|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:50 AM March 17th, 2004 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
The purpose is to reduce the lifespan gap between the sexes.
Let us keep the spotlight on this neglected area of health care in our society, i.e., Men's health and well being. I recall reading that of the 10 or 15 leading causes of death, men lead in all categories in the greatest number of dead.
(click) Oppression
(click) Have a Heart
Ray
(Please do not scroll up the page of the linked items. All the info I am trying to convey is only as the page comes up initially.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:21 PM March 17th, 2004 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
>"men lead in all catagories in the greatest number of dead."
But judgeing by the coverage of our "news" media, one would think that it is women who are dying earlier and from more things than men.
Also despite the fact that men have a greater chance of dying from heart disease, the media coveres women's heart disease struggles and death freaquently. I can't remember the last time they reported on Men and heart disease.
This is because of course, we have a very feminist controled media. If the feminists only wanted to educate women on health, life styles and medicine, I wouldn't have a problem with that. But it is the fact that they want informed women and UN-INFORMED men, that I have a problem.
THEY WANT MEN TO DIE. and perhaps I'm being a bit melodramatic when I say this, but in esence, the feminists are guilty of murder, I.M.O.
They do not NEED consentration camps to commit their "genocide", appearantly.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe, but as you can see, things are beginning to change in a positive way for men in this field.
Rage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:07 PM March 17th, 2004 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
"Depraved Indifference
Caesareans, Patriarchy, and Women's Health"
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?Sectio nID=12&ItemID=5153
"I'm no fan of taxpayer subsidized lung cancer, but we're talking about arresting women for smoking...not because they might hurt themselves but all in the name of protecting the unborn (sound familiar?)."
Yeah and the state doesn't recognize the unborn child as a life, but for us men we are held responsible for the possible future childs life from the moment of conception, while the woman can abort it. And the state lays it's heavy hand on us. Sound familiar?
"There's more than chauvinism at work in the C-section issue when obstetricians and hospitals are more highly reimbursed for surgical births than for vaginal births.......
"Upon closer examination, one will find that the entire system of medical research is tainted by patriarchy and profit."
Yeah, like circumsizing boys isn't about profit. Nor is selling the foresking to cosemtic companies for profit at the expense of the male gender. And which gender is it who buys cosmetics, hhhhmmm? I wonder, what would happen if this were the case with women? Would we call it female privilege or ignore it? Hey, it's just your dicks, guys. The patriarchy is doing it for you own self interest at the expense of women........
"Conditions that affect men and women equally-heart disease, certain cancers, etc.-are heavily researched, for sure. But they are studied "almost exclusively in men," says Hubbard. "Little research has been done on lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, and other conditions that affect primarily women. No one even understands why their incidence is skewed."
Heart disease, "equally". Amazing how feminists will claim women have equality with men when it's men who are disadvantaged. I'n my reasearch I've read that in the US there are more female deaths because CVD, but I think this may be because women have these heart problems in old age. I think it's because they live longer. But, isn't it also the case that men have more problems with CVD at a much earlier age? If that's the case, and I think it may be, then men should be given priority, and "more heavily researched in men".
Then there's prostate cancer and breast cancer disparities, with the money going to women's healthcare.
Any reliable and trustworthy statistics that anyone knows of.
I was thinking about writing "Mickey", but it's probably a waste. I might tell him something about the patriarchy and profit associated with cutting up little boys penises, still. But I imagine it would fall on deaf ears and I'd be ridiculed by this forward looking "progressive" for not taking it like a man, or to just quit whining my privileged ass off. Could I call this "depraved indifference of the matriarchy"?
I just posted this here to let off some steams. These one sided fucks get to me.
p.george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:10 PM March 17th, 2004 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Any reliable and trustworthy statistics that anyone knows of concerning health care disparities for men?
p. george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before you get into that, you might want to check out some articles about the false claims promoted by feminists about past discrimination against women in medicine:
Article 1
Article 2
Article 3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey,
Great articles, I am going to read them in full in the next few hours, but great research.
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's one more sham ...
It's like the end run Feminazis are trying to do around Social Security. They know it's broke so they are trying to set up a separate fund for older women (due to their living longer - poor dears) ...
"women's health" ... ya know what is really messed up? Can you imagine the quality of care (or lack thereof) someone would get when a Fem doctor got her undergraduate in "Women's Studies"? Would ANYONE want to place their health in her ... ... competent ... hands?
Just a thought
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:23 PM March 17th, 2004 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
does anyone know of a link that talks about boys foreskin being sold to cosmetic testing companies? I've read this before, and I remember it saying something about how the label on the cosmetics say they are tested safely. Meaning, not on animals. And this, is ignored by the left. What a fucked up world, man.
p.george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike some other aspects of intactivism, chasing down the evidence trail on the post-amputatory sale of neonatal male prepuces does not have -- TTBOMK -- any dedicated activists focusing specifically on that issue.
The late John A. Erickson discusses it at his "In Memory of the Sexually Mutilated Child" site, which is now maintained in his memory, and therefore is not being updated. See:
http://www.sexuallymutilatedchild.org/f4sale.htm
Sorry, but I don't know of a specific link directly addressing this issue. A quick googling of "foreskin profit cosmetics testing" (with "non-profit" as an excluded term) brings up 31 sites:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe =UTF-8&as_qdr=all&q=foreskin+profit+cosmetics+test ing+-non-profit
Ack!
Non Illegitimi Carborundum, and KOT!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey buddy,
I got part of the answer to this for you. Most clinical research gets done on MEN. In other words she talks about:
"Conditions that affect men and women equally-heart disease, certain cancers, etc.-are heavily researched, for sure. But they are studied "almost exclusively in men," says Hubbard. "Little research has been done on lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, scleroderma, and other conditions that affect primarily women. No one even understands why their incidence is skewed."
See, she presents the facts in a SCREWED up and skewed manner. They don't WANT to do clinical trials on WOMEN (can't hurt the girls, "for the children") ... nope, prisoners, soldiers, and MEN are preferred. For her to present THAT as evidence that MEN get BETTER care is 180 degrees misleading.
Feminist can't tell the truth to save OUR lives.
I hope this helped.
Steven
Guerilla Gender Warfare is just Hate Speech in polite text
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 03:11 PM March 19th, 2004 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
yeah that did help, thanks for everyones reply's.
p. george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's a little bit of change, but I don't feel very optimistic. Look at any news program and there will usually be some segment about women's health no matter how trivial the ailment. Tooth decay: a woman's problem! In most of the West the problem is that people have been conditioned to think that the lifespan gap is something genetic, historic, and immutable, that it's just the way it is and that nothing can change it. In fact, most people believe in a WOMEN'S health crisis because that's all they've heard. The only ones who really are aware of the truth are health professionals and men's activists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 09:18 PM March 17th, 2004 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
"In most of the West the problem is that people have been conditioned to think that the lifespan gap is something genetic, historic, and immutable, that it's just the way it is and that nothing can change it."
I know. It is very interesting because it is considered (and rightly I believe) reactionary to not look at all possible rational causes for an inequality before coming to your final conclusion or theory. Yet, men dying younger, hey it's genes. Imagine the hey day if women lived shorter lives and men tried to off handedly blame it on their genes. Using the genes argument quite often a way to justify privileges, and progressives should know this, and they do.
I think it does show that our society is reactionary, at least in some areas, towards men.
And even if it were mens genes, that doesn't mean nothing could be done, in this day and age, I would think.
p.george
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 04:20 AM March 18th, 2004 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
> And even if it were mens genes, that doesn't mean nothing could be done, in this day and age, I would think.
Exactly. The human genome being now fully sequenced and analysed, genetic manipulation could drastically raise men's lifespans. But of course, feminists will lobby as much as possible to prevent this kind of scientific research.
Rage
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
