Two Essays on "The Pink World"

Via eamil:

Please distribute / publish the following two articles (also attached in word file form).

Thank you,
Alan Millard

Kentucky Fried Chicken “Pink Bucket”--a Sex Discriminatory Campaign.

A campaign by KFC is now underway to generate money to fund research to find a cure for women’s cancer. Why do we accept the battle against cancer, in any light, only against women’s cancer? Is this not a form of sex discrimination applying to a cure? Sure, women’s cancer is a terrible thing, but so is men’s (prostate) cancer. Why discriminate?

An equal effort to battle both should be a given. The sex discrimination is high-lighted by featuring the pink-colored bucket. Despite the grave numbers of male victims of prostate cancer, this sexist example is included amongst other discriminatory efforts, even by government agencies, including the U.S. Postal Service, in which case it failed to equally represent/support male cancer. Indeed, men’s health is not given nearly the concern to women’s health, and less effort is made to secure it. Although male (prostate) cancer and female (breast) cancer have an equal mortality rate, equal financial support wasn’t even arranged by the federal government for males in a postal campaign for cancer treatment, amounting to a mere government sham for men. Apparently to appear equal, “ . . . the U.S. post office issued a breast cancer and a prostate cancer stamp. The breast cancer stamp cost 40c with seven cents going to breast cancer research.” The first run of 200 million produced $14 million for breast cancer. “The prostate cancer stamp cost 33c with no proceeds earmarked for prostate cancer research” (Hise, The War Against Men, 2004, 92 & 93). This is the same criminal mindset that has allowed the implementation of the Violence Against Women Act. All these examples demonstrate efforts favoring one segment of people within society (women) over another (men).