Tit rot, knacker lackers and fire in the hole

After reading this post over at Adrian's I have a couple of things to say:
First, I fucking hate theme events; I don't even like fancy dress parties - unless they have a 'topless girlies with perky boobies' theme. I don't like Red Nose Day, Pink Ribbon Day, Shave For a Cure or even the MS readathon. All of them are noble causes - all of which I have been affected by - none of which I donate to. At least, not during the aforementioned themed events. I am aware of these causes and contribute to them accordingly based on the merit of their case, not because people are willing to humiliate themselves in order to glorify their own self-image as public benefactors. Which is not to lump Adrian's young bloke in with those knuckle fuckers who think that getting their hair spray painted makes them into paragons of virtue.
Secondly, this is a better than average cause which, as a card-carrying misogynist, lights my fire. There has been a lot of talk about this cervical cancer vaccine being put on the PBS - and rightly so. I don't care how much it is going to cost, three jabs will save a lot of lives and a lot of money in the future, too. Twenty two female MPs signed a letter demanding that the PBS listing be expedited. How many of these women would have gone to the trouble of drafting and signing a letter if the vaccine were for prostate cancer? Prostate cancer killed 2718 bonzer Aussies in 2001. Source: Cancer in Australia 2001,( AIHW & AACR, 2004) (Via Australian institute of Health and Welfare. This is slightly more than 1000% of the number of women who died of cervical cancer in the same period (ibid*) and 124 more than died of breast cancer (ibid, again.).

How much money gets poured into women's health compared to men' health? Women live longer already^, they are less likely to contract just about any form of cancer than men (Specialised girly bits excepted, although 26 men died of tit rot in 2001.); the only gender neutral cancers in which women are markedly more represented in the statistics are Thyroid cancer and cancers related to alcohol consumption - although the mortality rate for thes second group is actually higher among men than women, females were more likely to be diagnosed.

Some of the discrepancies in levels of what would appear to be gender neutral diseases can be attributed to the cause rather than the site: Four times as many men as women contracted mesothelioma. Blue Sky Mine, anyone? (That would be Wittenoom for the uneducated.)

Five times as many men contracted Karposi's Sarcoma. This is one of the diagnostic indicators for HIV. Not for nothing in the politically incorrect eighties did we call AIDS the Anally Injected Death Syndrome. Although bum cancers don't appear to be biased toward men much more than other cancers.

So what's my Point?

I forget.

^You know why old married men die younger than old married women?

They want to.

* I jist put ibid in cos I no wot it meens.

Oh yeah, I remember one point. Breast cancer and Cervical cancer research is so well-funded compared to Prostate cancer, Testicular cancer, etc., because women are much more vocal about their perceived injustices than men - and because men like boobies. As for the Cervix, let me quote L.J. Hooker - "Location, location, location."