[Sarah Hawkes from the University of London's Institute of Global Health] says that when you look at recent data, men lose three times more years of healthy living than women because of tobacco, alcohol and unsafe driving.So the "health problems" that have to do with men are personal behavioral choices. The focus on women is about pregnancy and childbirth, where health care is needed. In that view, what's wrong concentrating on women? That focus is really about the next generation, which includes males and females.
"It's cool to be a man that smokes and drinks — who drives a fast motorbike, or fast cars," she says. "If you were really serious about saving lives, you would spend money tackling unhealthy gender norms" that promote these risky behaviors.
May 20, 2013
"If you look at the top 10 health problems around the world, they are much more common in men."
"But the current focus is predominantly on women's health."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
64 comments:
Women's "health" is all about abortion.
Since risk taking behavior is, historically, one of the more important selection criterion used by women when selecting a mate, how is this not "blaming the victim?"
likely that is 'men' not 'mean' in
to do with mean
but with a feminist, you can't always tell.
Freudian?
"That focus is really about the next generation, which includes males and females."
If the males survive pass their risky behavior to want babies. If the babies are not choice-out by the females.
It's cool to be a man that smokes and drinks — who drives a fast motorbike, or fast cars," she says. "If you were really serious about saving lives....
Who wants to save the lives of a bunch of smelly drunks? Good riddance, I say.
So pregnancy & childbirth is a personal behavioral choice when it's convenient for women, and "really about the next generation" when convenient for women.
Nice.
Is pregnancy and childbirth not a choice now? Oh, not a "behavioral" choice. I get it now. Unlike the men's health issues (where we want to change behavior), we don't want to fix the behavior that causes these "womens health issues", we just want to fix them. Gotcha.
It's interesting to me that most first world "health problems" these days often boil down to personal lifestyle choices. Historically of course this isn't the case. In olden times contracting tuberculosis or some other lethal infection wasn't a choice.
"It's cool to be a man that smokes and drinks — who drives a fast motorbike, or fast cars," she says.
Steve McQueen called. He wants his life back.
Is pregnancy and childbirth not a choice now? Oh, not a "behavioral" choice. I get it now. Unlike the men's health issues (where we want to change behavior), we don't want to fix the behavior that causes these "womens health issues", we just want to fix them. Gotcha.
The Attic Greeks understood moderation in all things.
So did the Plains Indians when it came to smoking.
Stupid generally gets you killed, one way or t'other.
bpm4532 said...
Women's "health" is all about abortion.
Women's "health" is all about abortion?
FIFY.
The Drill SGT said...
likely that is 'men' not 'mean' in
to do with mean
but with a feminist, you can't always tell.
Freudian?
There are no accidents, but sometimes a typo is just a typo.
(I originally thought fat-fingered, but I didn't want to get yelled at)
OTOH, breast and prostrate cancer kill roughly equal numbers, but breast cancer gets vastly more funding.
What's the point of tacking on a few creaky old years on the back end if you can't enjoy drinking and fast cars and loose women and risk-taking during your good years?
By today's standards not one of the men who moved the world forward in the 19th and 20th centuries lived healthy. They had bigger fish to fry. By all means let the bulk of our nanny state's attention focus on women. The more men escape its horrible concern the greater the possibility that actual vigor will survive.
At last! A solution to our health problems: Change gender norms!!! Why didn't I think of that? Oh, right. I live in the real world. Thank God we have academics working on this.
"What's the point of tacking on a few creaky old years on the back end if you can't enjoy drinking and fast cars and loose women and risk-taking during your good years?"
Doctor: I'm afraid you only have six months to live.
Male patient: Six Months! Is there anything I can do?
Doctor: Well, you can give up smoking, drinking and chasing women.
Patient: And then I'll live longer?
Doctor: No, but it will seem longer.
A woman's breeding is not only a behavioral choice, it is the worst choice possible when it comes to global warming, species extinction, and devastation of world resources from overpopulation.
When a woman breeds, she makes a choice that doubles her carbon footprint; there's hardly an action that a man can take, including buying a yacht or a Ferrari, that will so double his carbon footprint.
It is no excuse that a man is equally responsible for breeding; that may be so biologically, but the choice to carry a baby to term or not lies solely with the woman, at least in Amerika.
Of course, women are all powerful. Everything feminine just because. Misandry at work again.
Spontaneous Pregnancy. interesting concept. your feminist brain produce that spontaneously?
So the "health problems" that have to do with mean are personal behavioral choices. The focus on women is about pregnancy and childbirth, where health care is needed. In that view, what's wrong concentrating on women?
Not a thing, but if you want to focus on women's issues, there is a behavioral cost. To almost eliminate breast cancer, you could eliminate the pill (and other birth control that makes one "almost pregnant" for years at a time). You could encourage women to have their first child by 20, and to nurse it for a year or more.
But pink ribbons probably won't do it.
OTOH, breast and prostrate cancer kill roughly equal numbers, but breast cancer gets vastly more funding.
Women are apparently smarter than men.
How did they get all those pink earthmovers and garbage totes?
Assuming Sarah's utterances happened because of the stuff between her thighs than her ears, seems unshackling her ilk from the kitchen was a bad idea
How did they get all those pink earthmovers and garbage totes?
Because almost everyone loves boobies, but who wants to think about a prostate?
I mean--other than Titus, say.
jimbino said...
A woman's breeding is not only a behavioral choice, it is the worst choice possible when it comes to global warming, species extinction, and devastation of world resources from overpopulation.
I'm pretty sure that a woman's breeding is actually necessary to prevent species extinction.
Spontaneous Pregnancy. interesting concept. your feminist brain produce that spontaneously?
I thought it was spontaneous generation.
Maybe it is parthenogenesis.
Why is pregnancy not based on behavioral choices?
Because almost everyone loves boobies, but who wants to think about a prostate?
An excellent point. Like the GOP, men will just have to learn to sell better.
Wouldn't hurt if they learn to smell better either.
So, the solution for men's health problems is to change them into Women?
Ummmm, no thanks.
That focus is really about the next generation, which includes males and females.
Sperm is plentiful and therefore cheap. Eggs are neither. So women win.
But remember: All must be rationalized. Hence, it "for the children."
It's for the women.
You know what would be interesting - to count how many times in one week there are legitimate proposals to allow bureaucrats to restrict our freedoms for our own good. I read yesterday (albeit in the NYT) a call to ban plastic bags in NYC and a renewed call to "do something" about climate change. Here is a plea to restrict smoking, drinking and fast motorbikes, among other things. And it is only mid day Monday
Women seem to be catching up to men when it comes to smoking.
Peter
Men are expendable. Fetuses are, too.
my pet peeve is heart disease: my husband has a much greater chance of being impacted than I do, but the American Heart Association, and lots of corporate sponsors, are all about WOMEN's heart health.
So the "health problems" that have to do with men [sp] are personal behavioral choices. The focus on women is about pregnancy and childbirth, where health care is needed. In that view, what's wrong concentrating on women? That focus is really about the next generation, which includes males and females.
Wow, that was kind of harsh. And not very well thought out?
...it's pretty obvious you haven't read Glen Reynold's wife's book, eh Ann?
Men on Strike: Why Men Are Boycotting Marriage, Fatherhood, and the American Dream - and Why It Matters
I suggest you should: link to Amazon: tinyurl.com/p68owyx
A clear case of "if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem".
Buy a clue.
From a Darwinian viewpoint, men are more expendable than women.
So, what's new? Since that's the biological reality, why not just say so (and adjust state policy accordingly)?
Helen Smith Men on Strike
...from the description
"American society has become anti-male. Men are sensing the backlash and are consciously and unconsciously going “on strike.” They are dropping out of college, leaving the workforce and avoiding marriage and fatherhood at alarming rates. The trend is so pronounced that a number of books have been written about this “man-child” phenomenon, concluding that men have taken a vacation from responsibility simply because they can. But why should men participate in a system that seems to be increasingly stacked against them?
As Men on Strike demonstrates, men aren’t dropping out because they are stuck in arrested development. They are instead acting rationally in response to the lack of incentives society offers them to be responsible fathers, husbands and providers. In addition, men are going on strike, either consciously or unconsciously, because they do not want to be injured by the myriad of laws, attitudes and hostility against them for the crime of happening to be male in the twenty-first century..."
By that rationale, post-menopausal women are similarly unimportant. Their health problems are insignificant because they cannot have children.
The old "women and children first" command makes some sense, in a weird way, because a community can do just fine with only a handful of men if it preserves its child-bearing women.
We live in a mature, and relatively peaceful and prosperous, modern economy with good healthcare and a growing population. There's no need at all to prioritize women's health.
If you were really serious about saving lives, you would address the dissociation of risk, and thereby rejection of responsibility, caused by normalization of abortion. This is where prejudice is born, from which follows normalization of redistributive and retributive change, denigration of individual dignity, trillion dollar account deficits, etc.
Only women and men, girls and boys, capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior are, by definition, eligible to enjoy liberty. I thought the terms and circumstances of reality were no longer questioned. Perhaps I was overly optimistic of the outcome following enlightenment.
A woman's breeding is not only a behavioral choice, it is the worst choice possible when it comes to global warming, species extinction, and devastation of world resources from overpopulation.
*facepalm*
Sex can be a risky behavior which causes a burden on our health system, should we encourage less sex?
Going to the moon was risky, working undersea is very risky, what else does she suggest we stop?
Yeah, go to any nursing home and view the legions of men who are left alone by the early death of their wife.
Reminds me of this book, no doubt available via the Althouse Amazon Portal:
"Eat What You Want and Die Like a Man"
"Because almost everyone loves boobies, but who wants to think about a prostate?"
Also, the exams are completely different, interest wise.
Dont' worry, men. Mr. Balls has arrived.
Seeing Red:
We should encourage more personal responsibility. We should discourage policies (e.g. abortion) which promote dissociation of risk.
Whether it's men or women, or boys or girls, only individuals capable of self-moderating, responsible behavior are, by definition, eligible to enjoy liberty. This is the origin of the Democrats' leverage. They promise people a instant (or immediate) gratification without perceived consequences. We are all the victims of this fanciful policy.
That said, corruption in the exception can mimic fundamental corruption, but the latter serves to obfuscate the former. There will be no positive progress until fundamental corruption is resolved.
The article does not claim all the longevity differences are due to smoking, drinking, and driving too fast. And Ann is such a good reader, I'm sure she knows that.
I'm quite fine with different roles for different genders, but then let's have some expectations. Like, don't expect the US taxpayer to pay for your brats. Find a man, make him happy enough with you that he will put his energy into productivity and have him support the brats.
That might mean putting out once in a while when you don't feel like it. Boosting the dude's fragile male ego once in a while. We all know this sucks, but it can also suck to work hard all the time.
And it really sucks to work hard for a bunch of women raising other guys brats and not deigning to be appreciative.
A woman's breeding is not only a behavioral choice, it is the worst choice possible when it comes to global warming, species extinction, and devastation of world resources from overpopulation.
Much the same could be said about bringing in a bunch of illegals into this country, as per Capita the US produces so much C02, so much environmental damage, etc.
Yes and no, Dante.
The difference is that rearing an Amerikan brat costs some $12,000 per 9 month period of mis-education, which comes to $156,000 in 13 years. Non-breeders share a great part of that expense. Furthermore, we have to deal with the brats in grocery-store aisles and they'll call the cops on you if you try to speak to one in a public park.
The illegal immigrants I hire are already potty-trained, literate in Spanish and maybe English, and they work like Mexicans, which I can't say about any teen or young-adult citizens I've mistakenly hired.
Paraphrasing:
"The important thing is reproducing (except when we feminists want to be equal like a man).
The world of taxpayers ought to support women's health issues, like Breast Cancer, child birth, cervical cancer. AND the men can live less long, AND they can raise the world of women's brats."
Modern Day Feminist Position:
"Guys, pay for our offspring, our poor choices with guys that lead to two households, make us work, and require day care, pay for our health needs, work hard, die young, and if we have a headache 95% of the time, deal with it."
The illegal immigrants I hire are already potty-trained, literate in Spanish and maybe English, and they work like Mexicans, which I can't say about any teen or young-adult citizens I've mistakenly hired.
Yes, I'm certain most adults can do a teenage job better than most teenagers, so the teenagers don't get the experience because people are hiring illegals to do the work for them at the same wages.
But right now, today, half of the CA K-12 population is Hispanic, when forty years ago Hispanics weren't even counted. The progeny of illegals is costing CA > $30B in education costs alone. And it's the people who have been here who are paying for that, because the illegal doesn't make enough money to pay for schooling, nor the Hispanic with an average household income in CA of around $40K.
So yeah, sure, you have subsidized adult labor, what do you expect. Wait until the Hispanic brats grow up. The second generation does slightly better than the first, but by the time the third roles around they perform worse than the second in important categories, including household income, college matriculation, gang affiliation, welfare, etc.
The cultures are immiscible. I don't blame the illegals, I blame our leaders.
Dante said:
"The article does not claim all the longevity differences are due to smoking, drinking, and driving too fast. And Ann is such a good reader, I'm sure she knows that."
Bingo! I was wondering if anyone else would point out the fallacy of Ann's post. Male mortality it highter than females from birth, long before they begin to drink, smoke or drive.
Shame on Ann for promoting a false narrative.
"Eat What You Want and Die Like a Man"
I have that book. A guy named Steve Graham, and he used to have a hilarious blog.
Whatever happened to that guy?
Speaking as a man who drinks, drives fast (not at the same time), and has been known to smoke a cigar now and then, I say:
Piss off, all you busybodies. I don't want your help!
I Callahan @ 5/20/13, 3:43 PM
"Eat What You Want and Die Like a Man"
I have that book. A guy named Steve Graham, and he used to have a hilarious blog.
Whatever happened to that guy?
Yeah, me too ...the blog was Hog on Ice, and it was a daily read (at least!). I still have a copy of the book. Some of the recipes are pretty darn tasty lol.
Stever got religion, changed to a blog about tools and religion and guy-stuff ...and somewhere in there I lost interest and lost track.
Hmm. It's called Tools of Renewal now ...add the usual suffix to toolsofrenewal.com. YMMV.
...ain't google grand.
Also, the exams are completely different, interest wise.
No they're not. Once you've done a few dozen, it becomes drudgery.
I work in a breast imaging center as a radiologist. It is perhaps once in three or four weeks when a patient comes in with a rack that I would have paid significant attention to as a young man prior to med school. Still drudgery, these days, and devoid of sexual interest. It is barely worth taking note.
The only mildly interesting thing left about seeing and palpating all those boobies is comparing the work of different plastic surgeons, so I can offer a reasonable recommendation to the idle wives of my wealthy acquaintances. This is all about recognizing professional skill and craftsmanship, and not remotely about titillation (so to speak.)
I say that when you have two demographically (race/location/income-level) identical cohorts, of equal size, and find one of them with a life expectancy several years longer than the other's, it might make sense not to focus entirely on the cohort that currently lives longer, yes.
This morning's NPR story on the NY "stop-and-frisk" case focused on racial profiling. You don't suppose that perhaps there might have been a little gender profiling in there, too? Why is that OK? Because it was the "privileged" group that was targeted?
If women were several times more likely than men to get murdered, several times more likely to kill themselves, several times more likely to be killed or maimed at work, much more likely than men to be homeless, much less likely to go to college, and ... one could go on, but why bother -- wouldn't it be a crisis? Wouldn't we be upset? As the numbers are reversed, evidently it doesn't matter much.
jimbino,
The illegal immigrants I hire are already potty-trained, literate in Spanish and maybe English, and they work like Mexicans, which I can't say about any teen or young-adult citizens I've mistakenly hired.
I see. So your policy is to ask for proof of right to work legally in the US, and then systematically hire only people who haven't got it (except for the few citizens who somehow slipped through the cracks)? Gotcha.
If I were in your position, I'd comment pseudonymously, too.
Yes, Michelle,
It is definitely my policy not to cooperate with our gummint policy of forcing me to pay for mis-education of Texas youth while at the same time encouraging me to hire those same illiterate, barely monolingual, indolent beings, seeing that I can easily find a willing and able worker who hasn't been so stultified. I never ask for documents, nor am I required to.
I happen to be an extremely well-educated Hispanic myself who has worked as an undocumented alien in Argentina and Mexico. Why shouldn't I favor superior workers from south of the Rio Bravo?
Hispanic workers are saving money to buy a house. They have a small business which runs on classic lines - long hours, backbreaking work doing landscaping, a small tight group of relatives and friends, all male. Anyone who isn't following this trajectory is despised. They do have social capital when they arrive and they soon get capital capital aka money. That is reality. I used to work in a bank and I saw the pattern of deposits and I check intermittently to see if the pattern is holding which it is. If we saw these people as they are the whole debate would move on different lines. I don't like being held responsible for every racist atrocity that happens; they don't like being smushed in with the failures in their group. We, the people, have lot in common.
But it is still true that African-American unemployment rates are horrendous and illegal immigration plays a role in that. Shouldn't we consider the native sons in our national policy?
BarrySanders20: John Steinbeck (at the start of "Travels With Charley")
is advised by his doctor, following a minor coronary episode, to "slow down and take it easy". His response was, Why give up fierceness in exchange for a small gain in yardage?
The focus on women is about pregnancy and childbirth, where health care is needed.
Actually, it is mostly about sex and preventing pregnancy.
Just for the record, we have spent the last 100 years almost eliminating childbed mortality. That job is mostly done.
This kind of blogs are always knowledgeable and really i enjoyed reading this post. John Claire
Post a Comment