I know I'm being petty, and that scientists in Malaysia and Iran are expected to be a bit behind the curve as far as social awareness goes, but this article made me angry and sad. They mention a transgender man, and it's pretty clearly a transwoman. It's not even valid or ethical research reporting to claim that you found a man who had a type of lymphoma that males rarely get, if it's a "male" who is not male, and has been on estrogen long enough to have breasts. The writers don't even trip over their pronouns; they're coolly and casually disrespectful throughout. They should be educated enough to know better.

Title:   Primary Non-Hodgkin B Cell Lymphoma in a Man

Author:   Sh.M.I. Alhabshi ; Z. Ismail ; Sh.A. Arasaratnam

Abstract:   Malignant breast lymphoma is a rare condition and primary breast lymphoma is extremely rare in"nthe male population. We present a case of a 26-year-old man (transgender) who presented with a large palpable mass in the right breast. This mass was rapidly growing in size associated with right axillary lymphadenopathy. Ultrasound and MRI findings were consistent with BIRADS IV lesion which was suspicious of malignancy. Core biopsy was performed and histopathology confirmed the diagnosis of primary non Hodgkin B cell lymphoma of the breast.

http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=fulltext&passMe=http://journals.tums.ac.ir/PdfMed.aspx?pdf_med=/upload_files/pdf/18533.pdf&manuscript_id=18533

Men and women have completely different physiological structures all aesthetics aside that do not directly corellate with someones gender appearance. I understand completely why he used to the term. Like cervical cancer would occur in FtMs and Prostate cancer in MtFs. You have to go by what they were biologically born for medical studies. Especially when conducting studies on populations.

Hope that didn't offend anyone.

While I do see the printers wish to clarify the birth-assigned sex of the person involved in these types of matters, the usage of "Man" when speaking of MTF's nonetheless always annoys the heck out of me, as "Man" is a term that, atleast to me, describes someones Cis-Gender, not Sex.
In short, no-one can be born a man, but you can be born a male.

Hence, when the writer necessarily wants to clarify the birth-assigned sex in subjects like these, the term "male" would be the correct one to use, as the subject involved have never been an actual Cis-man. Or atleast, usually not.
Just a Sissy-man.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

in this case elle is right you have to treat the birth gender regardless of the presentation so even though when talking to the patient you will use the correct pronouns {hopefully} in the medical report it must stae the birth gender other wise the report would not be usable to anyone who might be researching things like this type of cancer in the trans population. medicine is also science and like all science proper documentation is required.
jessi

OP and Elle are both right tbh. You do have to use the birth sex, but gender is irrelevant here. "Man" does not refer to sex, it refers to gender.

I disagree. Did you read the article? The point of interest is breast lymphoma. Even if you decide it's valid to treat the patient as male, he still has female breasts. So you can't make a valid claim of finding a rare case of breast lymphoma in a male here unless you want to focus on the TG aspect, in which case the title is misleading.

OK, I read the article.  Truthfully I see nothing wrong with the presentation.

They made it clear the person they were talking about was on hormones, they made it clear the person was transexual.  I don't feel the use of the male term was done to insult the person, it had to be stated to make the article relevant.

They did make it clear that in their opinion the cancer was due to taking the hormones and treated the "person" not the male or female, the person.

As for men having lumps, cancer, etc it is rare but does happen.  I had a lump removed from my breast over 30 years ago.  Luckily it was benign.  (It could have been from hormones, I had been on and off my wife's birthcontrol pills back then).

I didn't say they were trying to insult anyone, I said they were arrogant and oblivious. Finding a kind of breast cancer in a male is not publishably interesting if that male has been taking hormones, unless the focus of the paper is on the risks or effects of hormone treatment.

The streetwalkers I spoke to in sydney refered to each other strictly as he.

They have 3 toilets in some schools in Thailand. Malaysians seem to have a similar view of transgender-ism.

people will hate me for this, but they actually  have a more honest view, which is more easily accepted by the mainstream.

Quote from: fionabell on November 18, 2011, 05:54:51 PM
The streetwalkers I spoke to in sydney refered to each other strictly as he.

They have 3 toilets in some schools in Thailand. Malaysians seem to have a similar view of transgender-ism.

people will hate me for this, but they actually  have a more honest view, which is more easily accepted by the mainstream.

Spoken for truth. That is the only way people will accept them. They have to be "two spirit" or "third gender".

Quote from: Elle Le Interdit on November 18, 2011, 08:15:55 PM
Spoken for truth. That is the only way people will accept them. They have to be "two spirit" or "third gender".

Thank you. I think it's not a bad of looking at it.

Well. Okay. I don't know that we're debating the same thing. I think my complaints were more medical and academic than gender-related. I was reading a gender-related study because I do have that interest, but now that we're parsing everything out superfine and expounding on that, I'll admit that the labeling isn't the issue. It's that if they're going to claim this is a viable subject for scientific interest, they need to either find a cismale or recognize the physiological realities of transwomen.

And for what it's worth, I think recognizing 3 genders is fine. I've always been happier to check the "other" box than I am pretending there are only two boxes.

You're right. Transgender man is not the right way to describe a transgender woman. I think I just woke up on the wrong side of the bed that day and found a way to disagree.

I understand your point. They're describing it as a rare condition and ignoring the fact that they have female breast tissue. The breast growth surely makes their point invalid. Regardless of the rest of their anatomical makeup, they have breasts.

They're all "omg a man has breast cancer that's rare!" - when in reality....the person has breasts...thus making it not interesting at all.

I thought EXACTLY the same thing when Thomas Beatie was in all the papers.

"WOAH A PREGNANT MAN" ...yeah but he has a womb, people with wombs get pregnant all the time