Alex Manley "Men with prostate cancer are privileged"

Here’s his wonderful piece of work.

Perhaps, Alex one day may become “privileged” enough to experience prostate cancer.

I don’t know if he’s is just plain off his rocker or was aiming for fame. Either way, I hope he has fun writting for Sears catalogue for the rest of his life.

Fuck you Alex !

Not familiar with his work, but that article reads pretty trollish.

Tell me he’s being provocative. I mean what the hell is this:

Can he possibly be serious?

ETA:Turnip is right. If somebody posted what he did on these boards, they’d be warned for being a troll.

That article must be one of those “moron or troll?” puzzles.

What a fucking tool this guy is. This article has so many stupid things in it, it’s hard to pick the worst.

Tell that to my neighbor. Oh, you can’t - he’s dead.

So therefore let’s cut funding for research? What an idiot.

Where is this idiot from anyway…???

Ah, Concordia. Home of the Guilty White Man. Best that the author just cuts his penis off in penance for the horrible sin of being born an oppressive tool of the patriarchy.

I’m going to be generous and assume that maybe he has prostate cancer…in his brain.

The man’s an idiot. His argument appears to be that prostate cancer research is a trivial cause and people should give money to other causes that are worthwhile. Which, as I said, is idiotic. You can argue about what cause is the most worthy in the world but only an idiot (my apologies but you can’t avoid repeating the word in this context) would claim that prostate cancer research is not a worthy cause.

I’m not even going to bother to read the link. It is a fact that without treatment most men who show elevated PSA levels, or other predictors, will die of something else before they die of prostate cancer. With treatment, we still die, only with a vastly lowered quality of life in the meantime.

I bet he’s trying to get pissed people to donate to prostate research.

Much more money goes to researching breast cancer than prostate cancer. And last I heard, money for medical research in general that’s aimed specifically at men is only about half of the money that’s aimed towards research for women. Some “privilege”. If that’s “privilege”, what would be necessary for “equality”? For men who get prostate cancer to be shot out of hand?

I don’t suppose there’s a chance that men in Hanoi have slightly less access to preventative prostate cancer screenings than those in Detroit? Just maybe…

I fully acknowledge that you said “most,” and further that I’m a statistical outlier; but if untreated my prostate would have killed me in 5-10 years. And since (according to my doctor) the first physical symptom would have been intense and intractable back pain, my quality of life wouldn’t have been so hot, either.

That said, Alex Manley is a fucking idiot.

Would this idiot still be alive if he said the same thing about breast cancer in women?

Yea, Alex, breast cancer isn’t much of a cancer, just cut it out and throw it away. Prostate cancer, just cut it out and render the guy impotent and incontinent for the rest of his life. No big deal. Women don’t need breasts and men don’t need to have erections while diapers are a lot of fun. Maybe that’s Alex’s kink.

To the credit of the women who made breast cancer an issue, it gave men the opportunity and courage to make prostate cancer an issue. Previously, both had a sense of shame. It didn’t have to be that way. It shouldn’t be that way.

Just when you think you have seen stupid you see something like Alex [not so]Manley who somehow trumps it all.

I think he’s got a point. Id rather money was going more to some of the far more aggressive cancers, and prostate gets a look-in as a specific cause because its a ‘mans’ disease.

As in you can tie ‘Movember’ to it, while theres not the same easy ‘sell’ with something like pancreatic cancer. Its not really ‘the patriarchy’ as such, and more that its easy to raise support for something when you can attach a gimmick to it.


He’s got a fair point.

Sure there are exceptions, but generally we’re talking about a disease that is far more prevalent in richer countries, and has indicators including age, weight, lifestyle and diet. Average age of diagnosis is 65 - 70. As cancers go it is usually slow growing, easy to detect, and if caught early is relatively easy to operate on.

Now, from a European/American perspective, that still leaves it as a big threat. Most of us expect to live well past that age. But as worldwide killers go, it’s a minor league player, I’m afraid. Heart disease accounts for more than 40 % of deaths in poorer countries, and is the top killer worldwide. For parasitic diseases, Malaria is the daddy: 220 million cases in 2009, and just under 800,000 killed. The various influenza strains usually take out 500,000 a year. And that’s across the age groups, compared to the relatively old target range of prostate cancer.

Even just compared to cancers, it’s a low performer. Here’s the WHO’s table from 2008:

lung (1.4 million deaths)
stomach (740 000 deaths)
liver (700 000 deaths)
colorectal (610 000 deaths)
breast (460 000 deaths).

Which I guess means that prostate places at least 6th.

So, really…he’s got a point. We don’t have months where we don’t wash for Malaria research, or don’t wipe for colon cancer. We don’t even spend a week without deodorant for water born dysentery. Movember is a great piece of marketing, hats off to them for it, and prostate cancer is indeed a terrible thing - but there’s much nastier killers out there that we should probably focus on as more important.

I think it’s foolish to argue whether one cause is more important than another cause. Is saving the rain forest more or less important than curing diabetes? Is ending world hunger more or less important than AIDS research?

Stop worrying about it. Donating resources to any worthy cause makes the world a better place.

I guess we disagree on whether ‘worthiness’ is an entirely binary thing, which was the point of the article.


You think it’s foolish to acknowledge that there are some diseases that cause more suffering than others?

Dear OP: I can’t find “Men with prostate cancer are privileged” at your link.

You’ve put it in double quotes. You’re telling us someone said those exact words.

AFAICT, the writer you criticize for saying those words didn’t say them.

So take your silly little rant and shove it up your ass.


Bolding is mine

This is, and please excuse the knuckle dragging engineer, exactly the kind of thing Art students that write for campus newspapers create. Self indulgent, poorly structured arguments against the oppressive power structures.

I now eagerly await being told the guys was some Mech Eng idiot.