I like it on the floor too, but not for an entire month

T.Chong says:

06:44am | 11/10/10

Unfortunately ( from a humanist POV ) feminism is not about being equalist, or humanist, its about women, and there fore deserves no more attention , or kudos than any type of “masculinist” ideology.
Any and every other type of “ism” bigotry is rightly frowned upon and viewed as archaic and divisive. Except femininism.
May the outrage commence.

KH says:

07:00am | 11/10/10

Ever heard of MOVEMBER????

marley says:

07:24am | 11/10/10

Women (not just feminists) have been advocating for breast cancer research because it directly affects them.  That’s a powerful motivator, believe you me.  It has nothing to do with wanting to divert money from other forms of research, or setting up a “win-loss” over men and prostate cancer, it has everything to do with focusing on the thing that impacts most closely and immediately on ones own life. 

Thirty years ago the medical establishment wasn’t doing enough about breast cancer;  now it is, thanks to years of lobbying, fund-raising and publicity by women affected by the disease. 

Prostate cancer doesn’t get the same attention, quite true.  Men apparently assumed the establishment would take care of it.  It hasn’t.  So, Eric, here’s your chance to learn from women - get out there and start lobbying, fund-raising, and organizing.  Stop whinging about how unfair it all is - do what the women did, get off your backside, and start pushing the establishment to act.

AliceC says:

08:18am | 11/10/10

@Marley

Hear hear, my sentiments exactly!!!

dancan says:

08:28am | 11/10/10

Gotta agree with Marley here.  Eric if you’re really that concerned then get off the punch, then go out there and do something about this grave injustice you see in the world.

JoJo says:

08:29am | 11/10/10

@ Marley, couldn’t have put it better myself.

James1 says:

09:23am | 11/10/10

Eric is right.  Every day I curse the fact that I was born a white male of Anglo-Celtic descent.  I often ponder how hard life is while sitting in my office putting the final touches to my PhD thesis, before going home to my comfortable apartment and beautiful family.

Roja says:

09:39am | 11/10/10

Eric, your theory (aka sexist rant) falls in a screaming heap when the reality that men also get breast cancer gets put into the equation.

Luce says:

10:02am | 11/10/10

Wow Eric.  I have to say I’m not a feminist, but reading your words and the feeling the chauvinistic undertone almost makes me want to be. You clearly don’t have much of an understanding of what the feminist movement is about.
Sure, like with anything, there are people with more extreme views, but the movement as a whole is aimed at promoting the rights women which are all too often trodden down by men. Even now we still live in a male dominated world, with much more progress to be made.
You’re right, there is a long way to go to equality, but it’s not in the way you’re thinking.

BallsUp says:

12:07pm | 11/10/10

Maybe if we renamed “prostrate cancer” to “ball cancer” it might grab more attention and be better marketed by prostrete cancer lobbyists.  What’s in a name?

pete says:

12:23pm | 11/10/10

what rot, if what you say is true, what about cervical cancer that is entirely restricted to women and it does not enjoy the same prominence as breast cancer.  The reason breast cancer has such a high profile publically is because women went out there and gave it that prominence by lobbying for it,

Unlike men, women confront their health problems where men go into denial until it’s to late.  So if you want equality get out there and beat the drum about prostrate cancer push for a screening program.
There is nothing to stop you except yourself. Stop burying your head in the sand in the first place and do what women did, bring pressure to bear. Unless you like to sit there and moan about feminists and keep on fooling yourself.

Eric says:

01:04pm | 11/10/10

Advocating for men-only anti-cancer campaigns is not the answer. Rather, we should be campaigning against *all* cancer.

A gender-specific cancer campaign that would primarily benefit only one sex is the problem, not the solution.

marley says:

03:20pm | 11/10/10

@Eric - the problem is, Eric, that all cancers are different - they have different causes, different phases of development, and different impacts on both individuals and society.  Campaigning for generic cancer awareness and funding diffuses the focus on those forms which should have priority for limited research budgets: the ones that affect the most people, or have the most serious outcomes, or cost the most to treat, or are closest to being solved.  A little bit of money going to all forms of research may ultimately be less effective than a whole whack of money going to two or three areas of special promise.

Generic campaigning also reduces the impact on individuals who are being targeted by the campaigns. It’s a lot easier to raise awareness about lung cancer with emotive anti -smoking ads than with “all cancer is horrible - please donate generously”  campaigns.  People don’t relate to generic cancer fund-raising nearly as well as they relate to “Aunt Maggie got breast cancer” or “little Paul has leukemia” ads.  So effective fund-raising and awareness-raising requires a spotlight on the victims.  For breast cancer, that means women.  For prostate cancer, that means men.  For other types of cancer, though - childhood leukemia, melanoma, lung cancer, it means both sexes equally. (And I believe lung cancer is still more likely to affect men than women.)

Realistically, if you want prostate cancer and other male health issues to stand out in the public conscience, you’re going to have to work to put them there.  And the entire breast cancer movement is a template which you should be using, not criticizing.

NEFFA says:

04:32pm | 11/10/10

@BallsUp - “BALL CANCER” would be testicular cancer. the Prostate is a whole other beast.

Fidelis says:

10:13pm | 11/10/10

Marley, this should not be a battle between men and women .  A woman can find a lump through regular examination , but men , what a different case that is with prostate cancer.  As the wife of a prostrate cancer survivor , I would like to say it was so hard to   get my husband to listen to his body and take notice that something was not quite right , then to have a doctor say the symptoms are from over work , or as some say , you are getting older and any number of reasons.  Our doctor still did not act even when our bed was blood stained when we woke up one morning,  you can imagine what our doctor said about the blood ,  but we instisted on seeing a specialist and   then the real stress started     Marley if you saw the love your life go through what they have to go through just to have it diagnosed , it would bring tears to your eyes ,  that is one thing women like us need to know before posting comments like you have .  I would not wish prostate cancer on the devil himself . The aftermath of treatment can be devastating to many aspects of men’s lives.

We need to work together , not men versus women , what a waste of misdirected engery and effort.

marley says:

07:26am | 12/10/10

@Fidelis - I’m very sorry to hear about your husband.  My grandfather in fact died of prostate cancer, so I’m not unaware of the issues.  And I certainly didn’t mean this to be a man vs woman thing.  That’s Eric’s stance, not mine.

My point was, don’t blame women because they’ve gone out and worked to make breast cancer a high-profile issue which brings in a lot of donations.  Take a leaf from their book and do the same with prostate cancer.  Take ownership of the issues and do something about the disparity in funding, just like women did all those years ago.  That’s all I’m saying.

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

09:36am | 12/10/10

Marley :  This is my second attempt to reply to your post to Eric . I guess the moderator deemed my comment just a little too detailed on the outcomes of prostate cancer.
However , i would like to point out to you that the unpleasant realities of
what happens to a man after surgery to remove the prostate , are extremely embarrassing to say the least.
It is very difficult to go public to gain the focus of attention from ” the establishment “.  It is difficult to explain to you without being allowed to detail the adversities of prostate cancer. Unfortunately , the moderator is
not sympathetic enough to men’s embarrassment involved in focusing public attention to the disease.
In short , what i am trying to tell you , it is far more difficult for men with prostate cancer to get the establisment to act , than for women with breast cancer.
My sister has recently undergone a radical masectomy and she recognises the problems for men in putting their case to the public ,but as she also said , ” you have to get out there and put all the embarrassing details in a public presentation. “
Extremely difficult to do so unfortunately , because the public find the details disturbing to say the least. Just how men will ever get a fair deal is beyond me as the truth of the effectsof this disease offends peoples senses .  When the disease involves a females breasts , that’s sexy ,
when it involves a man’s ....................that’s disgusting and taboo.

Rebecca says:

12:10pm | 12/10/10

There is nothing sexy about breast cancer Wayne. The aftermath of breast cancer also used to be seen as disgusting and taboo until women put in the hard work over the last few decades to make people pay attention. If the public finds the details disturbing, then too bad. We went through that too. If you find yourself embarrassed, then too bad. We went through that too. If you want a fair deal, then you have to do what we did before you can complain about not getting the same attention. I also believe you will have more support from women in your endeavour, than women got from men. Not because of gender, just because we’ve done it and have empathy.

I’ve received three invitations to tell people where ‘I like it’. Instead I posted facts and information about prostate cancer as my status. I have two reasons for this. First, because prostate cancer kills as many men as breast cancer kills women, but does not have the exposure. Secondly, because the invitation says that we are powerful women who can make a difference by posting an vague but suggestive status update, which I personally find ridiculous and insulting. As a powerful woman who wants to make a difference, I phoned my female relatives and asked them if they knew about breast cancer detection.

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

03:16pm | 12/10/10

Rebecca :  Twisting my words into sarcasm to suit your comment is unlikely to solve the problem . My ” sexy breast ” reference was in relation to public perception , as was my reference to a man’s…..........being disgusting and taboo.
I am well aware that there is nothing sexy about breast cancer Rebecca , don’t lecture me , direct your comments to the public , which is where i directed mine.
Your ” too bad ” flippancy is quite insulting . I tried to present a picture of the aftermath of a Radical Prostatectomy in my first comment to this column . It was deemed far too graphic for publication , but at least i tried to bring the matter out into the public arena.
I have personally worked on Breast cancer campaigns to raise funds for further research and was just one of many men in my community who were involved. You have tried to put men down for lack of support for women in their struggle with breast cancer . In my personal opinion ,
i believe men were largely responsible for addressing the matter and bringing it into the public’s focus.
Instead of falling back on a feminist style attack on what i am trying to achieve where prostate cancer is concerned , read my comment again and try to understand where iam coming from.
I have tried other columns to bring the real facts into public focus but i can assure you , they do not wan’t to print the ugly details.
Just as you have done , i contacted all my family and relatives to bring their attention to the dangers of prostate cancer .  Four of my brothers have been diagnosed , two died and one has not long to live . My sister has had a recent radical Masectomy and continues with Chemo.
My sons are aged 35 and 30 and are both very alert for any sign of the disease.  I tell you these details to help you understand that i know what i am on about.
Finally , i reiterate my contention that it is far more difficult for a man than a woman in the two spheres of the disease. Why else do you think men have stepped back from measures designed to inform them of detection , remaining adamant about not visiting a doctor. ?

Rebecca says:

08:50am | 13/10/10

Wayne, I wasn’t being sarcastic or flippant, I did not put men down and I certainly didn’t twist your words. And it is the height of ridiculousness to call me a feminist when I am trying to tell you that we and our cancers are the same, whereas you are trying to convince others that the prostate cancer cause is somehow at an unfair disadvantage. I read your message the first time. You are complaining because people don’t want to hear your message and that’s fair enough. I gave you the same advice your sister did, I was just more blunt about it. I’ll keep it simple for you, on the off chance that you might listen this time instead reading all kinds of dark and dastardly motivations into my lack of agreement. If you put the same effort into prostate cancer awareness as has been put into breast cancer awareness, you will get the same result. Maybe, instead of repelling people with graphic images and descriptions, you could tell them how simple it is to be checked, and that there is a blood test available if they don’t want to….you know.

Wayne Fehlhaber says:

11:50am | 13/10/10

Rebecca :  What i am telling you is that there is a distinct difficulty in bringing the prostate cancer cause to public focus because of the graphic descriptions necessary in getting our message out in the public arena.

“........you could tell them how simple it is to be checked , and that there is a blood test available if they don’t want to….......you know.  “

It is not as simple as a blood test at all. !  I had an agressive tumour which had enveloped the entire prostate but my P.S.A. (blood test ) showed only a normal 2.9 reading. Because i knew that the disease was already into my family , i insisted on a referral to a specialist who grudgingly agreed to a bi-opsy after a
D.R.E. ( digital rectal examination ) revealed an enlarged prostate. The bi-opsy told the rest of the story and i was sent to Brisbane for surgery.
This is a common occurrence with men who * do * want a thorough check.

Men have been working very hard in bring the public’s focus on to prostate cancer for over 20 years and have always had to withdraw much of the graphic detail of what really counts in bringing the disease under some control.

Therein lies the difficulty i have described to you , not as you put it ” an unfair disadvantage ” , a serious difficulty because of moderating sentiment in nearly all areas of print and electronic media.

Rebecca , I do apologise for bringing the ” feminism ” issue into the debate .  It was unfair and uncalled for on my part.

RT says:

01:58pm | 11/10/10

I tend not to use facebook and have a habit of switching off when the missus is talking about whatever… they’re talking about where they like sex, aren’t they? Actually I really don’t care what they are talking about…

Darren says:

09:07am | 11/10/10

@Rose - I find talking about protate a real pain in the ass!

Lisa H. says:

12:19pm | 11/10/10

Being happily married to a wonderful husband and father, I DO think we should be doing more about prostrate cancer.
The current treatment options for the disease are aggressive and can horrible side effects such as incontinence.
The outcomes of treatment are often deterimental to family life, and to the individual affected.
I would really like to see better treatment outcomes for men at risk of prostate cancer.
That pihk ribbon seems to be on absolutely every product I buy these days… I’m hoping the research on breast cancer helps in the research of other cancer types.

KH says:

08:35am | 11/10/10

“knowing about a disease can cause the disease”?! Then how do any doctors remain healthy?  What a foolish statement.
The higher rates of diagnosis are because awareness of how to detect it has increased.  Early diagnosis = Better prognosis.  In the past, many people would have just died never having realised they had a problem.

Sarah says:

02:11pm | 12/10/10

I think it is incredibly mean spirited of you to deliberately boycott anything “pink” on principle.  One would think that, having been through the trials of cancer so closely, you and your mother would at least be supportive of such a cause.  Unbelievable.

MK says:

10:05pm | 12/10/10

No sarah its not Mean Spirited,
One would hope you get a clue some time,
the cause is well supported,
In fact
It is over supported (comared to every other cancer)
It is over supported many times over,
You cannot go a day without teeing something pink,
Its been a hugely successful campaign,
its been too succesful
I am just Sooooo over it

Lazy Jesus says:

09:00am | 11/10/10

Pink ribbon = a pass when I’m doing the shop. If there was a choice to pick up a blue one or a pink one (any product), I’d happily play along and alternate week to week/month to month, unfortunately that is not the case. I no longer support any breast cancer charities as the equality is simply appalling.

Steely Dan says:

09:01am | 11/10/10

@ Equality

“I guess men’s lives are less important… “
No, it’s because men are less willing to talk about or address their health, particularly the health of our prostates.

marley says:

09:52am | 11/10/10

@LazyJesus - well, why aren’t there blue ribbons?  Maybe because women are prepared to put more effort into their health issues than men are into theirs.

Andy says:

10:02am | 11/10/10

it’s partly to do with the method of detection.  To detec breast cancer you get to feel a breast - nice.  To detect prostate cancer you get a cold handed MD with huge knuckles.  I know which I’d rather.

Lazy Jesus says:

10:22am | 11/10/10

@marley - Effort has absolutely nothing to do with it. It would be entirely due to do with the fact women are in supermarkets more often than men, so targeting towards that demographic makes more sense from a marketing POV.

Effort? Pffft, that’s just an insult.

Vicki PS says:

10:42am | 11/10/10

@Andy:  Nice theory, but no cigar.  Breast cancer detection via mammography involves having each breast in turn squeezed, flattened, pinched and compressed between two flat glass panels, while draped semi-naked over the apparatus.  Not fun in anyone’s language, but (at least here in Queensland) the free mammography clinics are relaxed, friendly and very efficient places—staffed and run by women, naturally.

As a general comment, it’s such a pity that one of the great successes of fundraising and public health prevention has to be turned into an exercise in competitiveness, pettiness and spite.

Luce says:

11:27am | 11/10/10

@Lazy Jesus, you seriously refuse to support research for breast cancer because the way it’s marketed is lacking in gender equality through the use of pink ribbons? Women have been dealing with gender inequality at the hands of men since the beginning of time. I hardly think the fact that breast cancer is targeted at women (because, after all, the disease affects mostly women, and hence women will identify with the cause and more likely support it) through the use of pink ribbons is making your life so hard that you have a genuine reason to be bitter about it (even though it must be pretty tough being white and male). Maybe you’d feel differently if you lost a loved one breast cancer, like so many people have, making you realise the seriousness of what this charity is trying to achieve, instead of treating it like a gender war.

On a more practical note, it would confusing if a charity alternated the colour of their ribbons, and it would detract from the individual and recognizable identity they are trying to create. If you do a bit of simple research on wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_awareness_ribbons) you will see that blue, along with purple and turquoise, is one of the most widely used colours for ribbons raising awareness, one of those being prostate cancer. They may not be marketed as effectively, but it’s not like they don’t exist. Maybe you could come up with a better marketing scheme and help the cause?

marley says:

12:05pm | 11/10/10

@LazyJesus - Where the hell do you think the ribbons come from, anyway?  They’re not put there by some magical government institution.  And companies don’t just decide out of thin air to donate some of their profits to breast cancer.  Thousands of women have campaigned on breast cancer issues for 30 years.  They’ve harangued, fund-raised, negotiated and persuaded people and companies to step up to the plate and help out. That’s why there are pink ribbons in the stores.  Because women and the organizations they fund raise for,  put them there.  Because those women and organizations negotiated for them to be there.

You want blue ribbons?  Fine, get men to put the effort into prostate cancer that women have put into breast cancer, and you’ll see those blue ribbons.

Lazy Jesus says:

12:37pm | 11/10/10

@ Luce. Thank you for completing my thoughts, I really appreciate that!

It isn’t the pink ribbons I have a problem with, the problem is with equality. So, in the interests of maintaining equality I choose to not buy products that support the fight on breast cancer when I cannot purchase an alternate that allows me to support the fight against prostate cancer. See, if no one gets anything, then everything is equal.

The fact YOU have bought up gender inequality/gender wars speaks volumes, I was simply making a point about the wildly differing levels/avenues of support afforded to both diseases.

I’m not even going to address the rest of your laughable post, as I am about as furious as I have EVER been over your “Maybe you’d feel differently if you lost a loved one breast cancer”. How fucking dare you.

Eric says:

01:12pm | 11/10/10

As Lazy Jesus notes, it’s a gender war issue.

Feminists have made literally everything a battleground between the sexes. So they shouldn’t be surprised when men start fighting back.

Luce says:

01:13pm | 11/10/10

@Lazy Jesus, my inquiry still stands, have you lost someone? I have, more then one in fact, as it runs in my family, along with colon cancer, and a rare genetic disorder which affects 75% of my immediate family (myself included), which increases the chances of all familial cancers, and which I’ll not only most likely pass it onto my children, but spend ridiculous amounts of money on medical treatments as a result. So my sincere apologies if I find your reasoning exceptionally hollow and vain. ALL cancer research is worth it, regardless of which cancer they are trying to fight.

Can whether you have donated any money to prostate cancer recently? Because you can, very easily: http://www.prostate.org.au/articleLive/

bec says:

04:02pm | 11/10/10

Some feminists (and I count myself amongst them) despise the whole pink ribbon stuff.

http://ehrenreich.blogs.com/barbaras_blog/2009/12/not-so-pretty-in-pink.html

Liam says:

09:16pm | 11/10/10

So, because of the selfish attitude of a single person, you now totally ignore a worthy cause.
Not only does that make you heartless, it also makes you an idiot.

RT says:

02:04pm | 11/10/10

Movember is not really about charity or awareness, even for men. It’s either for suicide or prostrate cancer, one of those (maybe both?).

We just use it as an excuse to grow a moustache and the wife or girlfriend or boss can’t get upset because it is “for a good cause”

over it says:

05:48pm | 11/10/10

Movember is all about charity and awareness. It’s really about all men’s illnesses but focusses on prostate and suicide/depression because those are the main illnesses that affect men. If you only use it as an excuse to grow a moustache then you obviously don’t care about men’s illnesses yourself. Good work, you’re doing your whole gender a real disservice.

Baal says:

11:43am | 11/10/10

As a queer man I can attest that when it comes to prostates there is often a man behind pushing.
I think the gay lobby should get behind protates, only men have them and will use the protate more than you realise. Also if the lobby starts to save thousands of lives like the breast ladies have done it would be wonderful way to show love for the greater community. Just an idea fellow rainbow soilders.

Eric says:

01:15pm | 11/10/10

What about the blatant sexism that is feminists seeking attention for women’s diseases only?

Even though women already live longer and get more health support than men do.

AliceC says:

01:45pm | 11/10/10

@Eric

You will find lots of the people who run these campaigns have been affected, or someone they know, has been affected by the disease. It is not a blantant war on women against men. There is absolutely nothing stopping you or anyone else starting a campaign to fundraise for ANY diease. My partner is Type 1 diabetic, so I feel strongly towards dontaing to that cause. Doesn’t mean I’m waging war against people with Type 2 diabetes…

And if women live on average longer, this again is not due to some underlying scheme that feminists have created. Would you feel better if women started to kill themselves if they reach the average male age of death? And what are you basing your higher health support stats on? Women may get more support due to the fact they carry and give birth to children (which, unles I am mistaken, men cannot). Is that a problem? Or should we remove this support, because men cannot be provided with the same??

Luce says:

02:58pm | 11/10/10

@Eric, the only blatant sexism going on here is your ridiculous assumption that women standing up for themselves and trying to find a cure for a disease (which does actually affect men too, by the way) is somehow a war being waged on men. A lot of the distance you see between men and women you have actually created in your own head.

Its a real shame that such a successful fund raising effort is cheapened by people such as yourself tearing down those who got it off the ground. Tall poppy syndrome to max. How about you go out and start campaigning for something that means a lot to you, instead of bitching about those who actually did get off their ass?

Eric says:

03:12pm | 11/10/10

“And if women live on average longer, this again is not due to some underlying scheme that feminists have created. Would you feel better if women started to kill themselves if they reach the average male age of death?”

Not really.

But, according to the feminist view of the world, any gender difference in outcomes is due to discrimination. And, according to the feminist view of the world, any such difference should be evened out by government action.

So, if we were to take feminism seriously, women should not kill themselves if they reach the average male age of death. Rather, the government should randomly select women, and kill them, in order to create equal outcomes.

That’s what feminist “logic” leads to, in the end.

Luce says:

03:45pm | 11/10/10

@Eric, you are so ridiculously ignorant.

Vicki PS says:

06:12pm | 11/10/10

Eric, you really are the ultimate practitioner of the straw woman tactic.

Please, let me in on this great feminist conspiracy which only you know about.  I am astounded that not only can you tell us what feminists do, say and support, but also what they think!  And then, you can go out and identify those twisted cryptofemme conspirators while the rest of us are still assuming they’re just other people!  Like, wow!  Clearly, your attack-as-defense strategy is an effective armour, because you manifestly haven’t succumbed to prostate cancer, social death through divorce-driven bankruptcy, internalised rage, blue balls, the rays, halitosis of the soul or acute personality toxicity—yet.

marley says:

07:31am | 12/10/10

Eric said, and I quote: “But, according to the feminist view of the world, any gender difference in outcomes is due to discrimination. And, according to the feminist view of the world, any such difference should be evened out by government action.”

Ok.  In your very first comment, you complained bitterly about the fact that more money goes to breast cancer than to prostate cancer (that’s because women have led an active campaign for disease that directly affects them, but I digress).  You want that to change.  You want things evened out.  So, how are you any different from the people you complain so bitterly about?

Sarah says:

03:26pm | 12/10/10

Sheesh Eric….!!!  Some woman really burned you didn’t she?  Poor bitter fellow.  Time to get over it my boy   Be strong, stop being a victim, it is pathetic.

baal says:

11:38am | 11/10/10

That was first generation pills, the risk factors are much better managed now. Also the pill literally allowed for the liberation of women everywhere Cate from their tradional role of baby oven. Research it a little and you will see that the pill have overall been a boon unto humanity.

AliceC says:

12:09pm | 11/10/10

So, you shouldn’t take the pill, in case you get breast cancer, but then if you accidently fall pregnant, and have an abortion, then you can also increase the risk of breast cancer? I’m assuming abstinence is the answer…..

Lisa H. says:

04:34pm | 11/10/10

An interesting thread of study that is not so PC is the POSSIBLE link between breast cancers (also skin melanomas) and sexually transmitted wart virus.
It’s exciting to think that breast cancer could be ‘transmitted’ (and therefore avoided or vaccinated against!)

Beck says:

09:38pm | 11/10/10

Doesn’t the pill also lower your risk of ovarian cancer?

Trev N says:

12:36pm | 11/10/10

Is there any truth to the rumour that the AFL will be drawing attention to the plight of Testicular Cancer next season with a game of football played with two balls ? I’m sure this will have the desired impact but I’m sure if they did it for a month the public would get pretty sick and tired of it.

Jax says:

09:02pm | 11/10/10

@ Bon: What are we all discussing right now? Granted many of the male commenters are pissed off, but that is only because they were left in the dark until they decided to google it or ask a female friend (which many did). I’m pretty sure as a result of the campaign more people have considered breast cancer awareness month and more people have followed various links on breast cancer and cancer related issues. This would inevitably lead to greater awareness and education in the area.
I have personally learned more about cancer as a result of the facebook campaign and not just breast cancer might I add.
Besides, it’s fun.

marley says:

12:15pm | 11/10/10

Stiffy, I think you misunderstood my point.  I have every respect for men who get involved in cancer causes or indeed in any effort to raise money and awareness on health issues.  Jeff Kennett and Beyond Blue comes to mind as a pretty good example, as of course does Glenn McGrath.  And I don’t care whether the cause is breast cancer or any other major medical problem.

I have less respect, however, for the men on this thread who are whining about the disparity in the amounts of money and publicity which goes to prostate cancer as opposed to breast cancer, without recognizing that breast cancer gets the money it does because of years of voluntary work by concerned citizens. It didn’t just fall out of the sky.  If these guys are concerned about the disparity then instead of complaining about the unfairness of it all they should seize the initiative, learn from the breast cancer model, and start raising money and awareness of prostate cancer issues.

Garry Condoseres says:

01:48pm | 11/10/10

Yeah, I know. Someone came to my desk today selling Breast Cancer Awareness teddybears in pink tutus. I bought one, just to show there are no hard feelings. It now sits proudly on top of my computer screen and silently denounces me as a hypocrite.

Bon says:

01:29pm | 15/10/10

A lot, considering prostate cancer and testicular cancer are two different cancers.

Cate P says:

04:16pm | 11/10/10

Phillipa here are a couple of sites to get you started.  Janet Daling, well known prochoice researcher’s findings:  http://www.megaessays.com/viewpaper/93947.html
A good precis of various studies/research http://www.abortionbreastcancer.com/The_Link.htm,  You can google the various studies mentioned in these sites for more detailed information.  Get past your own prejudice and read for yourself what the stats are.  It should be part of the information provided to women who are considering abortions or using contraceptives or HRT so they can make a fully informed decision.

Davo says:

07:22pm | 11/10/10

@ MK Are you trying to be ironic (ie, writing a lengthy response to an article that you imply is a waste of time)?  In any event, I’d say writing an article for a significant online publication, which in turn generates debate and discussion, is hardly a waste of time.

Steve says:

03:20pm | 12/10/10

Totally with you on this one, Lisa. Last year’s campaign and this years have both used the ‘sex factor’ of breasts to generate awareness.

I’m tired of seeing the inuendo-soaked posts clogging Facebook. It doesn’t make me think about breast cancer, and all the comments I’ve read when people post about it are jokes relating to sex.

Lola says:

01:19pm | 12/10/10

So, BEHIND the status updates, there was actually a lengthy message explaining that this was a fun way of raising awareness amongst women and promoting self breast exams and the like, something which women often forget about or neglect due to the general rush of everyday life.

The same way men often forget to check their prostrate. Movember, all about men growing facial hair to raise funds for prostrate research - thats another type of symbolism, but you’ll find many people who don’t know what it’s about. Being able to explain to them is just another step in raising awareness.

So, perhaps if you’ve seen those ‘symbolic’ updates, instead of getting angry about it, you could speak to the women in your life and give them a friendly reminder about getting to know their breasts and going to the doctors for regular check ups.