← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Robbie
Thread ID: 20770 | Posts: 7 | Started: 2005-10-27
2005-10-27 02:30 | User Profile
This is something I've noticed since the time the Clintons stepped into the White House. It seems that October has been designated a national month for women's health issues; cancers in particular. It's not even relegated for one month; any time of the year some major health organization is promulgating some major event set aside for women only. Of course, they do so by making it touchy-feely by reducing it to symbols. If it's not the ubiquitous (and now tacky) pink being commercialized in every conceivable form, they also have made the red dress a symbol for women's heart disease. In the supermarket, I see that certain cereal and other food companies have made products supposedly for women only.
The question is, where do the men fit in with all of this? If you guessed nowhere, you're right. There have been attempts over the years to politicize cancer of the prostate in men, and these attempts have failed. That is because men have naturally been an independent sex, and emotionalism, which works so well with women, just doesn't translate well when it comes to men. Politicizing diseases and making them "social causes" simply doesn't cut it.
Unfortunately, women are being manipulated into thinking that as long as they get their breasts examined, they can be rest assured that nothing will affect them anywhere else. That is a lie. Anything can happen to them in any part of their body, but what is it about the breasts that makes it that type of cancer a "social cause" and a politicized disease, like AIDS?
Breasts are an external part of the body, and also a sex-specific organ. In the 1970s, womanpower found a way to make it a part of their agenda when one of their "sisters", First Lady Betty Ford, had a bout with cancer in the mid-1970s. So did Gloria Steinem later on. Up until Hilary Clinton became First Lady, women's cancers were more or less treated the same as men and children. After Hilary stepped in, womanpower finally had a true blue "sister" in a powerful position.
In 1998, the federal government gave women set-asides for breast examinations and other health issues. At first being called "victims" because they were afflicted, they were now labelled as "empowered". Apparently, being a middle-aged female and having cancer was a form of status. There is an even a website that glorifies this mentality called "Cancer and Careers".
Men's health issues will remain health issues, and not emotionalized "social causes", and for good reason. Our society has decided that certain diseases get the honor of having a colored ribbon (pink for women; red for AIDS patients) that apply to the "preferred" peoples (women, non-Whites). The attempts to sensationalize cancers in certain body parts (breasts and prostates) is Freudian. Of course, for women it's all about feel-good gloss and emotionalism; for men it's.....anyone have an answer?
2005-10-27 03:46 | User Profile
[url]http://www.glennsacks.com/when_mens_health.htm[/url]
2005-10-27 04:49 | User Profile
[QUOTE] The attempts to sensationalize cancers in certain body parts (breasts and prostates) is Freudian. Of course, for women it's all about feel-good gloss and emotionalism; for men it's.....anyone have an answer?[/QUOTE]
Actually, I think it's because those cancers are the most common in certain age demographics.
2005-10-27 06:28 | User Profile
I got news for you people, for every woman that dies of breast cancer five will die of a heart attack.......
2005-10-27 12:04 | User Profile
[QUOTE]... Unfortunately, women are being manipulated into thinking that as long as they get their breasts examined, they can be rest assured that nothing will affect them anywhere else. That is a lie. ...[/QUOTE] It's also a lie that the breast exams are 100% accurate. If you want something done right you have to do it yourself.
[QUOTE=Robbie]...Our society has decided that certain diseases get the honor of having a colored ribbon (pink for women; red for AIDS patients) ...[/QUOTE] Women buy lots of unnecessary crap on an emotional based whim. The aforementioned colored ribbons are but one example but in this case has proved a lucrative fad for the time being. Men, for the most part, are more frugal.
Cancer is one disease I wouldn't wish on anyone. Seeing a loved one succumb to it has got to be the most gut wrenching feeling of helplessness ever as death comes ever so slowly with constant pain.
2005-10-27 15:45 | User Profile
[quote=Robbie]This is something I've noticed since the time the Clintons stepped into the White House. It seems that October has been designated a national month for women's health issues; cancers in particular. It's not even relegated for one month; any time of the year some major health organization is promulgating some major event set aside for women only. Of course, they do so by making it touchy-feely by reducing it to symbols. If it's not the ubiquitous (and now tacky) pink being commercialized in every conceivable form, they also have made the red dress a symbol for women's heart disease. In the supermarket, I see that certain cereal and other food companies have made products supposedly for women only. I've got to say ,as a woman ,I can not stand the societal push that I wear a red dress, burn my bra, and regurgitate the ultra feminists line of crap that I'm supposed to buy into. I find this sort of commercialization of my body to be insulting. Unfortunately there are too many women willing to be sheep. And to many organizations making a profit off of the image of women being "victims". Ponce is right, heart disease is more of a problem than breast cancer and yet it's never publicized the way cancer is. Why? Because the groups that make their money off womens "victimization" can't claim as strong a case for something that affects men and women.
2005-10-28 05:21 | User Profile
I think it is better to have healthy women rather than unhealthy men that wish to be women. Or, in other terms, worthless men that think as women.
It angers me greatly that some men act like women and more so some women that pretend to be men. They both misunderstand the meaning of manliness.
The European and American visual media is populated by females and homosexuals. The attention of it attracts them. It is clear that is their design and genetic preference and also error.
And the media-man always demeans manhood for he is usually homosexual and/or applicable to female notions and pampering. Like a small child with its mother.
However, with respect to my first sentence, it remains with the male to regain and retain manly behaviour and condition. For in times of distress or disorder the woman will demand the protection of the man, for herself and her children - and will expect no less and no exception.
Therefore, men must remain men. And never become like women.
Mentzer