Now gender is extremely important to me, but before I would say being a man was irrelevant to me, or even obviously unwanted - it was a moral choice, to be a woman was to be a better person in my mind, to abandon a toxic social role in favor of an enlightened one.

Now I think you can't really choose, that we have these implicit gendered feelings that we can't really change, and so being a woman feels good to me because of what I am, and now being a woman is just a precious gift, rather than a moral imperative.

I totally botched this post, I wanted this to be succinct and lost my sense of purpose and have rambled along.

Looking forward to hearing from you all. 💚

52
submitted 1 month ago by dandelion to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

have been wondering recently what my blind spots are, what are beliefs I have that are unexamined or based on too little evidence for how much I believe them ...

maybe there are common patterns, that people commonly believe false things and I might be challenged in my own beliefs this way

62
submitted 1 month ago by dandelion to c/mtf

Just wondering what moments of gender euphoria or joy you have experienced, was hoping we all might enjoy hearing some positive stories!

I'll start: today, I went to my laser hair removal place to reschedule an appointment and nobody was at the front desk, and after waiting for a while I went to use the ladies room and ran into a woman even taller than me who immediately called me gorgeous and then proceeded to compliment my makeup, earrings, and hair. I was like a deer in the headlights, simply stunned as if I had slipped into an alternate universe where this complete stranger was actually a close friend and I had forgotten. Nobody is that nice to me, let alone a stranger.

Anyway, women can be so wonderful, and this moment made me grateful to be a woman. 😊

81
submitted 1 month ago by dandelion to c/mtf

What is something you learned or experienced from being trans that you wish you knew pre-transition, or that you wish cis people knew?

I'll go first: the temperature differences when going from testosterone-dominance to estrogen-dominance is not just real but significant, my body just puts out less heat and I feel colder much easier now even when otherwise maintaining a high metabolism, eating in excess, etc.

It may have just been my trans denial before, but I really wanted to believe that the difference was not that great and I was wrong.

What's something you wish people knew?

278
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by dandelion to c/mtf

I missed this news somehow (the article is from July 1st):

A judge has thrown out the case of a 20-year-old trans woman who was arrested in Florida for washing her hands in a women’s bathroom.

Prosecutors reportedly failed to meet the deadline for filing charging documents against Marcy Rheintgen after she was arrested while protesting the state’s anti-trans bathroom ban. A Leon County judge granted her lawyer’s motion to dismiss the misdemeanor trespassing charge.

In case you didn't know the background:

In March, Rheintgen informed Florida lawmakers of her plan to enter the state’s Capitol building and use the restroom, even including a photo of herself so they knew who to look for. She never thought police would actually arrest her, despite the fact that the move broke the 2023 law.

...

Nevertheless, two cops met her at the restroom, but she decided to go in anyway. At first, they told her they would just give her a notice to appear before the judge. But they then reported she became “sassy” and indicated she may use the women’s bathroom again, so they arrested her.

...

Florida’s bathroom ban criminalizes anyone who uses a toilet or changing facility that doesn’t match the sex they were assigned at birth. It applies to public schools, universities, parks, prisons, and other government buildings but not to businesses and healthcare facilities.

The law only applies to facilities run by the state, but transgender and nonbinary Floridians have nonetheless been confronted, harassed, and intimidated in public restrooms located inside private businesses.

8
submitted 1 month ago by dandelion to c/polyamory@lemmy.world

I have a friend who is HIV positive and was distressed when turned down sex with someone they have a sexual history with because they joined a polycule that as a rule don't allow members to have sex with anyone with HIV.

Wondering what the thoughts are here about that.

view more: next ›

dandelion

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF