It's worth noting that the surgeons who do top surgery and the surgeons who do mastectomies or reconstruction for breast cancer often aren't the same people (on top of that, I believe it's common for the person doing the actual "cutting out cancer" part and the person doing the reconstruction to be separate people)--they're fairly distinct medical communities. This may be changing a bit in the US now that there's insurance coverage for top surgery, but they're still pretty different worlds, afaik. (I actually knew someone who had discovered he had breast cancer as he was preparing for top surgery. It did upend the plan somewhat, but he happened to be seeing a surgeon who actually saw cancer patients, so it was less disruptive than it could have been. I suspect the surgeon I saw would have said "yeah, sorry, can't help you".)
hoyland
Honestly, did we ever de-pathologize dysphoria?
You misunderstand me, I think. I'm not suggesting that you're relying on stereotypes to conclude your gender is "woman" (I assume)--part of the exercise is explaining how your gender is perceived by others, which is both about presentation and how that presentation interacts with society.
It's been a long time since I've run Gender Gumby. I used to answer the "presentation" question with "I don't know", because I didn't -- so much of my day-to-day was occupied by trying to figure out how people were reading my gender for the sake of safety. These days it's unambiguous--I get assumed to be a man. But my gender identity is the same--it's off doing its own thing, getting put into a box by society.
Have you tried doing the exercise, including the part where you have to explain to others why you have positioned yourself where you did? Particularly the one about how others perceive your gender. At a minimum, you have to talk about other people's understanding of gender stereotypes and how it relates to your presentation.
There are routinely people who say "this line is stupid, I'm putting myself somewhere not on the line", and I should have mentioned that (because it's a possibility often discounted in the dismissal of the activity), and you may well be one of them. (I mean, I have been running the damn workshop and stuck myself not on the lines, not least because I genuinely don't know how others perceive my gender.)
It has become someone fashionable over the years to slag off the "genderbread person" as overly focused on the binary. However, long before there was an infographic (or honestly before anyone had coined the word infographic), this was floating around the west coast as a workshop exercise called Gender Gumby, and part of the point was that framing things as a spectrum between two poles doesn't really work and it's a fairly futile exercise--no one, cis or trans, is going to end up being able to place themselves on these lines and explain their choices without resorting to gender stereotypes.
I guess it's not actually a widget, it's a silent notification (that shows current conditions plus hourly if you expand it). The actual hourly forecast in the app is like that too, but since you can see the percentage chance of precipitation, it's less annoying. I switched from the Norwegian Met Office to the NWS in the hopes Norway was just rubbish at forecasting the US, but it's the same--it's how Weawow maps the forecast data to icons.
I'd take a screenshot, but unbelievably Weawow doesn't think it's going to rain today.
The one thing that bugs me about Weawow is that the logic for when to display rain or thunderstorms in the widget is way wrong. It seems to show the rain or thunderstorm icon at the slightest possibility of precipitation.
I believe the Norwegian weather service (which is the default option, IIRC) does worldwide forecasting.
Southern Europe generally isn't particularly progressive. A number of southern European countries are quite conservative in the sense of "things are slow to change".
I normally hate posts like these--they're almost inevitably too "I'm now the expert" but I actually thought this one was lovely, I think because it was mostly reflecting on the author's experience.
And, really, part of me aches for the world of fifteen years ago where trans people were ignored. One of the great lessons of my transition was that people are generally decent and will try to do the right thing and treat others well, and I don't know that that would happen today--clueless cis people can default to being decent, even though they're steeped in a transphobic society, but a lot of those once clueless cis people now have been primed to actively hate trans people.
That doesn't mean it's not tiring.
But also, why does the norm need to be hetero vs "people are varied". Sure, most people are straight, but that doesn't mean it automatically has to be the default assumption, that's just a choice made by a... heteronormative society. Most of the time, we aren't in situations where we actually need to assume someone's sexual orientation, so we don't need to play the odds, as it were.
Yes--elementary school (K-3) in Illinois, early 1990s. I was crap at it. We also had gymnastics rings.
I'm pretty sure none of the other schools I went to had ropes or rings in the gym, used or not.