Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 81
  1. #11
    V.I.P. jenc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Colchester UK
    Posts
    2,124
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Women are underdiagnosed for heart attacks

    Men care underdiagnosed for breast cancer

    I don't thnik that men are deliberately discriminated against in health any more than women

  2. #12
    Senior Member Sophia Maria's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    New England, U.S.A. / Paris, France
    Posts
    545
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Duvet View Post
    The battle against things like abuse, crime, health, economic problems, should be about the situations, regardless of the gender involved. Domestic abuse is domestic abuse: cancer is cancer regardless of who it is attacking. The trouble is that when a man presents himself as needing help, the support system is rarely there, even if the issue is recognized, and thatís because it is assumed that women are always the victims, and that the men are either the problem, or can deal with things for themselves. A man in the system is often viewed as defective or deviant in some way.
    Well said! Exactly what I think. Men have as many problems as women, and that should be recognized...also women are stronger than society sometimes makes them out to be

  3. #13
    Moderator Darshiva's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Kyabram, Vic
    Posts
    4,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kashmir View Post
    Ditto circumcision - does the author really think male and female circumcision are of equal impact? One is painful for a short time then of no real impact - apart from slightly reducing STDs (including AIDS) for the man and his partners. Many women die as menstrual blood is trapped and becomes infected; they need surgery before giving birth - and in most cases are sewn up tight afterwards.
    Actually, that information about male circumcision is inaccurate.

    Firstly - the death rate of newborns to circumcision is quite high even in the US with first-world medical. The fact that most are unaware of it is that it is covered up as 'complications from birth'.

    Secondly - the myth about circumcision lowering std rates comes from a faulty african study where they circumcised volunteers and took a census during the months immediately after said surgery and noticed the lower (only slightly, mind) rates of infection that had absolutely nothing to do with the amount of time spent recovering from surgery. That study has been debunked as completely flawed in almost every aspect. To a layperson it wouldn't matter but for me with a science background I would like to see the idiots behind the study labelled as rogue scientists for not doing their jobs properly!

    Thirdly - the complications from the surgery are every bit as serious as the female counterparts. Lost of sensitivity, loss of function - those two are what's SUPPOSED to happen. The other stuff like constant pain, inability to produce &/or maintain an erection, scarring - that's all stuff that's only supposed to happen with femcirc. I am NOT comparing male circ to femcirc because femcirc is a misnomer in that more organs are amputated. But that does NOT lessen the impact of male circ.

    Fourthly - in studies from grown men who have known what it is to be sexually active with a foreskin and circumcised (by choice) they say that their pleasure is reduced from a 10 to a 4 - that's best case scenario. That's not 'nothing'. That's a huge part of their enjoyment of sex that has been taken from them by circumcision. The reason most circed men don't complain is that they do not know the difference. Imagine if you had only ever had porridge made with water - you would not know that porridge made with salt, sugar & cream was better, you would simply assume that it's all porridge and there's nothing wrong with the porridge you eat. You don't know what you're missing.

    Every man has a right to feel good about his penis no matter what, but wouldn't it be lovely to live in a world where everyone had a choice in the matter of genital modification (which is what circ becomes when done on a fully grown, fully consenting person)?

    *Sorry about the whargarble, I'm an intactivist. If you want more information, google circumstitions or pop me a pm for some links.

  4. #14
    V.I.P. Kashmir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Christchurch, New Zealand
    Posts
    1,952
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darshiva View Post
    Fourthly - in studies from grown men who have known what it is to be sexually active with a foreskin and circumcised (by choice) they say that their pleasure is reduced from a 10 to a 4 - that's best case scenario. That's not 'nothing'. That's a huge part of their enjoyment of sex that has been taken from them by circumcision. The reason most circed men don't complain is that they do not know the difference. Imagine if you had only ever had porridge made with water - you would not know that porridge made with salt, sugar & cream was better, you would simply assume that it's all porridge and there's nothing wrong with the porridge you eat. You don't know what you're missing.
    Interesting. In NZ men of my generation are all circumcised and seem to think its "normal" - so I have never met someone who has switched as an adult. The younger generation is less likely to be circumcised. Among them I have heard of two who had problems retracting their foreskins and were cut to "fix" it - but I guess they wouldn't discuss the side effects with an old lady!

  5. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    H-Town
    Posts
    111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Being a medical student and a mother of three boys I agree with Darshiva.

    And yes some men do need their foreskin split to uncover their head just as some women need to go in to loosen their vagina. I have seen it done.

  6. #16
    V.I.P. khanjar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    South West England
    Posts
    1,915
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    The male circumcision debate is a hot one steeped through with medical and religious myth and so filled to the brim with false information that makes it a real challenge for those considering having it done to themselves or those in their charge and that, the 'those in their charge' bit for me is the worst aspect.

    As it is not like ear piercing or even cutting hair in a certain style or even dressing those in your charge in a certain fashion, but what it is removing something nature put there for a very good reason and denying those in their charge the choice of what they wish to do with their bodies.

    It is also true male circumcision reduces sensitivity and makes sexual intercourse less enjoyable and that from adult males who have had it done and years later report that fact, as of course it takes years for skin to toughen up. Of course those that had this done as a child will never know what has been lost and with a great many of them who have since become adults, they question what they have lost and the right of mutilators. Further knowledge of the future implications of this procedure might be better understood if one considers the like area of sensitivity in the female gender, medical literature is clear on the location of this fact.

    There is a medical condition called phimosis that sometimes necessitates male circumcision, only after topical creams have failed to work but what causes phimosis is often purely down to lack of knowledge, myth and bad advice given about cleanliness and humanity's apparent need to go one better than nature. We are as natural creatures and self cleansing, our bodies know what to do and does it to remove problems, shedding skin and hair for example which is what makes up the vast majority of dust we sweep up and vacuum in our homes, dead skin flakes and hair

    But to the origin of this unnecessary even barbaric practice, personally I can only think it's origins are somewhat unclean, unclean in that for some there is an impure even puritanical fascination with that area of a male body and of course the fascination derived from pagan cultures where phallic representation was common place. With such imagery prominent in society, to differentiate between a supposed higher culture and the supposed uncultured, what better way is there than to have different imagery ?

    But something else, is the supposition that babies are not developed enough to feel pain, bearing in mind anaesthesia is not recommended due to the very danger of anaesthesia itself on the very young, what a distasteful welcome to life....

    But, here's Wiki on the subject ;

    Circumcision controversies

  7. #17
    Premium Member Aniseteph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Sussex, England
    Posts
    4,856
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kashmir View Post
    In theory there should be no discrimination - but it isn't helped by ill-informed comments such as the prostate screening thing which is believed to be a bad idea by those in the know - something like for every life saved 50 men would undergo unnecessary surgery (prostate cancer is very common - and very slow - most men die of something else). Of these a third will suffer urinary or rectal incontinance and a third permanent sexual disfunction.
    This. I haven't checked the link out, but the "you've got screening programmes where's ours?" mentality is oversimplistic. Biologically speaking we are different, with different bits that get different diseases that are not directly comparable in terms of how easy they are to detect, how often they happen, and how easy they are to treat. That's just how it is; there's no point trying to get all gender issues-y about it.

    (Ack, looked at the link. Yes women are better at putting themselves in reach of the health system, but contraception and babies will do that for you. And possibly a little out of date on men's health. There are Well Man clinics nowadays, plenty of gender-neutral leaflets at the doctor's (diabetes, heart disease?), GPs targets for general health checks don't discriminate.... And where I change for my dance class at a college sports centre there's a poster telling guys how to check themselves for testicular cancer. It looks more fun than a smear test - not fair!!! )

  8. #18
    Moderator Zorba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Merritt Island, Fl.
    Posts
    2,661
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Duvet View Post
    Iíve experienced gender discrimination against men at my work (dress code and job description)
    Yea, don't get me started on dress codes and stupid male clothing...

  9. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    H-Town
    Posts
    111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    But something else, is the supposition that babies are not developed enough to feel pain, bearing in mind anaesthesia is not recommended due to the very danger of anaesthesia itself on the very young, what a distasteful welcome to life....

    I agree with you.

    I have heard the screams and hollers of the baby so no one can tell me they feel no pain. Unfortunately that is what they still teach at school

  10. #20
    V.I.P. Ariadne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    NE Mojave Desert
    Posts
    2,275
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by khanjar View Post
    what do you think ?
    I think you are absolutely right and there is discrimination against men in society in the US as well and it has ticked me off at times. I don't presume to speak for other countries and I'm not touching certain other subjects in this thread with a 10' pole.

Page 2 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •