69

Are men with prostate cancer “privileged”?

Anti-Movember editorial is offensive and just plain wrong


 

Photo by termie on Flickr

I rarely have trouble distinguishing seriousness from mirth when it comes to a piece of writing, but I had to read this post by Alex Manley more than once. Despite multiple, brow-furrowing reads, I’m still hesitant to say I think the Concordia student journalist is being genuine. But, no he can’t be! Surely he just forgot to write “PSYCH!” at the end.

If only. In his column entitled “No to Movember,” Manley lambastes all you dirty bigots who donated your money and mustaches to prostate cancer. The Movember campaign to which he refers sees men from all over the world grow their mustaches during the month of November to raise money for prostate cancer research.

Now, I can understand a critique of the fundraiser in form, especially since some fervent mustache-growers tend to lose sight of the greater focus. But it seems that greater focus is precisely what Manley takes issue with in his editorial.

“If Movember was to raise money for people in third-world countries,” he begins, “for illiterate people, or homeless people, or for anything but what it is—which is privileged guys pretending they have it as hard as people with real problems—then it might come close to approaching something vaguely resembling worthwhile.”

Manley thus concludes that not only are these cancer-stricken men irrefutably privileged, but they also know nothing of what it means to have a “real” problem. Hear that, black single-income family provider recovering from surgery? You know nothing of what it means to struggle. Now go back to your liquid diet, because Manley has more to say:

“The whole thing is just a really well-disguised tantrum that guys are content to throw to make it seem like prostate cancer research is as important as research towards curing women’s cancers.”

Can we take it from the Manley doctrine that women’s cancers should indeed be cured first? Obviously, no one is paying attention to breast cancer. Unless, uh, we look at the numbers. According to financial documents available on the Canada Revenue Agency website, the Prostate Cancer Foundation of Canada saw a 2010 total revenue of $14.7 million, compared to the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation, which saw over $47 million in total revenue. Pft…Numbers…

Onward, Manley makes the gracious concession that he doesn’t think anyone should die, then tells us bleeding hearts to stop our prostate-cancer whining: “Furthermore, it’s worth mentioning that, as far as cancers go, prostate cancer is not much of a cancer. It’s slow acting, and it has relatively low death rates. Men diagnosed with prostate cancer are more likely to die from something else than they are from prostate cancer.”

I suppose it never occurred to Manley that the fundraising he so laments paid for research toward advanced treatment techniques, improved screening, and garnered greater early detection awareness. It’s because of fundraising that prostate cancer survival rates have steadily increased since the late 1990s.

The comparatively low death rate is true. But prostate cancer is still the most common cancer to afflict Canadian men, and these men (and their families) still have to suffer through emotional and physical trials of radiation therapies and surgeries. If death is the marker of “worthy” charity, according to Manley, why make mention illiteracy, homelessness, or vaccination, as he has?

Manley continues by declaring that “prostate cancer is a first-world problem,” failing to consider that while prostate cancer may be disproportionately diagnosed in North American men, the actual numbers of those afflicted worldwide are unlikely to be represented in general statistics.

Then, he moves to economics—also not his strong suit. “Men, by and large, are doing okay for themselves. They’re still out-earning women by significant amounts. Cancer doesn’t exist in a vacuum—it affects the whole of a person’s life. Disease aside, the richer a person is, the better their [sic] chances are, especially in countries where your cash inflow influences the quality of your care.”

Uh… Steve Jobs, anyone? Jack Layton?

“Men—or any privileged group—will have an inherent advantage when it comes to beating cancer and landing on their feet than more disadvantaged people.”

On the topic of privilege, the Carleton University Students’ Association made a similar misguided determination back in 2008 when it cancelled its Shinerama fundraiser for Cystic Fibrosis based on the incorrect suggestion that the disease “only affect white people, and primarily men.”

Prostate cancer clearly affects men rather than women, but it also affects black men more frequently than it does any other ethnicity. Black men, in fact, are more than twice as likely to die from the disease, according to Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Is Manley suggesting that we should stop wasting our time on a “not so bad” cancer that affects privileged black men?

Manley concludes with a simple statement: “Prostate cancer is a hallmark of privilege. Deal with it.”

Well, sir; you’ve convinced me. Instead of donating my money to prostate cancer research this November, I plan to offer a hefty sum to whatever clearly starving humanities department at Concordia University you came from. Based on logic like that, by God, they need the money.

Cancer, Alex Manley, is never a privilege.


 

Are men with prostate cancer “privileged”?

  1. Thanks for having the courage to write this. Thanks to Macleans for having the courage to print it.

    • While I agree with the article whole-heartedly, I don’t like when Op-Eds are considered “courageous” or “brave”. He was speaking the truth, and he’s not gonna get in any trouble for it.

    • As the widow of a 61 year old amazing husband, father, would be grandfather, son, brother and dear friend I have to question the sanity of the person/people who suggest this cancer is inconsequential. My husband suffered terribly. His family suffered with him. And we miss him everyday. He was an incredible person who contributed to a better world in everything he did and his loss is a loss to so many. He fought a valiant battle for 3 1/2 yrs., but succumbed to a ruthless killer. I would love to think this killer could be kept from doing this to others. I don’t think it is courageous to oppose the effort. There are bad things happening in all corners of the world we know. Any effort made toward improving lives of others is a worthwhile effort and should be applauded.

      • I too lost a husband who was only 66 from prostate cancer. I agree with Jane my husband was a wonderful Father, Grandfather, and my best friend who was taken from us too soon. Anything that can be done to help stop this disease is a step in the right direction and should have all men supporting it

    • I wholly endorse the article and the sentiment. It is perverse to pitch one group of cancer patients against another. That said, it should also be said that bill desmond (bless him) sets the bar too low when he praises the writer and Macleans for their “courage.” The standard for what passes as courage these days is astonishingly low–especially in journalism. Only academia has lower standards (and even then only in the English Department).

  2. Just because you go to college does not necessarily mean you have a brain. God help him if he or a family member gets prostate cancer, if not caught in time like all cancers it is not an easy way to die. Just ask Jack, if you could.

  3. Great rebuttle.
    I agree 100% with your position and also must applaud you putting Mr. Manley on blast, very awesome.

  4. Thank you for posting this Robyn…when I read the other post I was literally shaking i was so mad. The pure ignorance of it was horrible and they’ve most likely never had to deal with this issue in their life.

    Although, reading the authors other works for the paper i wasn’t really suprised. the author seems to be a generally miserable person who hates any and everything.

  5. I suppose HIV was a privilege in the mid-80s in the Bay Area since only rich men were infected by it. What a despicable person this Alex Manley person is.

  6. I suggest everyone email the Editor-in-chief, Laura Beeston, and let her know how distasteful and ignorant Alex Manley’s article is.
    Email: editor@thelinknewspaper.ca

  7. “Manley continues by declaring that “prostate cancer is a first-world problem,” failing to consider that while prostate cancer may be disproportionately diagnosed in North American men, the actual numbers of those afflicted worldwide are unlikely to be represented in general statistics.”

    There is plenty written on diet’s affect on cancer rates, and heavy meat & dairy & processed foods consumption is a first-world problem… but possible for anyone due to pollution/environmental factors.

    You won’t find me an Unshaven Maven, or jumping into pink ribbon consumerism(there is a documentary on that)… I find truth in the following:
    ‎”Isn’t man an amazing animal? He kills wildlife – birds, kangaroos, deer, all kinds of cats, coyotes, beavers, groundhogs, mice, foxes and dingoes – by the million in order to protect his domestic animals and their feed. Then he kills domestic animals by the billion and eats them. This in turn kills man by the millions, because eating all those animals leads to degenerative – and fatal – health conditions like heart disease, kidney disease, and cancer. So then man tortures and kills millions more animals to look for cures for these diseases. Elsewhere, millions of other human beings are being killed by hunger and malnutrition because food they could eat is being used to fatten domestic animals. Meanwhile, some people are dying of sad laughter at the absurdity of man, who kills so easily and so violently, and once a year, sends out cards praying for Peace on Earth. ” David Coats

    For more information, check out the movie “Forks over Knives”.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7ijukNzlUg

  8. This man clearly has no idea how devastating cancer can be for people. My grandfather died due to prostate cancer than was not caught soon enough, and it spread to his bones. My mother also is 9 years breast cancer free, grandmother is 15 years free, uncle is 2 years prostate cancer free, and other grandmother is 3 years free of skin cancer. From personal experience I can truly say cancer is no privledge. Am I thankful that we had the proper health care to detect and save most of my family members that got it, yes. But treating is not smooth sailing either. Thank you for putting Mr. Manley in his place. His editorial infuriated me! Though some of you gentlemen look ridiculous with your Movember staches, keep up the spirit and good work!

  9. Thanks for putting this clown in the pillory. If I ran into him on the street, I’d probably poke him in the snoot.

    I lost both my father and a father-in-law to prostate cancer, one an immigrant and the other a son of immigrants. Neither of these men were privileged, having had to build themselves up from nothing.

    Mr. Manley will never be 1/10th the man these men were.

  10. Superb article, Robyn, carefully crafted.

    Manley’s approach is so utterly wrongheaded and bizarre that it makes one wonder if he is actually trying to take an idiotic position in order to *undermine* the established concept of male privilege…

  11. Methinks he is just looking for his 15 minutes of shame.

  12. Was there a reason that we needed to add black to “black single-income family provider recovering from surgery”?

    • I think it was in foreshadow to the research the author states later in the article that Black men are the most likely ethnic group to develop prostate cancer.

  13. This is an excellent correction of some extremely unfortunate logic on the part of said Concordia student. Well-written and researched– thank you for setting things straight! Privilege has about as much to do with cancer and its worthiness as a charity as does the penguin population to the proportion of lint in the dryer screen.

  14. Manless!! not Manley!!

  15. Just wait till the MRM gets ahold of this. This guy is finished.

    • Maybe because black men have highest rate (60%-80% higher than white and hispanic) of prostate cancer (http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/prostate/statistics/race.htm), but have almost 20% lower average income (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Personal_income_race.png)

      From those two facts it is obvious, that financial burden that prostate cancer puts on black men is double that what some other population groups have to deal with, making ilness and cure, so much worse. But privilege it is not, no matter the color of your skin. Shame on Mr. Manley for writing this piece of junk.

  16. How is he sharing his opinion so awful, he’s correct on a lot of points; a whole month for prostate cancer seems like a silly cause when there’s much more worthy causes that require a month of awareness. “. . .prostate cancer’s five-year rate is 96 per cent . . .” compared to an overall death rate of 60% average for cancers averaged out. There is a higher rate of death for being an Aboriginal prostitute then for prostate cancer but indeed it would seem because it is mainstream men who get it, who are we growing our mustaches for. My father died of heart disease and it is the number one killer in our society as preface for anyone who is going to attack me as a person. He raises some really good points, sorry.

    • Sure there are a lot of problems but to poke holes in others efforts doesn’t address any of them. People are raising money for a cause. If you want your cause to be highlighted you should put it forward. People are more than willing to give there money if it is something they know about and like you said heart disease is the number one killer so why not do heart month or something. I would get behind that. But being vague like saying homelessness or illiteracy, it doesn’t provide anything constructive, he is just trying to tear down others efforts which is a shame. Put your constructive ideas forward and people are more than likely to respond generously.

    • its not as if people are making you support it for an entire month. I fyou really felt like it you could go out and start a charity/program that supports anything you want for a month.

      Also, ‘mainstream men who get it’? Have any actual facts and numbers about the ‘mainstream’ man? How does the person who suffers from itaffect its importance? should we only focus on things that affect women? blacks? hispanics? people between 15-25 years old? can you please tell me the most important criteria?

    • Look, nobody is is attacking Manley’s right to express his opinion, by all means be opposed to Movember and don’t participate or donate any money to the cause, that is fine. What is in question is the fundamentals behind his argument, we’re looking at an article that belittles a lethal disease and that suggests that those affected by the disease are not only impostors with hidden agendas masquerading as tragic victims but are also in fact privileged to be diagnosed with an illness which they may not survive from.

      He is welcome to have his opinion; he is even welcome to share it publicly but he is not welcome to tell people what is and what is not a worthwhile ’cause and he is not welcome to tell those people affected in any way by prostate cancer that what they have been through is a privilege and that they should just “deal with it”. But most of all he is not welcome to publish a completely rubbish article with no formal research that attacks an innocent cause and attempt to pass it off as a legitimate piece of journalism .

  17. As the daughter of a senior and a veteran currently dealing with an aggressive form of prostrate cancer, the same form that took the life of his father and his uncle, I am appalled at the lack of empathy and understanding Mr. Manley has for others struggling with this hideous disease. I will point out that while we may be white, our family is anything but rich.

    My father has received treatment and for the moment appears cancer free, that however, could change at any time, and the side affects of treatment have been both costly and life-changing. As for my grandfather and great-uncle, well they never had the chance to make it past the first year of diagnosis. By the time my grandfather was diagnosed it was already too late, the cancer had spread and was rapidly continuing to do so. When my great-uncle was diagnosed, treatment was started as quickly as our Canadian medical system would allow for, but nothing could prevent the spread of this aggressive form of the disease. None of these men would consider their disease a privilege, and certainly neither would any member of our family.

    Universities may be places of exploration of thought and knowledge, where freedom of expression and speech are encouraged, but when comments are made from a point of ignorance, they should never be allowed to be printed. Shame on the editorial staff for allowing this to be printed, and shame on you Mr. Manley.

    • I am deeply sorry but he is allowed to share his opinion, your words are colored by experience and pain, they should never make you an expert on any field. There is no shame on Mr. Manley, hell my father died at 53 of heart disease but I believe this man has a right to share his opinion that in relative terms, this is not a world worry. He is correct, period. Do I think he was insensitive? Yes indeed. Do I think he could have thought of a better way to express dissent? Yes, but are there any points that stripped of emotion are correct, yes there are.

      • Perhaps I failed to mention that I work for a doctor and see cancer patients every day from all walks of life, but that does not negate the point, Mr. Manley’s words were insensitive and writing from a point of ignorance, which should never happen.

        You seem to fail to understand that my argument as well as many others here is not being made from over-emotionalism, but experience and knowledge, something that Mr. Manley’s article completely lacks. It is all well and fine to express an opinion, and to want to spur discussion, but do it from a point of knowledge, not ignorance. Ignorance breeds disinterest, radicalism, and hate, or have you forgotten your history.

      • Okay Tony, just one thing.

        Cancer strikes almost anyone and / or everyone. Heart Disease is also a giant killer and a terrible disease. Some of my family member have congenital heart disease, being born with holes in the heart.

        However, the reason that heart disease is such a big killer is because people are obese, eat crappy foods, smoke, etc. etc.

        Not that that changes anything, because certainly cancer can be induced by poor lifestyle choices as well — but come on. If you want to reduce heart disease, encourage healthier living. Cancer is largely hereditary and often random when it strikes.

        Apples to oranges, sir.

  18. I had a radical prostate cancer surgery in January 2009, not working since,incontinence problems..slain surgery for men to corrected…still leaking…kidney infections..bladder infections,no bladder flow…emergency intervention at the local Hospital…pain and lack of mobility due to pelvis weakness..not employable..no sexual activity, because of the nature of the surgery…SOO Mr. MORON…you are more dangerous in front of a computer than whit a machine gun in your hands…You know enough to be dangerous. Only one thing is to say ” CHARITY is the DIRECT result of SOCIAL INJUSTICE” Stop the waste of our taxes by defending the MULTINATIONALS abroad,let they paid for they own army.

  19. Better yet, feel free to “discuss” it with him on Twitter.

    @alex_icon

  20. Nice Picture…

    If I was him I would find a small hole out of town and crawl into it and stay a while.

    FAIL…!!!

  21. I know Alex Manley, so I may be biased when I say he’s a bit of a turd (and he’ll forgive me for saying this), but I think the underlying point of the piece, that the attention being given to prostate cancer is disproportionate vis-a-vis the number of people who are affected by it as compared with other illnesses is a completely valid point.

    In the same vein, Robyn’s rebuttal brings some good evidence to the contrary to the table but slathers the discussion with so much condescension than any hope of a good debate has been hopelessly smothered with a pillow.

    • How can there be a “good debate” when one side vehemently believes in a slew of flawwed arguments? Until Movember, there was little in the way of awareness for prostate cancer, which is a disease with complex decisions for treatment.

    • Manley smothered any hopes of a good debate when he tacitly assumed that trying to raise money for prostate cancer was more selfish than literally anything else you could do.

  22. wow, thanks!

  23. Robyn, you’re my hero.

  24. To Christopher Olson:

    Arguing about the comparative attention given to various diseases (or charities) is one thing. That is a good debate.

    Tenuously linking it to male privilege undermines privilege as a concept and is wildly insensitive to those who have suffered from the disease.

    Manley’s piece is not worthy of a good debate.

  25. I welcome anything that will bring attention to Alex Manley’s level of ignorance and stupidity.

    Is there a career equivalent to the Darwin award? He gets my vote.

  26. Alex Manley’s position re: ‘privelege’ (aka White Males are the Devil) is pretty standard boilerplate feminist ideology. Concordia sure can twist the minds of it’s students hey?

    Just another bit of evidence that shows just how anti male and racist they really are…if you’re white, and male, then you have so much ‘privelege’ even cancer is nothing to ‘whine’ about.

    I hope feminists are shown the same level of concern someday…

    • do not pigeonhole all Concordia students because of one individual’s opinion. Concordia is a forward-thinking university full of intelligent, articulate, compassionate people. You offend all (45,963) of us when you make broad, sweeping generalizations.

    • @ Factory –

      I consider myself a feminist but see Manley’s view as abhorrent and wrong for many, many reasons.

      Your comments show that you are full of it. Do you understand that all students that are registered at a particular educational institution do not believe exactly the same thing? If what you’re saying is true, I’d like to know where you go/went to school so that I can ensure that my children don’t go there to learn how to spew ignorance.

  27. The article was the extreme but natural outcome of years of leftist indoctrination in the schools and Universities.

  28. The high survival rate of prostate cancer confers all sorts of privileges.

    For example:
    -The privilege of having to wear adult diapers.
    -The privilege of permanently losing sexual function.
    -the privilege of permanent rectal inflammation.
    -etc etc

  29. The previous article author was a disgusting misandric male feminist who has bought into his “womens studies” class theme about how all men are “privileged” thus we can just ignore prostate cancer. Yup a quick google of “mens rights” will debunk that feminist myth, wont stop them from whining about it tho.

  30. I am a student a Concordia University. Tomorrow, this article will be taken to the Dean of Student and I have sent this article to the media. I am sick and tired of the Link writing their hate just to get attention. I lost my Great Uncle to prostate cancer, 3 male friends, and to read this article, I am personally taken it to the Dean and letting Concordia deal with the Link.

    • Sorry, for the repeating my sentence.

  31. The article is atrocious. Breast cancer and other women diseases receive much more in research spending than male diseases. And ask yourself how many hospitals have male health specialty centers like they do for women? (Urology is not: it does kidneys, bladders, etc., for both sexes, prostate issues being just one of many.)

    As for men not dying of prostate cancer, that just is not true. Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of deaths among American men. As for the saying “most men will die with prostate cancer, not from it”. That is just not true as a recent study has shown. It may have some truth if the cancer is discovered in a 70+ man. And it also belittles the terrible cost physically and psychically on those that do survive from treatments that leaves them impotence, losing bone mass, losing muscles, fatigue, and a decline in intelligence, higher heart and circulation related diseases, higher Alzheimer’s, secondary cancers, etc… Often times these “survivors” do die not from prostate cancer, true, but from these treatment related illness.

    My father died of prostate cancer, both of my brothers have it, a number of my uncles and cousins have/had it. I’m pre-metastatic. None of us are rich or white. And we certainly are not privileged.

    If Mr.Manley calls himself a journalist, then he needs to prove it by doing due research. I will bet you if Mr. Manley were to do the minimum of research in his own extended family he will find a number who have/had prostate cancer and I don’t they will react too kindly if tells them face to to face that they are just over privileged and whiny and they should “just get over it”!

    No one is talking about his right to think and say stupid things. However, his editors have some responsibility to their readers to verify the facts before they published such.

    • “Prostate cancer is the second leading cause of deaths among American men.”

      If you’re talking about men under 45 …not true.

      Suicide is.

  32. I just got back from my grandfathers home where he has now been put on 24 hour a day morphone drip because his prostate cancer has gotten to the point where if we are lucky he will die before the weekend.

    Im sorry this guy is a moron , a complete and total moron I am supporting movemeber and am growing a tache becuase of my grandad , and because of every man who will need help.

  33. “Men, by and large, are doing okay for themselves. They’re still out-earning women by significant amounts.”

    This is actually mostly false. It’s a myth that is being perpetuated by ignorance. A closer look at the statistics shows that women are actually doing better than men.

    Sources:
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704415104576250672504707048.html?mod=wsj_share_facebook
    http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505125_162-28246928/the-gender-pay-gap-is-a-complete-myth/?tag=bnetdomain

  34. GREAT REVIEW! I totally agree with all you said in your article, especially at the beggining of your article. Thank you, your post is very valuable as always. Keep up the good work! You’ve got +1 more reader of your blog:) Isabella S.

  35. Prostate cancer effects women too! My husband and best friend has metastatic prostate cancer, and believe me it is NOT a privilege! Thanks to you for writing this article. Obviously the person who wrote that about cancer being a privilege does not have cancer or have a loved one who does. It is about as far from “privilege” as one can get.

  36. it comes as some comfort to me that most people are outraged by yet another self hating son of the womyn’s pseudo movement who has assimilated his own oppression to the extent that he believes the only way to show love for woman is to put himself down like love is a zero sum game. it never occurs to Manley and the women who brainwashed him that you can love both simultaneously.

  37. I’m truly in agreement with this article and wish no person cancer however we still have to respect both Robyn Urbak and Mr Manley for using their right to freedom of speech and speaking on behalf of a important issue. though most may not agree with Mr Manley there is a real disparity between people who support the great funding this cancer receives and those that don’t. I think it’s important to note that all cancer is bad and the severity of a cancer irrelevant. We do need to understand that in order to have progress in most if not all things, we need to take into account both sides of the issue whether we agree with it or not.

    • …? That only really applies when both sides are based on fact and can actually be backed up. Manley’s “supports” for his argument contradicted themselves on several levels, as discussed in the comments above. Does everyone have a right to expression? Yes. Do I have to respect someone abusing that right and shouting out something stupid? No. Not all opinions are equally valid, and any solid points he might have had (buried very deep in there I’m sure…) are made useless by the mounds of idiocy piled on top. I’m not saying that he’s an idiot per se, but his article is still idiotic and shouldn’t be counted as legitimate journalism out of an abstract obligation to “cover both sides”. If Manley is a legitimate representation of the ‘other side’ of the argument, then the argument is really only one sided to begin with. Agreeing with someone is different than holding them to a basic standard of decency and accuracy. Manley fails on all counts.

  38. Does Mr. Manley suffer from moustache envy or was he accosted by moustachioed bullies in high school?
    No to the latter? Then, maybe now he will get the chance to be bullied by all the guys out there showing their Mo-Jo
    Personal attacks aside. GET A GRIP!

  39. My father was diagnosed with Prostate cancer one Saturday night during the July long weekend a few years ago. He was in his eighties, lived in his own home and was a very self sufficient. He called me at home to drive him to the hospital because he was not feeling well and of course I did and he walked to the car, although a bit unsteady on his feet. He received treatment at the hospital and we left several hours later, by this time he was even more unsteady on his feet. By the time we returned to his home he could not walk on his own and he only made it as far as his back steps before I had to call an ambulance to take him back to the hospital.

    They sent him for an MRI in the early morning hours and discovered that the Prostate Cancer migrated into his upper spine and held a grip on his spinal cord. He never returned to his home. He never walked again. He passed away later that year in November just missing his next birthday.

    If you had seen or understood what he had to go through, leaving his home not feeling well and never to return again, you would not consider him privileged.

    I consider myself privileged to have had the chance to spend those ending days with him and hope that just some of the courage he showed in those last months has somehow rubbed off on me.

    Dad, I miss you

  40. “Instead of donating my money to prostate cancer research this November, I plan to offer a hefty sum to whatever clearly starving humanities department at Concordia University you came from.”

    I got a better idea. Spend your money on a campaign for removal of the gender studies in the Universities, because this guy has obviously been hanging around the feminist there for so long, that they have turned him into a moronic, unempathic, brokenspirited housepet:

    “Men, by and large, are doing okay for themselves. They’re still out-earning women by significant amounts.”

    “—which is privileged guys pretending they have it as hard as people with real problems.”

    “only affect white people, and primarily men.”

    “The whole thing is just a really well-disguised tantrum that guys are content to throw to make it seem like prostate cancer research is as important as research towards curing women’s cancers.”

    -All you have to do is look into the evidence of what he is saying, and ask yourselves, where you usually hear this kind of nonsense??

  41. I have lost 3 friends to this dreaded desease, all under 63. I have a good friend who beat it. You can support him at Movember:

    “Thanks for your donation. Your support of Movember and the 25,500 men that will be diagnosed with prostate cancer in Canada this year is sincerely appreciated.

    Attached please find your official receipt for income tax purposes.

    Through the Movember Foundation and our men’s health partner, Prostate Cancer Canada, Movember is funding world class awareness, research, educational and support programs which would otherwise not be possible.

    For more details on how the funds raised from previous campaigns have been used and the impact Movember is having please click on the link below:

    *Prostate Cancer Canada programs”
    http://ca.movember.com/about/beneficiary1

  42. Why would a reputable national magazine publish,publicize,acknowledge or give column space to such a stupid, uninformed, whining, no-nothing, would-be writer putting out such poorly researched trash devoid of all redeeming value? Having wasted time reading such crap the proper response is to ball it up and deposit it with the rest of the garbage. Unfortunately Maclean’s, you might be included if that is your new standard for newsworthy articles

  43. I hope awaiting moderation doesn’t mean awaiting censorship.

  44. A pox on Manley. Just kidding, how about a prostate cancer. Alright, now if I say PSYCH! I’m okay, right?

  45. If we pretend this is satire, it is very funny.

    • To clarify what I mean is what he is saying if so ridiculous that it is funny.

  46. The original post is more skilfully written, more logically constructed and overall more persuasive than the rebuttal. Alex Manley makes some pertinent points which are often overlooked by nearly everyone — particularly journalists — in our cancer-charity-obsessed society here in Canada.

  47. Pingback: Transcript: 2027 Ph.D Graduation Commencement Speech – J Metz's Blog

Sign in to comment.