Dare you to reply!

[Mandelin Rain]

But what about the content of their character?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PhotonBomb]

KHE shook

 

[RadOncMegatron]

The game that cannot be won on display right here in this thread. Dr. Choo wants diversity and laments "I am sick of the all male panel, the all white panel," but doesn't want to be invited as a token woman or Asian. Who could've guessed this would've happened? Who? Ouroboros on display.

 

[KHE88]

The game that cannot be won on display right here in this thread. Dr. Choo wants diversity and laments "I am sick of the all male panel, the all white panel," but doesn't want to be invited as a token woman or Asian. Who could've guessed this would've happened? Who? Ouroboros on display.

View attachment 287801

It is so interesting to watch the perverse public meltdown our thought-leaders are having in medicine and radiation oncology on Twitter.

They are getting a taste of their own medicine. The reality is they can't play the victim card because women and Asians are NOT an underrepresented group.

See here:

The Shortage of Black Male Doctors Is Medicine’s Real Emergency

Here’s what Temple and other Philadelphia colleges and universities are doing to put more black men in white coats.

www.phillymag.com

You want to fix problems in medicine and radiation oncology using only superficial identity? I disagree with recruiting based on skin tone and genitalia and anything other than merit and possibly adjusting for inequities in socioeconomic upbrining, but if you want to be intellectually honest, then what you do is you recruit more black males who are more likely to practice in underserved urban areas. You recruit more white males who are more likely to practice in rural areas.

But nope, lets keep on publishing psuedoscientific garbage about the gender gap and skin color. Yep, go on and recruit more Asian females to rad onc, who tend to want to stay in oversaturated affluent large coastal areas. And, when compared to makeup in the general population are actually over-represented in medicine. There's of course nothing wrong with wanting to live in a nice part of a big city, but you are doing them a real disservice by leading them down the primrose path then they can't get a job or end up trading geography for professional exploitation.

Then there's this dolt, Rachel Maddow:

Academic Science Rethinks All-Too-White 'Dude Walls' Of Honor

Historic portraits of revered scientists and doctors can be found all over medical schools and universities — and, as it happens, most feature white men. Some say this sends the wrong message.

www.npr.org

"What's up with the "dude wall?""
This insanely *****ic comment is the ethos of our time.

The "dude wall" is comprised of a group of individuals who either won a Nobel prize or Lasker award. She looks at these pillars of science and only sees a "dude wall," not a group of people who made great discoveries. So naturally the university had to try and change the makeup of the wall because of optics lest they be called sexist. Minorities and women haven't been given a lot of opportunities in the past in the sciences, this is undeniably true. This has largely been rectified and women have equal opportunity to study science if they want to. But that doesn't mean the discoveries the men made weren't valid and you have to pull down their pictures. That is absurd.

But that's what it's all about. These people are anti-science. They only agree with the science when it supports their agenda. When it doesn't, they just smear the other side.

For instance, science shows that men tend to have the best math skills, and women tend to have the best verbal skills:

The Science of Sex Differences in Science and Mathematics

Amid ongoing public speculation about the reasons for sex differences in careers in science and mathematics, we present a consensus statement that is based on the best available scientific evidence. Sex differences in science and math achievement and ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

"Sex differences in science and math achievement and ability are smaller for the mid-range of the abilities distribution than they are for those with the highest levels of achievement and ability."

Women's math skills are more tightly distributed around average. For men, they are more likely to be either excellent at math or absolutely terrible at math -- they lie more on the extremes. Now, if you state the fact that statistically, the people with the most excellent math skills are more likely to be men, you will just be called sexist.

A female professor pointed out that women are shorter than men on average, and had to resign:

Professor notes men are taller than women on average, SJWs storm out angrily

hotair.com

Then of course, instead of just ignoring or smearing objective science that doesn't support your agenda, you can just go full looney toons and say something like:
"Science at its core is systematicaly racist and sexist."


There are no words. This is just willful ignorance.

I could go on and on and on. The entire point of science is objectivity. Nature can hurt feelings sometimes. But it is what it is, and you can't change it.

Bottom line:
Academia is simply infected with brain worms. Stay far, far away.

 

[PhotonBomb]

KHE, folks!

He’s here all week.

 

[medgator]

Then there's this dolt, Rachel Maddow:

Academic Science Rethinks All-Too-White 'Dude Walls' Of Honor

Historic portraits of revered scientists and doctors can be found all over medical schools and universities — and, as it happens, most feature white men. Some say this sends the wrong message.

www.npr.org

Rachel would probably be less toxic than Stephen Miller. And she's arguably far less powerful


Just sayin'

Spoiler

guess this thread does feel a little like breitbart lite at times

 

[AlreadyRegretThis]

They are actually prioritizing self interest.

They are kicking the ladder out from under them -using the issue to advance their carereer. they are not resigning from their jobs and giving it to a minority nor did they volunteer to give up their match spot to a minority.

2) what they are advocating- limiting the entry of Indians and Asians in radonc to increase number of disadvantaged minorities is immoral.

3) if they actually cared about the well-being of women and minorities, they would caution them against entering an oversupplied field with the worst geographical restrictions in medicine and where the said women and minorities are at increased likelihood to end up in exploited positions.

4) lastly, many of the departments I have worked in, women were at least 1/2 residents and faculty.
Many of new prominent chairman positions have gone to woman-harvard Stanford ,UCSF, Columbia, pmh? etc, and almost none to the white male (not aware of any recent)

white Anglo Saxon (wasp) male make up like 10-20% of residents and faculty (anecdotally even less of new residents) despite being the predominant plurality in america

5) Lastly most important- A rising tide floats all boats. It is blatantly obvious this field is sick-rhe plight of women and minorities like our own is pegged to the health of the field. The only way to improve the situation for women and minorities is to fix the field!

There are so many simply false statements in here I don't know where to begin or if you're even arguing in good faith. No one is advocating to limit the entry of specific demographics; I am highly skeptical of your 10-20% WASP resident number & the appropriate comparator would be their % in either the residency applicant pool or medical school grads, not the US general population (I believe that in recent years entering med school students in the US are >50% women, not sure if the first >50% female entering class was long enough ago to become the first >50% female graduating class); and given the very small number of academic chair positions that exist, a consecutive run of women appointed to chairs should be just as unremarkable as the very long period of 100% rate of appointed chairs being men.

Even if many of the departments you've worked in have had a high representation of women, there are good data on the specialty as a whole to tell us that experience is non-representative.

I actually agree with you that encouraging more women to apply to radiation oncology residency is probably not the right thing to focus on to make rad onc a more fair, equitable, diverse, inclusive, or otherwise improved specialty. And may or may not make those women better off than if they bypassed rad onc and did something else with their lives - depending on how honest & complete the advice & guidance is that they're given & if there are decent (in general & for women specifically) training programs and jobs they can be steered toward.

If you think rad onc is a lousy choice for any med student right now, then of course encouraging women to apply to it in order to improve the demographics of the specialty is wrong. I gather that these women actually don't share the view that rad onc is a bad choice for everyone right now. That is a separate argument to have.

If you think women specifically shouldn't be encouraged to apply to rad onc residencies because rad onc is in some way(s) unfriendly to women, that had better be accompanied by a commitment to fixing the unfriendliness in the specialty - and then reaching out to potentially interested & valuably contributing women to say, "We're better now, give us a chance."

 

[AlreadyRegretThis]

thank you for coming here. This place needs you.

Thanks. That is encouraging to hear

 

[medgator]

Anybody watching the proposed Hispanic rad onc association thread over at ROhub?

Finally a popcorn worthy thread over there after a drought for several months

 

[deleted774703]

Anybody watching the proposed Hispanic rad onc association thread over at ROhub?

Finally a popcorn worthy thread over there after a drought for several months

ROhub has to be considered one of ASTRO's biggest failures.

It seems like they essentially want to control all radonc related talks on their platform

But unlike SDN, you have to show your identity so you can't really share any potentially controversial opinion against ASTROs wishes
Unlike Twitter, there is nobody on there outside of RO to discuss with

Also, the sign in process is cray

 

[GapCalc]

Scene: ASTRO Headquarters, Arlington, VA in a too-fancy boardroom.

CEO: "Team, we have been threatened by The Misanthropes of SDN. We need to fight back, but in a way that we can incompetently control. Who has any ideas?"

Board member #1: "What about clever hashtags?"

CEO: "Perhaps. Let's send that to The Academics to figure out. It's their new forte, because we aren't funding good research anymore. Anyone else?"

Board member #2: "How about ignoring them? Maybe they'll just go away"

CEO: "But the med students are paying attention. Who else?"

Board member #3: "What if we made our own echo chamber, and invited a bunch of mostly tech illiterate middle aged men to participate. We'll call it... ROWeb. ROchat. No... ROHub. What could go wrong?"

CEO: "OK, pefect. That's the winner. Great work. Let's call it a day."

End scene.

 

[PhotonBomb]

Lol why are some of you people mad that someone wants to start a Hispanic organization ?

 

[baculum1]

Some of the absolutely TRIGGERED white men on there are so funny. One guy is clearly so mad, it is pretty pathetic and truly embarrassing. Be careful SDN, don’t dox yourself on ROHUB.

so the korean mafia can have KASTRO, one clueless indian guy on there apparently does not know it is already a thing thinking he is funny, and a resident asks a harmless open ended question only to be piled on. Pretty great summary of Our field. SHAME SHAME SHAME

 

[OTN]

Lol why are some of you people mad that someone wants to start a Hispanic organization ?

Where did you get that impression? No one on this site has said they're mad about it at all, someone just said it's become a popcorn-worthy thread over at ROHub.

 

[OTN]

Some of the absolutely TRIGGERED white men on there are so funny. One guy is clearly so mad, it is pretty pathetic and truly embarrassing. Be careful SDN, don’t dox yourself on ROHUB.

so the korean mafia can have KASTRO, one clueless indian guy on there apparently does not know it is already a thing thinking he is funny, and a resident asks a harmless open ended question only to be piled on. Pretty great summary of Our field. SHAME SHAME SHAME

Can you post the thread? I'm not an ASTRO member (of course), so can't log in.

 

[medgator]

Can you post the thread? I'm not an ASTRO member (of course), so can't log in.

 

[medgator]

Personally, I don't see the big deal about creating an informal "HASTRO,"* and certainly didn't expect the original post suggesting a Hispanic RO society to become such an interesting thread on ROhub, but I guess we live in interesting times....








*- such a group could help promote interest in helping less developed ro programs in central/south America and beyond

 

[OTN]

LOL it's David Jones again. If we are ALL ONCOLOGISTS, why was his practice one of the worst "hire and fire" offenders in all the land?

LOL also at "can't use the word tribal because it implies primitivism", come on now.

Plenty to be entertained by on both sides of the debate over there. Almost makes one want to join ASTRO. Almost.

 

[baculum1]

LOL it's David Jones again. If we are ALL ONCOLOGISTS, why was his practice one of the worst "hire and fire" offenders in all the land?

LOL also at "can't use the word tribal because it implies primitivism", come on now.

Plenty to be entertained by on both sides of the debate over there. Almost makes one want to join ASTRO. Almost.

sounds to me like someone who runs such an abusive practice needs to be taken to task publicly for their sins. Good job

 

[scarbrtj]

Yo soy extático todos los oncólogos de radiación niñas y niños get su proprio sitio web (@HiROS)... es about tiempo
¡ROHub y Rojo Journal es un muy caliente combo mis amigos!
(Esto es más caliente than mi último plan de mamas)
<Miguel Bloombito en twentytwentyo>

 

[baculum1]

Yo soy extático todos los oncólogos de radiación niñas y niños get su proprio sitio web (@HiROS)... es about tiempo
¡ROHub y Rojo Journal es un muy caliente combo mis amigos!
(Esto es más caliente than mi último plan de mamas)
<Miguel Bloombito en twentytwentyo>

We got a future HIRO gold donation member right here folks!

 

[radoncgrad2019]

You guys ever met a Hispanic rad onc? I did once. Guy gave me a firm FIRM handshake. Gotta have more in our field!

 

[medgator]

You guys ever met a Hispanic rad onc? I did once. Guy gave me a firm FIRM handshake. Gotta have more in our field!

Mexican just finished up fixing my roof leak that the gringo before couldn't. And yes firm handshake. No joke.

I'll find out the next time it rains for sure, but he was much more communicative and prompt.

¡No tengo un problema con HASTRO!

 

[scarbrtj]

You guys ever met a Hispanic rad onc? I did once. Guy gave me a firm FIRM handshake. Gotta have more in our field!

Daniel Dosoretzo es hispano, si? Carlos Perez? Dosoretzo en América Latina offers mucho radioterapia gratuita a los hispanos there yo do believo. Dosoretzo more richo than Pablo Escobar. Mucho dinero en oncología radiológica en los old days

 

[PhotonBomb]

This Hispanic cat needs to chill out on ROhub before he gets taken out by the white PP Rad Onc Mafia. I used to be a part of it but it got too radical for me! He should watch out watch out.

 

[medgator]

Looks like someone brought up the privilege card....

 

[RadOncMegatron]

Looks like someone brought up the privilege card....

Did anyone else laugh/cry about the rad onc tumor board comment?!?

Dr. Liu made me LOL by putting rad oncs as an underrepresented group in tumor boards (sad but true?) whose voice cannot be heard and that our participation increases diversity. I think he is right and actually believe this kind of (intellectual) diversity matters, but I think he missed the mark here a little bit.

Someone might need to bring him up to speed.

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Did anyone else laugh/cry about the rad onc tumor board comment?!?

Dr. Liu made me LOL by putting rad oncs as an underrepresented group in tumor boards (sad but true?) whose voice cannot be heard and that our participation increases diversity. I think he is right and actually believe this kind of (intellectual) diversity matters, but I think he missed the mark here a little bit.

Someone might need to bring him up to speed.

you are always welcome to post.

 

[Mandelin Rain]

Why would anyone care if a group of Hispanic Rad Oncs met to discuss issues unique to Hispanic Rad Oncs? Who/what is it hurting?

 

[baculum1]

Why would anyone care if a group of Hispanic Rad Oncs met to discuss issues unique to Hispanic Rad Oncs? Who/what is it hurting?

never underestimate the fear some people get about “mexicans” congregating in large groups. Ask the triggered people on there. I got to say ROHUB has been a total snoozer for me but i love reading that thread. YOU BETCHA!

 

[RadOncMegatron]

Why would anyone care if a group of Hispanic Rad Oncs met to discuss issues unique to Hispanic Rad Oncs? Who/what is it hurting?

You think this might be a generational thing? In my HS and college experience ethnicity based groups were normal and not a controversial thing.

 

[scarbrtj]

never underestimate the fear some people get about “mexicans” congregating in large groups. Ask the triggered people on there. I got to say ROHUB has been a total snoozer for me but i love reading that thread. YOU BETCHA!

Eh well I'm 50th cousin or less to everybody on SDN, and every living Mexican, so no biggie.

 

[RickyScott]

Who cares if someone wants to form a group, but will submit that the major proffesional issue facing every group is future job market and oversupply.

 

[PhotonBomb]

 

[RadOncMegatron]

I think it's very reasonable to call everyone with a doctorate "Dr. XYZ" and would consider it disrespectful if you did not if that was their preference.

Alt the same time, this reminds me when General Walsh called Senator Barbara Boxer "ma'am" and felt disrespected and wanted to be called senator. She was unaware that the words "sir" and "ma'am" are used in the military to signify those of higher than them on the chain of command with the point being not many higher ranks than army brigadier general. Did the Senator have a right to be offended and be called senator - absolutely. Did Gen. Walsh respect her and call her the proper title without denigrating her due to unconscious bias - absolutely.

This is another be careful what you wish for case. When I became an attending, multiple physicians, men and women, insisted that I call them by their first name as a sign of equality. I also insist as well. I also wonder when somebody calls Dr. Roach "Mack" or Dr. Zeitman "Tony" - that person must be a hot shot to be able to call those guys by their first name. The pendulum will swing the other way when we see at the next ASCO with the abstract "Male surgeons more likely to call each other by their first name and their female colleagues by their academic title showing implicit bias and more camaraderie towards their same gender."

 

[deleted1002574]

Just to be clear, you think that that JCO article is showing ACTUALLY that women are more respected, because their titles and qualifications are more likely to be omitted when they are introduced? Because, otherwise, I have no idea what this rubbish means

The IDW and anti-PC people must be real flexible... because these are quite the contortions!

I think it's very reasonable to call everyone with a doctorate "Dr. XYZ" and would consider it disrespectful if you did not if that was their preference.

Alt the same time, this reminds me when General Walsh called Senator Barbara Boxer "ma'am" and felt disrespected and wanted to be called senator. She was unaware that the words "sir" and "ma'am" are used in the military to signify those of higher than them on the chain of command with the point being not many higher ranks than army brigadier general. Did the Senator have a right to be offended and be called senator - absolutely. Did Gen. Walsh respect her and call her the proper title without denigrating her due to unconscious bias - absolutely.

This is another be careful what you wish for case. When I became an attending, multiple physicians, men and women, insisted that I call them by their first name as a sign of equality. I also insist as well. I also wonder when somebody calls Dr. Roach "Mack" or Dr. Zeitman "Tony" - that person must be a hot shot to be able to call those guys by their first name. The pendulum will swing the other way when we see at the next ASCO with the abstract "Male surgeons more likely to call each other by their first name and their female colleagues by their academic title showing implicit bias and more camaraderie towards their same gender."

 

[RadOncMegatron]

Just to be clear, you think that that JCO article is showing ACTUALLY that women are more respected, because their titles and qualifications are more likely to be omitted when they are introduced? Because, otherwise, I have no idea what this rubbish means

The IDW and anti-PC people must be real flexible... because these are quite the contortions!

Yes, I had a confusing post. I think some of the women were disrespected.

4 groups though:

Men informal titles to women and they don’t care.

Men informal titles to women and they care.

Women informal titles to women and they don’t care.

Women informal titles to women and they care.

What % is from implicit bias ?!?! 0% since that is fake construct.

Is there just some subtle sexism probably yea, but not plenary session all over the media data to support it.

You know that there were real life men who did this stuff and it is quite a damning accusation of them w/o valid evidence.

Edit: It is more than ok to ask all to address each other by their formal titles which I completely agree with but the level of accusation, unnecessary multivartiate analyses, and national attention as if their is a sinister rather people just making a dumb mistake is taking it way too far.

 

[PhotonBomb]

‘implicit bias is a fake construct’ - Megatron 2019

 

[medgator]

‘implicit bias is a fake construct’ - Megatron 2019

Yikes

 

[RadOncMegatron]

‘implicit bias is a fake construct’ - Megatron 2019

Don’t get snippy now Reshma errr... I mean Dr Jagsi.


Disclaimer/Edit: This is a play on a joke @PhotonBomb said calling himself Dr. Jagsi so don’t everyone get all crazy now!

 

[evilbooyaa]

I think it's very reasonable to call everyone with a doctorate "Dr. XYZ" and would consider it disrespectful if you did not if that was their preference.

This is the part of your post that I like. We are not doing this for women on equal numbers as we are with men at least in Radiation Oncology, and we, as a society, should work on fixing that. The whataboutism of what may happen if we start showing the same respect to women in medicine is not relevant, IMO.

I already do this with any female attendings (unless they specifically tell me to call them by their first name), and I imagine many do, but if you don't, then you should start.

 

[KHE88]

‘implicit bias is a fake construct’ - Megatron 2019

Implicit bias is indeed a fake construct by any fair measure.

It is an idiotic psuedoscientific concept masquerading as real science as it is virtually impossible to accurately measure. The implicit bias assessment test has been repeatedly debunked and even criticized by its creators. And it's known that the test can be manipulated and can be taken twice by the same person with two totally different results. That is what real science calls an unreliable test.

It's all garbage. Don't believe everything your hear in the media that sounds good with the feelz.

 

[medgator]

.

It is an idiotic psuedoscientific concept masquerading as real science as it is virtually impossible to accurately measure.

Maybe it's kinda like pornography....

 

[pikachu]

I think it's very reasonable to call everyone with a doctorate "Dr. XYZ" and would consider it disrespectful if you did not if that was their preference.

Alt the same time, this reminds me when General Walsh called Senator Barbara Boxer "ma'am" and felt disrespected and wanted to be called senator. She was unaware that the words "sir" and "ma'am" are used in the military to signify those of higher than them on the chain of command with the point being not many higher ranks than army brigadier general. Did the Senator have a right to be offended and be called senator - absolutely. Did Gen. Walsh respect her and call her the proper title without denigrating her due to unconscious bias - absolutely.

This is another be careful what you wish for case. When I became an attending, multiple physicians, men and women, insisted that I call them by their first name as a sign of equality. I also insist as well. I also wonder when somebody calls Dr. Roach "Mack" or Dr. Zeitman "Tony" - that person must be a hot shot to be able to call those guys by their first name. The pendulum will swing the other way when we see at the next ASCO with the abstract "Male surgeons more likely to call each other by their first name and their female colleagues by their academic title showing implicit bias and more camaraderie towards their same gender."

This is the part of your post that I like. We are not doing this for women on equal numbers as we are with men at least in Radiation Oncology, and we, as a society, should work on fixing that. The whataboutism of what may happen if we start showing the same respect to women in medicine is not relevant, IMO.

I already do this with any female attendings (unless they specifically tell me to call them by their first name), and I imagine many do, but if you don't, then you should start.

I certainly find it disrespectful to be referred to by my first name in a group setting (e.g., tumor board) where male physician colleagues are called Dr So-and-So. Invariably the perpetrator is another woman and invariably it is a non-physician staff member (RN, RTT, admin, etc.). HOWEVER. I do not find it worth my time and mental effort to dignify it with a response. If someone wants to advertise their retrograde beliefs and petty sexism to a general audience, that's their problem. In the meantime, in professional settings I agree with others that it's best to follow the rule to call people by their professional titles unless you're specifically invited to be on a first name basis. But then I'm also getting old.

 

[w00tz]

I certainly find it disrespectful to be referred to by my first name in a group setting (e.g., tumor board) where male physician colleagues are called Dr So-and-So. Invariably the perpetrator is another woman and invariably it is a non-physician staff member (RN, RTT, admin, etc.). HOWEVER. I do not find it worth my time and mental effort to dignify it with a response. If someone wants to advertise their retrograde beliefs and petty sexism to a general audience, that's their problem. In the meantime, in professional settings I agree with others that it's best to follow the rule to call people by their professional titles unless you're specifically invited to be on a first name basis. But then I'm also getting old.

I saw this happen from time to time with female nurses/therapists calling female residents by first name. I did my best to try to correct them when I witnessed it, especially as I got more senior. The residents felt really appreciative and I definitely encourage other guys to do the same.

 

[PhotonBomb]

idk personally I think it's weird for residents either male or female to be called Dr. blah blah in a rad onc department which is otherwise a small department with collegiality.

but otherwise agree that the data about women being called by 'first name' at conferences etc is compelling and am glad it was published.

 

[metallica81788]

idk personally I think it's weird for residents either male or female to be called Dr. blah blah in a rad onc department which is otherwise a small department with collegiality.

Getting that page as a PGY5 from an internal medicine intern about an inpatient "this is Dr. xxxx" - you're an intern, please. We're all residents here let's not make it weird.

 

[thecarbonionangle]

I saw this happen from time to time with female nurses/therapists calling female residents by first name. I did my best to try to correct them when I witnessed it, especially as I got more senior. The residents felt really appreciative and I definitely encourage other guys to do the same.

Why is it usually a female doing it to another female?

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Getting that page as a PGY5 from an internal medicine intern about an inpatient "this is Dr. xxxx" - you're an intern, please. We're all residents here let's not make it weird.

yeah its always strange. I remember someone specifically who always did this on calls a pages and i thought it was weird. We’re all doctors here...

 

[KHE88]

Getting that page as a PGY5 from an internal medicine intern about an inpatient "this is Dr. xxxx" - you're an intern, please. We're all residents here let's not make it weird.

I remember when I was an intern in the ED. There was a shared line, so when you left a message for someone to call you back, it would go to the ED operator who would overhead page the whole department and tell the person what line to pick up. This was an awkward scenario. One time I paged the surgery resident on call, and left a text page "please call Dr. KHE88 at 83425 or whatever." Sure enough, 5 minutes later, there is an overhead page, "Dr. KHE88, you have a call on line 4." I picked up, explained the situation, and she came down to evaluate the patient. When she got there she immediately said, "Oh you're an intern, I thought you were an attending" and gave me a nasty look. I wasn't trying to show off, I was just trying to make sure the overhead page sounded appropriate as "Billy (not my name), you have a call on line 4" wouldn't exactly sound right coming to the entire department. Of course, she clearly thought I was a prick for wanting to be called doctor. When the reality is I couldn't care less what my peers call me.

The whole thing is stupid. It's even stupider to try and claim that all the male doctors naturally don't call female doctors "doctor" because they think they're inferior. Talk about an inferiority complex. Geez. Not everything is sexism, guys (use of "guys" there - NOT SEXIST!). Get a f'ing grip. It's like the boy who cried wolf when you call everything you don't like sexist. It undermines arguments against legitimate cases of discrimination.

My peers can call me whatever they want. Male of female. I don't care. Now staff on the otherhand, that's a different situation. Respect the hierarchy. No, it's not the miiltary but the same principle applies. You want your orders respected and not questioned. Give an inch with them you give a mile. I'm tired of every order I give my staff being questioned.