roywiggins 2 days ago

The reason why breast cancer became a cause celebre is that it really was a taboo disease that couldn't be talked about. Cancer generally, but breast cancer even more. There was a time when "awareness" really was important because people were not aware.

That progress has happened with it doesn't mean much to things like endometriosis, which has a mean time to diagnosis of ~a decade, a point made in TFA. People commonly suffer undiagnosed with it for ten years due to a collective failure. Finding a cure might be very difficult, but fairly rapid diagnosis really shouldn't be, it's not like Alzheimer's.

The numbers presented are stark: "Yet, it stands almost entirely alone in terms of how little funding the condition receives relative to the absolute number of lives it irrevocably alters for the worse: 10% of women (or 190 million) worldwide, with only $29M earmarked for them."

That's really bad. Like, really bad. It's not surprising that women might get very mad about this state of affairs.

Reply View 0 replies
steve_adams_86 3 days ago

The individual suffering from it probably shouldn't be lumped into some macro-social group of people who are 'playing victim while receiving equal treatment'. They're a person suffering from an extremely painful condition by no fault of their own. It could be your mom, your sister, partner, friend. How much money is raised for breast cancer makes no difference for their circumstance.

What's worse is that there are countless stories of women being denied care and treatment for this condition. It goes undiagnosed for years. Yet it's known to be debilitating in some cases. That's outside the bounds of normalcy and isn't made any better by hypothetical equal treatment.

Reply View 0 replies
zxexz 2 days ago

[flagged]

Reply View 4 replies
  • goku12 2 days ago

    There's no question that diseases like endometriosis and breast cancer needs to go. The medical research community is very self-critical about anti-female biases and there are numerous papers and articles about it. And that's good. If endometriosis is not getting the attention it deserves, then push for it by all means. Men don't really understand it for obvious reasons. But it isn't a big task to get their support by creating awareness. Articles like this is a step in that direction.

    But can we please avoid dragging men through the mud in matters they have no awareness or influence on? Why must a top-level comment about endometriosis, a disease that affects only women, implicate men in anyway? What makes you feel that men are fine with watching their female kin (or any women) suffer from any of those? Why would men like me even be reading this article if we aren't open to the experience of the others? Let's consider the fact that prostrate and testicular cancers don't receive anywhere near as much attention as breast and ovarian cancer. So the top comment is rhetorical and objectively false. Imagine if a man you know gets prostrate cancer and someone comments that there would be better treatment for it affected women too. How would you feel?

    I hate saying this here on the comment section about an important medical condition. Can we discuss women's issues objectively without looking for ways to blame men somehow? Why such hostility against men? I see this far too often and on far too many random topics - it's disheartening and depressing. Look at the way the discussion thread progressed. The top comment that mentions men unfavorably and unreasonably is upvoted and defended, while the opposing views are passionately argued against and even flagged. This is actually a recurring and unhealthy pattern on HN. Expressing male perspective is an easy way to get flagged - even if no hostility is intended (mods please note). Is this how we're going to achieve awareness on gender-specific issues and gender parity?

    Reply View 2 replies
    • zxexz 2 days ago

      Where in my comment do I even mention men? I was responding to a hateful comment from a person, not an entire gender.

      Also, I guess I didn’t state my gender anywhere (I did not think it would be so relevant! Apologies for not realizing this), but I am a man. So I guess I expressed a “male perspective”. Hopefully that brings some joy to your day.

      Sarcasm aside, I do think there may be some misunderstanding about how funding and advertising works for disease research. I am by no means an expert, but have found myself deeply embedded in this area for a while.

      I’d be happy to talk with you more about these issues, if you’d like to drop a way for me to get in touch with you on signal, matrix, email or phone.

      Reply View 1 reply
      • goku12 2 days ago

        I'm not talking about your single comment. The entire problem here is the top comment and the peculiar responses to it. Many of your objections apply to that top level comment too. Yet you chose to reply only to people who objected to that.

        Now, I did consider the possibility that you are not a woman. But that doesn't change the outcome, and neither does your sarcasm. People showing biases against their own kind is not unusual and that doesn't provide the missing justification. People sometimes aim for the easiest target and sometimes it's their own kind. Men showing bias against men is still bias and it's still not justified. Your 'male perspective' hardly invalidates those of the others.

        And no, I don't want to discuss anything in private since it's hard for others to see the bias or point out any issues. And I don't agree with your argument on funding and advertising, since I have been at the receiving end of it in an extreme manner. You can quote as much technicality as you want, but that doesn't invalidate the fact that prejudices cause harm. Unfortunately, the modern society is oblivious of the boundary between empowerment and prejudice. I'm not against women in anyway and I sincerely wish for their well being too. All those problems can be solved cooperatively and without this hostility and the us-vs-them mentality. Instead, this sort of negative reinforcement will only splinter and harm the society in the long run. Reverse of sexism is still sexism, and it achieves nothing.

        Reply View 0 replies