Not much to add here, as seemingly we agree on almost all real issues. Just wanted to acknowledge your response and wish you and yours well in all things.

Ashley Gavin has a stand up special where she does some 9/11 jokes and they’re pretty good. I think she does a good job of it, but she wasn’t an adult when it happened so I think that changes her perspective.

Thank you for not taking any offense to my frustrated tone, as it was indeed just that, frustration. Having questions and posting them here is completely understandable, and for what it’s worth, I’d rather people ask than just never get an answer.

Though you are allowed to have your own opinion and come to your own conclusions, I think the fact you stated that you think using the apps was a bad idea even before now, and that doctors have been helping people long before apps, demonstrates that either I was not clear enough, or you were unable to appreciate the lived experience of people affected by their periods.

Doctors regularly misunderstand, misdiagnose, and outright ignore period related medical issues. I’m not sure where you live, but even in a country with the best healthcare in the world, it’s literally impossible for doctors to provide the personalized information that apps can. I’m not saying that apps therefore must be used and are better than doctors, but I, a woman with periods, am telling you that my app has been more helpful than my doctor as far as managing my cycle goes. You don’t have to believe me, or you can say that you don’t think anything is worth the trade off in data for you as an individual, but people using these apps would obviously disagree. And not just because they don’t know they’re being tracked. We’re all being tracked to a certain extent and we decide what we’re willing to put up with in exchange. If you don’t think you’d share your data for that convenience, fine, but people share data for other conveniences all the time. It’s just extremely unfortunate that this data has now become so contentious.

Provided I’m not missing sarcasm here, that’s nice of you to say, but honestly I certainly hope it wouldn’t be relevant in a best of. Lemmy is full of really helpful people in niche communities sharing their expertise, so I’d hope explaining why people use apps would be seen as out of place in a best of lol. Thank you regardless.

I think it was probably a good move to stop using Samsung health. Hopefully you’re getting the features you need elsewhere or are staying healthy without it.

I think you are seeing some of that energy as it relates to these apps, hence the OOP, but for practicality sake, and maybe out of naivety, most women are not/don’t need to be as concerned as Jews in 1930s Germany. Most of the harm that will be done will be in removing access to future care and likely mainly to start in red states. If apps become a huge source of the issue, I think you’ll see a larger shift, but I imagine most of those cases would not need app data as a main source of evidence. You’ll see women dying of miscarriages more and more. And abortion will be more difficult to access, but I think there would have to be more cases where period app data was specifically used to convict before much changes. I think it’s difficult to accurately convey how important accurate tracking/predictions can be for some people, and how unwilling they would be to give that up. Especially if they are not in a situation where they are likely to get pregnant. The difference between telling your doctor your period is regular vs using an app is that your doctor is just not capable of giving up to the minute personalized information the way an app can. If people’s doctors were personally knocking on their door reminding them to take their medication twice a day and then giving them reminders that Wednesdays their symptoms are worse so maybe don’t plan a full body gym workout, they’d probably be less likely to withhold the information from their doctor, so I don’t really see the two as being directly comparable. Though, I generally agree with the sentiment that it’s bad idea to trust anyone with your data, especially health data or data that can be used to support a criminal case against you.

Appreciate the reply. I guess I see how conceptually that makes sense, but in practice I don’t see it helping someone actually accused of anything. If a woman in a red state is brought up on charges and her app data backs that up and the excuse given is “I was lying when I added that I was pregnant” I don’t see that really making a difference. I guess it technically makes it more plausible, but I’m not sure it’s moving the needle as much as would be needed in that case.

If my doc asked me what my diet was like I would try to give accurate info but if I needed to input my latest meal every time I sent a text, my phone would think I only ate ice cream. I guess I struggle to think of an app where I would give accurate data if given the option so I just assumed people would lie if asked honestly for it. I still am not sure most apps would do better if they were more transparent, but that probably speaks more to the scamminess and predatory nature of apps than anything else. There would be more paid only apps for sure.

I think people mistakenly believe it will make it harder to identify/charge women who have miscarriages/abortions. Your comment is 100% accurate though and although it’s nice to see men expressing what they view as solidarity by downloading these apps, ultimately it will have no effect and just mess with data being used for public good. Really wish whichever CEO started this trend to get more downloads for their app gets found out, because I can’t imagine who else would suggest people download an app thats main claim to fame is “respects privacy so little it can send you to jail” lol.

Legit only comment so far to not just say “PAPER EXISTS1!1!1!1!” So props for that.

Can I ask how polluting the data will help? Most apps that don’t care about privacy can probably identify people with zero issues. I bet people are giving these apps location data etc.

I don’t know what you mean by good data comes with proper consent. Like, ideally all data was offered with proper consent, but how does that make data better or worse? If anything, data given without consent is likely to be more wholistic/unedited since they were not given time to redact/remove info. If someone stole my phone and took all my data, they would have “better data” than had I been informed this would happen and given time to wipe my phone.

Most data already provided won’t be useful if they stop providing the data. Generally the concern is for miscarriages/abortions, so just change the data to indicate you were having a regular period and then request a data deletion/account close/stop using the app is actually pretty much as good as it’s gonna get.

Hi! Lots of people in this comment section who clearly don’t have periods, but yea they do offer something more. That’s why they’re used. It really feels like a bunch of presumably men are here in the comments to remind women that paper exists? Yea, we know. Other than these all being easily searchable questions, allow me to say we use them for many reasons including: Convenience - you almost always have your phone on hand. Do you really want to keep a dedicated period journal on your person at all times? Predictions - despite what you may believe, periods are not all regular. Some can skip months at a time. Most apps have a bunch of data sets they use to predict things even if your data isn’t complete Integrations - does my journal automatically cross reference my symptoms and alert me that it noticed that eating apples makes my headaches worse? No, and the level of analysis being done would need both an inhuman amount of time and resources to do by hand

Women are not “listening to an app for medical advice” so much as using apps predictive algorithm. The app has access to much more data than we do individually and it can be extremely helpful for women with irregular or extreme periods.

Is it great opsec? No. Sometimes things trump (lol) opsec. I still will advise against anyone (man or woman) downloading and using these apps if they have alternatives. The apple health app seems like a privacy focused one, but I can’t stress enough how none of that matters anyway. The courts and public opinion will be stacked against women in these positions, so any app data that can be used will be, and any lack of app data will just be used to make the case anyway. Keep as much data as you can as private as you can, regardless. People adding false data to the does nothing.

I don’t know if you’re someone who’s not had to deal with menstrual cycles, but that’s not really helpful advice. Apps provide a lot of useful information and often integrate with other health data to offer better predictions and general insights. Many cycles are not “oh, it’s the 15th, here we go”. Many can be affected or predicted by mood/diet/symptoms. That’s a lot for a person to keep track of. My app will sometimes predict up to a 3 day shift and be completely accurate. I have looked at the graphs and sometimes you can point to a specific symptom and say, oh that must be what it used for that prediction, but sometimes you can’t. Get stressed every year around the holidays to the point where it changes your cycle? Your app will remember that. One less thing for your stressed mind to worry about. Additionally, even if they were super regular to the day, having an app to send a reminder, “hey! Get ready tomorrow” can be helpful to make sure you have any supplies you may need.

Also, we use apps for things we don’t need to all the time. And generally, it’s for the same reason: apps are easier and more accessible. Since you mentioned a journal, there are plenty of apps out there that replace journals themselves. They are used for several reasons, but one would imagine using an app is easier because it’s not an extra item you have to have on you and can potentially lose or forget to bring, it’s always on you so the resistance barrier is smaller, it might even have search functionality.

Do I think people should be randomly downloading these apps? No, it really doesn’t do anything at all. But blaming people for using conveniences because the government is trying to take away their rights is really missing the mark. It might be good opsec, but it’s dismissive at the least and not really solving the actual problem.

Since the election I’ve written comments the length of essays attempting to explain what you just put so succinctly. “She was a worse candidate because she lost the election to him, which is the one thing you need to do” 100% this.

For what it’s worth, I do try to make the distinction between her and her campaign. She might have been the winning candidate had her campaign made different decisions, but at the end of the day, she’s responsible for her campaign. They can’t force her to say anything she doesn’t want to.

I think there’s a lot of people talking past each other because they don’t agree on what the purpose of being a candidate is. We might think it’s getting elected, others might think it’s being the best representation of the party. Obviously, she wasn’t option 1, but some people may think she was better because they are libs who agree with her ideologically and are somehow still under the delusion that Rs represent state rights, “godliness”, and fiscal responsibility. They see Trump and think “how can people say he’s a better representative of Rs than Kamala is of Ds” and the answer is that they have no idea what Rs want and are incapable of recognizing the broad spectrum of people that normally vote D. I hope people can rid themselves of that kind of thinking because it’s obviously not serving them or the party. Either recognize that candidates need to be ELECTED to mean anything, or be prepared to be in this same position for the foreseeable future.

I can’t speak to the misogyny, but to your second point, I try so hard to not mention him because your opinion gets disregarded in dem spaces as soon as you bring him up. He did everything right and dems would rather lose than actually be progressive.

I keep telling myself I won’t comment on political posts, and yet here I go again.

If we stop looking at non-voters, and start actually looking at voters, you’ll see that Trump gained support among both women and non-white voters. Why is nobody asking about that? I would rather they have stayed home than given Trump the extra vote, but all you hear about now is low turn out in white men. She lost in almost every bloc because she didn’t inspire any of the dem base. High turnout skews dem and she was just not an inspiring candidate.

Kamala had no time to campaign, was an unknown to voters despite being the VP, made no strides to distance herself from Biden, and failed to run a cohesive strategy. People just were not excited to vote for her. Do I think a popularity contest is the best way to elect the president, no, but that doesn’t change the system that we have.

The race was extremely close, and the fact that Trump GAINED in POC and women blocs probably speaks more to the campaign that was run rather than America’s inherent sexism or racism. Just to be clear, America is sexist and racist, and people can be self hating or whatever, but she GAINED points in the white male category and lost in the black male category. Sure, white men should have shown up, but it’s very easy to cry “racism/sexism” if you ignore all the other people who didn’t show up or the people who DID show up and voted trump. She might’ve run as well as she could have, but it was a bad campaign.

There was a 5% loss in young voters. I wonder how energized they would have been not just to vote but to donate and volunteer had she run a different campaign. It’s easy to Monday morning quarterback, but Joe ruined the chances of a dem winning this year.

If dems still want to blame racism/sexism, then I don’t want to see any dems support POC/women in primaries. Dems should only run white males and if I see a POC/woman being pushed again I will assume they want to sabotage that year. I expect “I’m not voting for a POC/woman candidate” to be a well regarded and widespread dem opinion for practicality sake. Either stop running them ever, or admit they can win with better campaign strategies. You can’t have it both ways.

Going off these numbers: https://www.nbcwashington.com/decision-2024/2024-voter-turnout-election-demographics-trump-harris/3762138/

I get where you’re coming from, and I sympathize with what is sometimes referred to as “low information voters” (though I don’t know how I personally feel about that term), but it’s important to point out that they are not NO information voters. They have heard at least some of what Trump has to say, and are willing to overlook blatant racism/fascism/misogyny/homophobia for what they think will be lower costs (or another either equally empty promise or overtly harmful promise). I am not by any means well off, but if someone said they could decrease my costs if I assented to rounding up X group, I would not take that deal. They have. They might not know the extent to which he will do others harm, but they are willing to take the deal because they do not think it will harm them directly. Hence the leopard/face jokes. They might be doing “honest work”, but that does not make them good people (though “some, I assume, are good people”).

I have family that voted for Trump who would be classed as “low info” and they only know he’s “gonna put god back in schools”. They don’t go out of their way to physically injure people different from them, but it’s clear that not only do they not care about those people, they want to force them to conform or leave. Imho, that’s not indicative of a good person. In fact, it’s often indicative of a bad person. Say what you want about “different values” or how dems are more open minded or whatever the studies show, at a certain point, conservatism makes you a bad person.

Sure, we can debate about where that line is, but the further back you want to “conserve” the worse you are in my experience. Wanna go back to the 90s? Probably economically motivated, but willing to throw the lgbt+ community under the bus. 70s? Them and women are not important to you. 50s? Just blatantly racist at this point. Anything before that and they might as well want to bring back ownership of people. At the end of the day what are they trying to conserve? Their own power. They just differ in who they’re willing to trample to take it back.

I think in this case the concept is that you are sending a thank you to Kamala Harris? So it’s supposed to make you feel like you will be contacting her directly in some roundabout way. So in that case although the text is to you, the thank you they are requesting you sign is to Kamala Harris.

It’s not really like that at all. Kinda the opposite.

“We would love you to pick up pizza for dinner”

“I generally don’t eat out”

“If you don’t pick up pizza, someone will get lasagna delivered”

“That’s fine. I don’t really care”

“WHY DIDNT YOU GET US PIZZA?! NOW WE ONLY HAVE LASAGNE!!”

If the dems wanted them to go out and pick pizza, they could’ve worked harder to do that. The people that didn’t vote legitimately do not care. The dems needed to give them a reason to care and they didn’t. Is it unfortunate that stopping fascism isn’t a good enough reason? Yes. Did we know that was going to be the case the whole time? Yes. The dems strategy was bad, and people will suffer because of it. The people who didn’t vote will continue to be apathetic.

Lmao at your last line. Yea, in another comment this AM I mentioned that they need to never run this kind of campaign again. If they do, it better be for the most generic white guy to ever exist. I know they will continue to run it because ratchet theory works in their favor regardless of what they say, but it’s just so disheartening. When they refused to let people speak at the convention I knew it was over for them. What a terrible joke. I feel insulted that I had to vote and pretend to care just to have them do less than I did. Hope we all make it through ok.

So help me, I’m tired of seeing this take. You can’t have it both ways. If you think Americans (dems specifically) are too racist/sexist for a black female president, then running her IS a mistake. Either you think it’s ok to run a candidate you know will likely lose but it’s worth it to say a black female ran, or you think they had reason to believe she would win. If #1, then that’s tacit support of Trump, if #2 you think the best poli sci/stats people in America were too dumb to figure out people are too sexist/racist.

I know dem voters that are racist (seeing a POC=lock your doors). They voted Harris. I know Rs that are racist (too racist to write here). They voted Trump. If the dems ran a better campaign, Kamala would have won. If they knew they were gonna run this campaign and were concerned the tiny minority of dem racists/sexists would be a problem, they should have run a white man. The take that America is racist but Kamala did all she could and the platform was great and we don’t regret running her is the problem with democrats. They did something wrong because they lost. If they wanna blame racism/sexism, fine, but then they have to take accountability for having a black woman run as the only choice. If we’re saying that’s the reason I don’t wanna see them run this kind of campaign for another woman or POC. Give us our rights. I don’t care what the person who does that looks like.

Sorry for the rant. I’m sure we agree on most issues, I’m just absolutely livid. I’m beyond consolation. My best friend just had a miscarriage and was given medical care that Rs are trying to make illegal. She would have died without it. She’s still trying to convince. If this happens again in trumps America, I don’t know what her outcome would be. It feels hopeless when people just point at voters. Dems can’t change America, but they can change their platform. I hope they learn and do better, but that’s been my hope for too long. I’m losing faith.

What a bad take. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote. It has very little to do with race or sex. I’m not going to pretend that it has nothing to do with that, but certainly not enough to change the results in even the tightest of races.

The democrats ran a bad race and they crippled themselves by not having a primary. A primary allows voters to hear more from candidates and Joe all but said he would be a one term president. Him holding onto power like he did while having such a low approval rating really kneecapped any chances for another dem to inject excitement into the base.

Like it or not, a politicians job interview isn’t based on their policy, it’s based on their ability to get votes. Kamala Harris didn’t get enough votes, so she did a bad job. She might not have been given the tools to do better (like having a primary in which to get her views out), but ultimately she failed. If you’re a sheep herder and you can’t herd your sheep where they need to go, you can’t blame the sheep. It’s your job and you’re bad at it. The sheep are what they are. Sure, you can point out that the other shepherd beats his sheep into submission, or slaughters the sheep who misbehave, but ultimately if he manages to get the flock (with or without all the sheep) somewhere, and you can’t get them anywhere, then it’s your fault. Not only are you a bad herder, but the sheep that remain in your flock are worse off because you’re unable to protect them since you’re floundering trying to get the lost sheep. They just sit there picked off by wolves (or whatever I’m not a shepherd) watching you be upset at the lost sheep. They would be better served by a better shepherd. They might not have been better served by the other guy, but that doesn’t mean anything now because you failed and now the wolves are getting them anyway. Blame the sheep if you want, but that doesn’t help you find a better shepherd next time.

The sheep who misbehave MAY be sexist, which statistically is not the reason they stray, but if it was, you should have left them to a different shepherd. It’s your job to protect them and if they’re sexist and won’t follow a woman, it’s in everyone’s (including hers) best interest to just let a man do it. Though, I can’t stress enough how little that probably changed the result of this election.

I’m a woman and I voted Clinton. I voted Harris. If I could choose between never having a female president for the rest of Americas future but having all the presidents align with my issues, or swing between R and D with some women sprinkled in, I’d choose option #1 without question. I don’t need a woman in office, I need someone who can win and make policy changes I support. I don’t care about anything else. Having a female candidate who wants to protect my bodily autonomy does nothing for me if I can get a president who does. Making this about identity politics is a great way to remove pressure from the dems to do better. Before the election you can’t criticize dems. Apparently after the election you can only criticize voters. The dems ran a terrible race and have been failing on both policy and optics for the entirety of her run. I feel bad for her, but I feel worse for us. America is screwed and the dems refuse to take any accountability. (Obviously the Rs are the absolute worst, but telling satan he’s evil just makes him smile, so I don’t bother. In case you want to know why I never really mentioned Rs).