If Mort Divine ruled the world

[CiG]

Men are more likely to die by prostate cancer than women are to breast cancer, yet breast cancer research gets double the funding, wow such privilege.

 

[rms]

I don't get how someone can hate themself so much

 

[Mort Divine]

Men are more likely to die by prostate cancer than women are to breast cancer, yet breast cancer research gets double the funding, wow such privilege.

Oh hey I can cherry pick things too

Don't be a dumbass

 

[The Butt]

"Cherry-picked" or not, that doesn't lessen the point's legitimacy.

 

[CiG]

Only a moron can't see that both men and women are privileged in different ways, areas and to different degrees and often at the expense of the other.

All this one sided shit is so intellectually void to me, it's fucking zealotry.

 

[Dak]

How about women have had a longer life expectancy than men for pretty much ever despite all of the "advantages" of the patriarchy.

 

[CiG]

Oh hey I can cherry pick things too

Don't be a dumbass

Cherry picking is mandatory to justify feminism, I have first hand experience with this fact.

No feminist will ever seriously entertain thinking rationally about privilege, admitting areas in which women are privileged over men, because the narrative requires you ignore anything real.
If you admit that women have privileges, you lose the ability to sell the cure to society and then it gets harder to justify your own existence.

Just.
Like.
Religion.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

Men are more likely to die by prostate cancer than women are to breast cancer, yet breast cancer research gets double the funding, wow such privilege.

tbh I always thought that this was retarded. Prostate cancer is something that mostly effects older men, and for many the treatment is worse than the cancer itself. More may die from complications in surgery, but on the whole breast cancer is certainly worse.

 

[CiG]

THAT was retarded, the very reason the treatment and surgery is worse is exactly because it gets minimal funding.

People with prostate cancer generally encounter significant disparities in awareness, funding, media coverage, and research—and therefore, inferior treatment and poorer outcomes—compared to other cancers of equal prevalence.[174] In 2001, The Guardian noted that Britain had 3,000 nurses specializing in breast cancer, compared to only one for prostate cancer. It also discovered that the waiting time between referral and diagnosis was two weeks for breast cancer but three months for prostate cancer.[175] A 2007 report by the U.S.-based National Prostate Cancer Coalition stated that for every prostate cancer drug on the market, there were seven used to treat breast cancer. The Times also noted an "anti-male bias in cancer funding" with a four-to-one discrepancy in the United Kingdom by both the government and by cancer charities such as Cancer Research UK.[174][176] Equality campaigners such as author Warren Farrell cite such stark spending inequalities as a clear example of governments unfairly favouring women's health over men's health.[177]

Disparities also extend into areas such as detection, with governments failing to fund or mandate prostate cancer screening while fully supporting breast cancer programs. For example, a 2007 report found 49 U.S. states mandate insurance coverage for routine breast cancer screening, compared to 28 for prostate cancer.[174][178] Prostate cancer also experiences significantly less media coverage than other, equally prevalent cancers, with a study by Prostate Coalition showing 2.6 breast cancer stories for each one covering cancer of the prostate.[174]

 

[Dak]

Mastectomy is much easier than treating prostate cancer, and you can also do breast implants to cover the physical change even. Given the popularity of BIs, and that if you get them done as a part of "reconstructive surgery" insurance will often pay for it, sounds like a win/win for women, whereas there's no win for men with PC.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

That doesn't mean much without more context. Breast cancer affects women much earlier on average than does prostate cancer men. The treatment is worse because if you have prostate cancer at 70 or so, which is probably about the average age for men to get it, taking chemo and having surgery will cause needless pain and problems when you're more likely to die of other causes than the cancer itself. It also goes without saying that being operated on near your junk as an elderly man is riskier than as a younger woman on a blob of fat hanging off your chest.

EDIT: irt CASSETTE

 

[CiG]

Your argument just seems redundant, who gives a fuck because most men are old?
Men already die younger than women, so really why should we waste any money on the bastards? Haha.

Jesus.

Age: The older you are, the more likely you are to be diagnosed with prostate cancer. Although only 1 in 10,000 men under age 40 will be diagnosed, the rate shoots up to 1 in 38 for ages 40 to 59, and 1 in 14 for ages 60 to 69.

In fact, more than 65% of all prostate cancers are diagnosed in men over the age of 65. The average age at diagnosis of prostate cancer in the United States is 69 years. After that age, the chance of developing prostate cancer becomes more common than any other cancer in men or women.

Race: African American men are*more likely to develop prostate cancer compared with Caucasian men and are nearly 2.5 times as likely to die from the disease. Conversely, Asian men who live in Asia have the lowest risk.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

If you have two pet dogs and you love them equally, one of them is a two years old, the other thirteen, arthritic, and going bald, and both of them are going to die from some disease unless treated, and you can only afford to treat one, which to you cure?

 

[CiG]

Going by that, we shouldn't worry about treating women aged 65+ for breast cancer?

Female breast cancer incidence is strongly related to age, with the highest incidence rates overall being in older women, supporting a link with hormonal status. In the UK between 2009 and 2011, an average of 80% of breast cancer cases were diagnosed in the over 50s, and around a quarter (24%) were diagnosed in women aged 75 and over.[1-4] Age-specific incidence rates rise steeply from around age 30-34, level off for women in their 50s, then rise further to age 65-69. Rates drop slightly for women aged 70-74 and then increase steadily to reach an overall peak in the 85+ age group.[1-4] The peaks and troughs of incidence for women aged 50 and over may partly be explained by the impact of screening*for breast cancer.

 

[CiG]

These are not great differences, 35% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer are below the age of 65.

 

[HamburgerBoy]

tbh you might be right, I thought women were affected much earlier. Still, breast cancer is much easier to treat.

 

[CiG]

Easier to treat because it has a shitload of funds dedicated to the advancement of treatment.
This is becoming very circular haha.

 

[rms]

For those wondering if Sargon is really someone you should be listening to, here is what he edited a Sarkeesian tweet with to demonstrate the "fallacy" of men cannot be the victim of sexism

 

[Dak]

Sargon?

 

[rms]

He's probably the exact opposite of a tumblr feminist for me. He's a YouTube guy, Sargon of Akkad is his name.