monkers
Squire
SJA have now taken down the advice to their crews on 'how to do CPR'. In anticipation of that I took a screenshot.
Gender again. Sorry!
- Thread starter theclaud
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
SJA have now taken down the advice to their crews on 'how to do CPR'. In anticipation of that I took a screenshot.
monkers
Squire
Hardly a pivot. I made the point years ago now in my very first post on the forum. A post in which I urged people to take care over the use of the word ''transgender''. I said the word is ''problematic''. However your ongoing misuse of terminology is willful and deliberate. This is exactly because you have irrational prejudices - also known as bigotry.
The way that you make demands while stamping your tiny foot and going into histrionics, making false accusations against forum posters and telling the most outrageous lies.
You've been called out repeatedly but you never learn - you have zero shame.
Bazzer
Senior Member
I'm a bit puzzled.
As someone who trained others to use CPR and separately the use of a defibrillator, whether on or the unconscious individual had breasts was irrelevant. It was trying to save the life that was important and if clothing got in the way, it got cut.
icowden
Squire
They haven't. It's still there.
I agree with Bazzer that the title is a bit pointless. It's just a CPR instruction sheet. If anything it would have been better to include something in section 5 about saving a life being far more important than modesty.
monkers
Squire
Ah, thanks, it's been put back up. I wonder changes have been made.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
You're deliberately omitting to mention that what caused the upset wasn't the page you linked but the version that called women 'a person with breasts' whilst calling men 'men'.
It has now been updated again, not deleted, and says 'women and other people with breasts', ie men with gynaecomastia for whatever reason - which is more accurate and a bit clearer.
https://www.sja.org.uk/get-advice/h...use-a-defibrillator-on-a-person-with-breasts/
As you didn't think women should be offended by being called 'people with breasts' you can't be offended that men who call themselves women are now 'other people with breasts', which covers all men with fat deposits on their chests.
It has now been updated again, not deleted, and says 'women and other people with breasts', ie men with gynaecomastia for whatever reason - which is more accurate and a bit clearer.
https://www.sja.org.uk/get-advice/h...use-a-defibrillator-on-a-person-with-breasts/
As you didn't think women should be offended by being called 'people with breasts' you can't be offended that men who call themselves women are now 'other people with breasts', which covers all men with fat deposits on their chests.
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Shaman
I'm not sure where SJA got their data but their claim is that people are less likely to offer to perform cpr on a woman because they think it involves exposing/touching their breasts.
I think the advice is aimed more at members of the public than trained cpr people who obviously wouldn't hesitate regardless of the sex of the person in need.
monkers
Squire
I'm not deliberately omitting anything. More of your invention. When will you stop telling lies? I will guess never!
AuroraSaab
Shaman
You put the new updated less offensive one up and claimed women were getting upset about it when they weren't - the one that caused the fuss was an older version. You ommitted to mention that so you could pretend women were moaning about nothing.
11th March:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ts-fury-ambulance-erases-women-CPR-guide.html
If you're going to post disingenuous things on here in order to misrepresent and denigrate women I'm going to point them out.
monkers
Squire
The offence is you pretending to live inside my head and pretending to know what I'm thinking, and writing such drivel.
I didn't deliberately mislead anyone.
When the fuss was first mentioned to me I went to the site. I copied it and pasted it here before it disappeared. Shortly after, the link went to error 404.
I couldn't see anything wrong with the version I saw, nor can I see anything wrong with the old version.
All this fuss for nothing. You morons are actually farking insane.
''Person's with breasts'' is absolutely fine for people with breasts. Men often develop gynecomastia through cancer treatments. Men often have breasts (especially in older age) and men can develop breast cancer - and not because they are trans.
Suits of armour for men include the parts ''breastplates'' - right back through history. Do these all have retrospectively be called something else now.
Next you'll be telling me that I shouldn't say ''history'' because of ''trans ideology''.
Last edited:
AuroraSaab
Shaman
The version you posted on here wasn't the one people were complaining about. You made out it was in order to denigrate the women who complained.
That's your opinion. Others feel differently.
If you want to kick off this thread again - so we can endlessly go over the same stuff - the least you can do is check your facts before you post so you don't embarrass yourself.
monkers
Squire
I accept that and I have explained. What I don't accept is that you can bang on saying that I deliberately did that. You can't possibly know that, and you didn't know that, because I didn't. But for you it's every angle your twisted brain can manage.
The very idea that the word 'people' erases women is beyond extravagant, it's boiling hysteria.
The word ''people'' as in ''people with breasts'' has exactly the same meaning as ''people with a disability''. I guess that the next step in this nonsense is to take issue with that.
AuroraSaab
Shaman
No, you didn't. You posted something entirely untrue and doubled down until it was undeniable.
Using 'people with breasts' while calling men 'men' is erasing women's sex specific language. It's insulting to women.
No it doesn't because either sex can have a disability. I'd take issue with it if was used to erase disabled women's experiences though. Clear, accurate language is important especially in a medical context.
monkers
Squire
Utter bollocks. You are the liar here, and a very known one at that. I have already written and accepted that the version I posted was the later version - it was the only one I had seen. That acceptance is not a case of ''doubling down''. It's a case of you continuing to be a twat.
