Just now, TheVat said:

Yesterday I had the distinct feeling this thread would go tits up.

2 hours ago, Sohan Lalwani said:

There I believe it also exists in the majority of Islamic countries. Even in the US and Canada you would likely receive stereotypes as shown with @iNow

Well your question keeps changing. But if your question is why are there gender stereotypes in jobs. Well these are often reflective of societal norms and stereotypes. Radiological techs are no different. A general trend is that jobs with more influence power tend to be more male dominated, even if the overarching field might not be.

For example, radiologiacal techs are about 67% women in the USA. However, radiologists are only around 25% women. Same thing for nursing where you can find numbers between 85-90% women in the US but only 38% of physicians are female. Mammography is not an extreme outlier in that regard.

3 hours ago, Sohan Lalwani said:

Understood, but my main points remain clear.

Like I said earlier, the reasoning for the rule might have been discussed when it was implemented. Have you investigated this? Seems relevant.

For all I know it could have been backlash from multiple sexual abuse incidents. It’s information that should be included in the discussion.

39 minutes ago, swansont said:

Like I said earlier, the reasoning for the rule might have been discussed when it was implemented. Have you investigated this? Seems relevant.

For all I know it could have been backlash from multiple sexual abuse incidents. It’s information that should be included in the discussion.

I summarised the reasons early on in the thread, based on what the woman from the breast cancer charity told the BBC in the article cited by @studiot . It was to encourage as many women as possible to come forward and take up the offer of free screening for breast cancer, bearing in mind that some groups in society could be put off if they thought a man might be doing it.

I was in fact interested to learn, reading about discussions about how to improve take-up of the covid vaccine in the pandemic, that certain groups with colonial heritage are markedly less trusting of the health service than those with long white British ancestry. This is not entirely irrational, as apparently some colonies were subjected to unethical medical trials in years gone by and the memory lingers. I had no idea. So anyway, there is a perennial challenge to get better participation from these groups. Using exclusively female radiographers for the programme seems to have been a way to overcome one potential barrier. Since well over half the radiographers are women anyway, this would not have been seen as something difficult to arrange.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Like I said earlier, the reasoning for the rule might have been discussed when it was implemented. Have you investigated this? Seems relevant.

For all I know it could have been backlash from multiple sexual abuse incidents. It’s information that should be included in the discussion.

I will not deny there were sexual abuse cases, but some of them were both men and women.

2 hours ago, CharonY said:

Well your question keeps changing. But if your question is why are there gender stereotypes in jobs. Well these are often reflective of societal norms and stereotypes. Radiological techs are no different. A general trend is that jobs with more influence power tend to be more male dominated, even if the overarching field might not be.

For example, radiologiacal techs are about 67% women in the USA. However, radiologists are only around 25% women. Same thing for nursing where you can find numbers between 85-90% women in the US but only 38% of physicians are female. Mammography is not an extreme outlier in that regard.

The dynamic in my question itself encompasses a variety of different things, it doesn't have a single one way answer.

55 minutes ago, exchemist said:

Using exclusively female radiographers for the programme seems to have been a way to overcome one potential barrier. Since well over half the radiographers are women anyway, this would not have been seen as something difficult to arrange.

Perhaps, but men should not be excluded from being radiographers either.

2 hours ago, CharonY said:

Mammography is not an extreme outlier in that regard.

From what I read a few years ago, the male-to-female ratio was about 61/39

I will read more recent studies then, thanks.

1 hour ago, exchemist said:

I was in fact interested to learn, reading about discussions about how to improve take-up of the covid vaccine in the pandemic, that certain groups with colonial heritage are markedly less trusting of the health service than those with long white British ancestry.

This is not specific to medical trials, there was a load of misinformation of vaccines being spread along with idiotic memes regarding the subject. Also, retract your previous statement.

On 5/2/2025 at 2:59 PM, exchemist said:

I summarised the reasons early on in the thread, based on what the woman from the breast cancer charity told the BBC in the article cited by @studiot . It was to encourage as many women as possible to come forward and take up the offer of free screening for breast cancer, bearing in mind that some groups in society could be put off if they thought a man might be doing it.

I was in fact interested to learn, reading about discussions about how to improve take-up of the covid vaccine in the pandemic, that certain groups with colonial heritage are markedly less trusting of the health service than those with long white British ancestry. This is not entirely irrational, as apparently some colonies were subjected to unethical medical trials in years gone by and the memory lingers. I had no idea. So anyway, there is a perennial challenge to get better participation from these groups. Using exclusively female radiographers for the programme seems to have been a way to overcome one potential barrier. Since well over half the radiographers are women anyway, this would not have been seen as something difficult to arrange.

Your "summary" was not very helpful just like your comment on that guy who wanted to be an engineer, nor was it explanatory.

Two different sets of statistics/concepts are being cited and referred to in this thread, typically interchangeably, but they're very different. Namely, polling data on women patients who "prefer" to be cared for by a woman, and those who refuse to see a man. The latter number, of course being much smaller than the former.

The reason this difference is notable is that workplace discrimination of this type is currently acceptable in society, whereas if someone repeated the poll and asked if patients "prefer" to be treated by a Jewish or Asian or thin doctor, no one would consider honoring this "preference".

Lastly, looking at it from the opposite side of the equation, knowing ahead of time that a potential client has bias/discrimination issues and avoiding interacting with that individual is actually a benefit to the provider of healthcare, so in my experience honoring "preferences" is a good idea.

On 2025/5/2 at AM1点23分, studiot said:

嘿，伙计们，如果我认为这会引发战争，我就不会发布这个链接了。

lol

lol

10 hours ago, Olivia Chen said:

On 5/1/2025 at 6:23 PM, studiot said:

嘿，伙计们，如果我认为这会引发战争，我就不会发布这个链接了。

lol

Google was unable to translate.

Since you can obviously do this please do so.

14 minutes ago, studiot said:

Google was unable to translate.

Since you can obviously do this please do so.

It’s basically saying “Hey guys if I knew there would be a war I would not have posted the link”

16 hours ago, Olivia Chen said:

lol

lol

Moderator Note

Do NOT quote another member and then change what they wrote in any way!