2 ms·

I'm not going hard on you at all, only on what you've said. The evidence about BPD is that it affects women far more often than men, the clinical data overwhelm

I'm not going hard on you at all, only on what you've said. The evidence about BPD is that it affects women far more often than men, the clinical data overwhelmingly supports this, and so does the genetic research on the topic. Instead of considering this evidence, you've tried to find some seperate evidence for gender bias, you found the one paper that examines this, and that paper doesn't even really draw any conclusions. Any time a question is asked about 'why are men and women different in regards to x', you'll have people lining up (like yourself and other commenters in this thread) to say it's gender bias. When the answer is often just because men and women have differences, which is exactly what the evidence points to in this case.

SolaceQuantum 9y ago
I literally just returned the first thing I could find that was a study with citations and stuff. Nothing in my post said I was attributing anything. You’re reading into my actions assuming intent that simply isn’t there.
- lulmerchant 9y ago
  >Basically, a complex mix of social expectations, social bias, how women are treated in society, and biological aspects of women’s personalities may contribute to an overall significantly higher rate of BPD diagnosis being a female diagnosis. By your own admission, with 5 seconds of googling, and 0 knowledge on the topic, you submitted a comment attributing this to gender bias. If you don’t want your comments to be scrutinized by others, then perhaps don’t post them on public forums... Discussion is the point of the comment section, and the limit of the discussion you’re willing to participate in is “I posted a random study from Google along with some of my own commentary, that I’m not prepared to defend in any manner whatsoever”.
  - SolaceQuantum 9y ago
    That comment wasn't even my own commentary. It's from the study's abstract. Nothing about my post was my own commentary beyond "hey I took this off google". I'm not against scrutiny insofar as I'm against having assumptions of intent thrown on me for little more than googling something and returning the first published paper I could find.
DanBC 9y ago
Can you provide any links to the "genetic research" please?

SolaceQuantum 9y ago

I literally just returned the first thing I could find that was a study with citations and stuff. Nothing in my post said I was attributing anything. You’re reading into my actions assuming intent that simply isn’t there.

lulmerchant 9y ago
>Basically, a complex mix of social expectations, social bias, how women are treated in society, and biological aspects of women’s personalities may contribute to an overall significantly higher rate of BPD diagnosis being a female diagnosis. By your own admission, with 5 seconds of googling, and 0 knowledge on the topic, you submitted a comment attributing this to gender bias. If you don’t want your comments to be scrutinized by others, then perhaps don’t post them on public forums... Discussion is the point of the comment section, and the limit of the discussion you’re willing to participate in is “I posted a random study from Google along with some of my own commentary, that I’m not prepared to defend in any manner whatsoever”.
- SolaceQuantum 9y ago
  That comment wasn't even my own commentary. It's from the study's abstract. Nothing about my post was my own commentary beyond "hey I took this off google". I'm not against scrutiny insofar as I'm against having assumptions of intent thrown on me for little more than googling something and returning the first published paper I could find.

DanBC 9y ago

Can you provide any links to the "genetic research" please?