|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think your sentiment is admirable and I realise that your concern for your husband stems from your love for him.
However, I always get concerned when women attribute men's apparent lack of concern for their own health to some notion of machismo in refusing to seek help.
In Scotland recently, after a Cervical smear mix up in Dundee, 20% of the 20,000 women involved ignored repeated reminders to return for another test. The reason? They feared bad news and “didn’t want to tempt fate again”. This is perfectly understandable. However, if men act similarly (albeit in greater numbers), they are obviously too macho to visit a doctor? This is the frequent implication in the press.
I believe that lack of education (directly linked to lack of spending on Men's primary health care), fear, awareness, opportunity and availability are actually the key problems. Last Year in the UK, about 180 million pounds (300 million dollars) was spent on Cervical and Breast Cancer research. The figure for Prostate Cancer was 4 million. A staggering discrepancy given the incidence rates of these cancer types.
It is hardly surprising that there is a difference in awareness and consequent medical attendance rates.
In addition, I'm sure the large number of males who are the "sole breadwinner" feel an additional pressure "not to be ill".
I believe that men are reluctant to visit the doctor due to the huge discrepancy in funding, research and subsequent awareness of men’s health, and not the oft quoted myth that male ego and machismo are to blame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hunter's rant seems to be more of this "There can't possibly be a real problem for men and healthcare in this world, so you're either making it up or just want to whine" philosophy. I can tell her a few things from my own experience:
PLUMBING: Four years ago, I was struck with epidydimitus, an infection of the epidydimus vessels, which connect the testicles to the urethra. This infection causes a GREAT DEAL of pain and, left untreated, can result in the loss of the testicles.
One Saturday night, I rushed to the emergency room. I was attempting to make it through the weekend so I could see the urologist during regular hours on Monday, but the pain became unbearable. After a three-hour wait, I was finally admitted to see a physician.
The physician, a female, and her witness nurse, another female, entered the room reading my chart, with sly smirks on their faces. The physician asked me about my pain. The nurse snorted laughter when I said the word "testicles." All the while I was describing the pain the physician had this "oh, come on. You're a man. Take it" look on her face.
Finally, I had to drop trou so she could examine me. Again, with the smirks. Before the examination was over, I'd had to drop 'em three times so she could fondle me.
"Well, there's no torsion," she said finally. "Just go home and relax."
And that was it. She recommended some over-the-counter pain killers (which didn't work). I went to see a (male) urologist that Monday, who actually bothered to run some urine tests and listen to the problem. He diagnosed the infection and prescribed antibiotics. In three weeks, I was relatively back to normal. The thing about that infection is that once you get it, it's very easy to get it again should your testicles suffer some kind of trauma (like a feminist thinking she's being funny by kicking you in the balls).
DEPRESSION: A few months ago, I was suffering from the worst depression of my life. I've been up and down for as long as I can remember, but this time I was more suicidal. Those types of thoughts were constantly in the foreground of my mind. So, I decided to seek help.
It took me THREE weeks before I could find a psychologist willing to take me on. Most of them were too busy with their female patients, I would reckon. Finally, I found someone, and things have been getting better... slowly.
Don't tell me there is no prejudice against men from the medical profession. Why do men hate to go to the doctor? Because of the humiliating way we're treated by them.
Why not delve into your husband's childhood experiences with physicians? You just might find a reason for his reluctance lurking there...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
any fem who begins her standard railing by instructing me to "listen up" reminds me of the millions of her sistas who have spent the last four decades commanding males to "listen up" while their own ears are firmly plugged with self-deification, moral supremacy, and assumption based on self-service rather than observable fact
poor health amongst american males, including skyrocketing suicide rates, has nothing to do with latent machismo, and everything to do with a culture which values its feminine members -- in every context, including health -- far more than its male members, and is not at all shy about making both genders aware of their relative status, or lack of same
america's interest in male health, whether physical or psychological, extends to the limits at which males can be utilized to improve the comforts of females and "their" children ... beyond this, the gutters and prisons and graveyards can fill with male bodies and nary a peep is heard
two people walk unannounced into any medical clinic in america. one is a well-dressed, professional thirty-ish mother with two kids in tow ... the other is an unemployed fifty-year-old male in tennis shoes and jeans ... from reception, to the billing office folks, to the nurse, to the doctor, to the pharmacist you will witness two vastly different levels of "care," which exactly reflect the value america places on females versus males ... the same goes for the courtroom, the welfare office, the university classroom, ad infinitum
yet our feminist is here to tell us to "listen up," that we are imagining our subjugation, and that from behind the barricades of her protected and privileged cultural status she is "fed up" with men who don't take their own health seriously
it is in the maintainence and protection of womens' "civilization" that male life is degraded and sacrificed ... yet this is insufficient -- we must also be ragged on by the very beneficiaries of our blood
it's orwellian, it's straight outta kafka, it's business as usual in amerika
ray remark
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the story, Nightmist. It's an eye-opener. And the tragedy is that I'll bet a lot of young (and old) men probably don't even know what an epididymis is - that is, until it causes them serious problems that may already be too late to deal with.
I can only repeat what I've said twice before about men and going to the doctor. We live in a society that overestimates the stability of the male "plumbing" while anticipating and normalizing female dysfunctions. Thus, women feel normal about having a problem of sorts, whereas men (especially young men) feel "weird" about it. And they fear (perhaps justifiably so) that if they see the doctor, they'll have a similar experience as Nightmist - being chuckled at and degraded, basically.
Ms. Hunter is, of course, to be commended for caring about her husband's welfare. But I take issue with her staunch confidence in automatically knowing what's good for her husband, and immediately assuming that he is wrong for having a different opinion on things. I also don't know where she gets the idea that feminists are somehow pushing for improvements in men's health - and in the face of male resistance, no less. I've never heard of feminists rallying in the name of any male-specific illness. Usually, feminists bemoan the higher male fatality rate only when it relates to women having more problems because of it (i.e., financial issues, etc.).
While I don't - contrary to Ms. Hunter's accusation - believe that most feminists actually want to see men suffer and die, they don't seem particularly concerned with seeing more of us live long and healthy, either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well put, Hawth.
Btw, if I were a rude individual, I might also accuse this (heh) woman of being a bigot because she assumes that ALL men behave about going to the doctor the way her husband does.
I see how it is, then. Women do not fit stereotypes, but men do. Ha.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I just want to thank everyone who's commented so far on this story - I had some reservations about posting it, becuase I knew the reaction would be negative, but I'm encouraged by the well thought out responses to it.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
important part in bringing about change is to change our own behavior and behave against "expectations": to go to the doc when something hurts (and not to wait until the pain is unbearable) and make it clear that we really have a problem. And of course we should speak out and lobby wherever we can to make everyone understand that a man going to a doctor is not a "weakling".
Again, I must point out that not every man behaves in the way Hunter describes, and that is her bigotry. As for waiting until pain is unbearable, the only physicians open on the weekends where I live are in the ER. I made my appointment for the urologist the second day I felt any discomfort (which was on a Friday) before the pain was unbearable. Because his office is closed on the weekends, he couldn't see me until Monday. Sooo... gee, I was kind of stuck, wasn't I?
I didn't wait for the pain to become unbearable. It became unbearable while I was waiting on my appointment.
I also believe I made it perfectly clear to the ER doctor that I had a problem, otherwise, she wouldn't have prescribed the pain killers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ya' know guys, there may be evidence of deep-seated misandry buried somewhere deep in Ms. Hunter's writing, but it's not the same kind of misandry that comes from PARG2000 and some of the other feminazis that show up here now and then. Frankly, when a woman comes to this site and has the courage to offer something that SHE regards as a positive, non-feminist contribution, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. We, as a group, are sounding just a little bit angry and bitter. We may well be justified, but no matter how significant the justification, it just doesn't help the cause. She came here and offered something with positive intent. Let's respect that for what it is, no matter how much we disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Honestly, Frank. I'm not sure how good her intentions actually were. If her intentions were good, I doubt her comments would've started out with the whole "Listen Up, Gentlemen" bit, which is how many patronizing feminist diatribes start these days (in print media, especially).
She may be sick of men complaining about the treatment we get by the medical establishment, but that's not going to stop me from complaining about it. For if we do not complain about it, it does not get heard, and nothing is done about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I for one can vouch for A. Hunter's intentions. We've had some off-line discussions before she sent in this story, which is why I was willing to post it in the first place. I see her as someone who is sincere and may have some interest in learning more about men's issues. She's told me she visits the site frequently, too.
My comment above about my appreciation for the well-thought out posts seems less appropriate as time has gone on. But I'm also disappointed that Hunter didn't take the time to respond to them, too.
My philosophy is, at least give people the benefit of the doubt. Yes, she did seem to be talking down to us. But she also seems to care about the issue of men's health and, let's face it, her rant has some validity. That's why I was willing to post it.
Let's accept this as a learning experience and continue our work.
Scott
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"listen up" is the first thing my t.i. told me when i disembarked the plane at basic training, and "listen up" -- or else -- is what my culture has been telling me for three decades now ... "listen up" is a covert and coercive way of establishing psychological dominance before the merits of any dialogue have even begun ... it really means "shut up"
don't even think of beginning a conversation with me with "listen up" unless you assume i'm your boy, and that is a dangerous assumption
i have no interest in inpugning ms. hunter's character, but neither am i responsible for her feelings, hurt or otherwise ... as for her intent, and whether her heart contains love for the masculine, this is for wiser powers to assess
i guarantee that ms. hunter has no idea -- none --of how difficult it is for a lower-class male in modern america to obtain medical treatment, much less competent and compassionate medical treatment ... there is a gender double standard in health care as in every other facet of american culture, and i speak from experience on both sides of the examining and operating table
frank h. does men no service by telling them not to sound angry or bitter ... righteous, loud, and persistent anger at, and opposition to, the psychosis of american culture indeed is the crucial element missing from american masculinity ... how extraordinarily docile we have become, terrified of offending anyone with disturbing, inappropriate reality
as for "bitterness," that would constitute a personal attack on ms. hunter, which i have not seen on this board ... gimme a break ... i've been hissed, booed and shouted down on many occasions, in publically funded institutions ... ms. hunter is getting kid gloves
the crux of what men need to communicate to women is inevitably going to hurt womens' feelings, and it's going to disturb their personal ontologies, because each day western women become more divorced and protected from the actual realities of mens' lives
until men can face the fallout from offending women, we remain culturally silenced and chained
ray remark
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I agree with much of what you said there, Ray. And I will admit that my comments on this particular post have been more biting than usual, mainly because men's health is an issue close to my heart, and it hurts me to see someone try to turn everything around and silence the work I've attempted to achieve by getting the word out about men's health issues.
The majority of my posts when I first started participating in this forum were about men's health. It remains a top priority whenever I find information about it. I take responsibility for myself and my health. I always have. And that's why Hunter's remarks so deeply offended me.
I'll admit that I may have carried it a bit far this time... but am I sorry? Nope.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
like you i have a passionate interest in the welfare of american men, especially boys and infants
it didn't escape me that the context of ms. hunter's sermonette was folded within what i sense to be genuine concern for a male, in this case her husband
does ms. hunter live in blissful ignorance? probably ... but in this hour any such concern must be counted a positive, a blessing, and an unspun point of dialogue
ray
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi Nightmist, I'm sorry you misunderstood me, the bit about "waiting until the pain is unbearable" wasn't about you! (Some time ago, I went to an hospital ER on a Saturday because of a painful prostate inflammation myself.) But many men do wait until they can't stand the pain any longer.
And neither was the "make it clear that you have a problem" bit aimed at you - what I mean, essentially, is we should take no shit from any doctors.
And neither did I say that all men behave as Ms. Hunter says, but I think we can all agree she has made a valid point - the proportion of men behaving as she describes is very significant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"frank h. does men no service by telling them not to sound angry or bitter ... "
Sorry Ray, I don't buy it. If you think it works to lose bladder control and start screaming and yelling in a debate where your opponent tries to back you into a corner or shout you down, then you're welcome to your approach. Anger, visible, bloodthirsty anger is a useful tool when used judiciously. But when used just because it's there it gets very tiresome. The only way this movement is going to get off the ground is if *we* keep focused and at least respect the people that are recognizably trying to meet us halfway. I wasn't real impressed with the "listen-up" part either, but after having a short exchange with her off-line, I'm convinced, or sufficiently so, of her motives. Ray, it would appear that your threshold of what constitues an "offending woman" is awfully sensitive, and I suspect that may well be why you've been treated so shabbily. But I sat in a meeting last week at my local school district across the table from a woman who appeared to be a bloodthirsty feminist, and I can say with confidence that I visibly moved her position. And I have note of follow-up action, so I know I didn't just get blown-off. I got there by holding my temper when she was losing hers. Let me say this to all of the readers, because it's important. The men who are most active in the movement are the men who have been the most victimized. But the men you need, the old married men and young single men who've NOT been victimized by their women are the ones who will give the movement credibility, money, and votes. You're not going to get those men (I'm one of them, by the way) by shouting at anyone that doesn't line up behind you in a neat queue.
I don't care much more than you about hurting anyone's feelings, but when I can, I choose intelligent dialog over angry rhetoric because it's more productive and less stressful for ME.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
well, frank, those are some pretty personal and vituperative comments coming from a self-professed ghandi of gender politics
i was unaware that i was losing "bladder control" and had begun "screaming and yelling" -- those sound like imputations of infantilism, frank -- cheap rhetorical tricks, rather than the "intelligent dialogue" of which you define yourself as practitioner and master
unlike you, i am neither clever nor wise enough to ascertain who in the "movement" has the "credibility, money and votes" and who i should be trying to influence ... i'll leave the tactics and strategy to you, given your superior conversance with "the movement"
thank you also for informing me that my "threshold of what constitues an 'offending woman' is awfully sensitive" given your omniscience of my work, motives, and character
when i speak and write about my experiences in american culture, and about the manifest realities i see before me endured by others, i am not concerned with how my views are interpreted by the "old married men" or the "young single men" in the "movement" ... that's self-censorship, voluntary mindfuck, and the culture already panders pitifully to the demographically challenged
your comment that you "choose intelligent dialog over angry rhetoric because it's more productive and less stressful for ME" brings us to the heart of the matter
most of the reason american men are in the fix they're in is because they do not find it financially, physically or sexually "productive" to speak truth either to women or to corrupt aspects of american culture... indeed, they have found such confrontation so "stressful for ME" that they have chosen, almost universally, not to engage in it, or to deny any problem exists
thus while their brothers -- and the sons of the nation -- get mangled, the unstressed, your "old married men" remain cocooned, having succeeded in that most crucial of modern survival strategies, Not Offending the Feminine
in the many years i have been speaking and writing about male issues, it has overwhelmingly been other men who have attempted to silence me, usually by some personal aspersion to my manhood (see the infantile incontinence of "losing bladder control" above) or by characterizing me as threatening females
you inform me that i'm "not going to get those men ... by shouting at anyone that doesn't line up behind [me] in a neat queue"
i'm not out to "get" anyone, frank ... and if i were recruiting space monkeys for my gender cadre, i assure you they wouldn't line up in any queue ... the ones rushing to line up in the queue are the ones i'd drive to the bus station
i think your projection of anger onto me covers your disgust towards yourself for your inability to express the full range of your masculinity, including confrontation and outrage when they are warranted
ray remark
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, Ray I didn't intend to start a fistfight here, and hurling insults back and forth across the Internet isn't going to get us anywhere, is it? You can be sure that my ability to express the full range of my masculinity, including confrontation, outrage, and physical violence, is quite intact. I just don't let those things get in the way of organizing a team.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
you tell me you have no interest in a fistfight, and then inform me that i can be quite sure that your ability to express physical violence is quite intact ... ever hear of cognitive dissonance?
who said anything about physical violence, frank?
i was discussing the incapacity of the american masculine to confront, with outrage when appropriate, elements in the culture which are regressive, subjugative, and patently injurious to the masculine, especially to boys ... i was commenting on how intimidated and silenced american men are before american women
should i be frightened of you, frank, and of your abilities for physical violence?
no, i think not ... i think it is you who are frightened of me, and of what i represent
still, indulgence in an implied physical threat is not a liberty one should take too often
ray remark
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sheesh! Ray, chill! There is no threat implied or otherwise, nor is there fear.
Go back and read everything you've posted in this thread. I criticized your approach (not you personally, though you may think so) and now you choose to insult me with this vitriol. You're proving my point. Enough.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
