People with prostate cancer - do you think men will start to get it now?

I was on a subreddit where a lot of trans people are against this kind of jargon as it reminds them of the body parts they find uncomfortable (as belonging to their birth sex) and would rather not be reminded of.

So who is driving this language? The ultra woke brigade? But for whom?

About 50,000 people in the UK are diagnosed with the disease each year, and nearly 12,000 die.

So is that about 25,000 men and 25,000 women?

Come on BBC, thought you'd stopped this nonsense.

The queerteacher tells us that 'Using the word "people" does not take away from the importance of getting regular check ups for a range of medical issues dependent on your age and medical/family history.'

Teacher what do you mean by 'does not take away from'? Using 'people' hides, it obfuscates, it renders opaque. This can only be a negative when dealing with healthcare issues.

Screening is a public health service in which members of a determined population, who do not necessarily realise they are at risk of, or are already affected by a disease or its complications, can receive tests of varying types. Two big, no two MASSIVELY important factors in determining these populations are age and sex. Yes, sex. Not gender, not gender identity, not feelings. Cold, hard science. Biology.

When I am screened for breast cancer or bowel cancer it is not because of my family history, still less because of my feelings. One screening is based on my age and the other is based on my age plus my sex. When I was getting regular checks for potential ovarian cancer, which was because of my family history, it was because of my sex and age. Still age and still sex. There is no escaping either of them, apart from dying.

All this 'people' rubbish from the BBC will merely make lots of us stop listening to them because we know their reporting is not to be trusted.

The Times covered it sensibly

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/medical-advances-make-prostate-screening-possible-within-5-years-dh7jzjgfg?shareToken=d4ff891fa7d7cda0d7cca507b89c7f15

I am a person.... I don't have a prostate. This is exclusionary language because not all people have this organ. Certain organs and bodily systems are specific to biological SEX. Male/female.

The fact that so many people think it's "prostrate" (meaning lying flat) implies that the term isn't widely understood, and therefore requires precise language to make sure the message reaches those who need it.

I don't think men will 'start to get it' now. They generally assume that people refers specifically to them, so it would not occur to them that the message is unclear. And if they don't know what a prostate is, then it's clearly not that important.

Most men aren't bothered about gender identity and trans ideology. As far as they are concerned, if males opt out of being men, then it's nothing to do with them any more.

What makes men 'get it' is generally either sport, or actual harm to women they personally care about, eg wives, partners, daughters and mothers. The women they consider 'theirs'.

Great post @Artichokeleaves

I also second @Atmywitsend29 point about young people getting typically "old people cancers". I work in a diagnostic area of the hospital. We have recently had several very young (30's) previously extremely fit and well people if both sexes diagnosed with advanced metastatic bowel cancer. Mild symptoms for a short period of time that could easily have been dismissed and in one case picked up on a precautionary CT after a car crash. Devastating.

Around 50% of men don't know the purpose of the prostate or the signs of prostate cancer. Even without taking to account men who will find this 'inclusive language' confusing such as those with English as a second or additional language for example, how does muddying the waters by not using known, sex based terms help?

I just showed the article to dh. When he finished reading it I said, "Maybe I should get checked. I sometimes have two of those symptoms." He looked worried, and replied "Maybe you should." Over the course of our conversation it became clear that this highly educated (PhD in a science subject) native English speaking man, has no idea what the prostate is, nor that it is a male organ.

This abuse of language is insanity!

Some people complain that feminists who do not include TWs are not feminists, claiming that feminism is about equality for all. Obviously it is not, if it was it would be called egalitarianism. Are we now going to be forced to fight for the right of men to have proper access to healthcare, in order to justify women also having that right?

It's so bloody frustrating. I've worked with many palliative and cancer patients, women cannot get prostate cancer. Only men can get it because only men have a prostate.
It's maddening to see them strip sexed language from things that are killing members of a specific sex!

I also take issue with the "old" thing, I think there needs to be more a push to make sure the public know any cancer can affect you at any age. Youth is no protection to cancer.
I've held the hand of a 27yo who died of skin cancer, a 45yo who died of a brain tumor, a 23year old who died of cervical cancer. My dad died of pancreatic cancer at 44. You're not too young to get these typically "old people cancers".

Of course it does. Language needs to be clear and I can’t thinking a more vital case when it refers to cancer checkups. To please some gas lighters?

There are appears to be a lot of frustration directed at the BBC on it's coverage of this article.

Though it is concerning that the frustration is in it's language. The BBC is not particularly a trans ally (see the recent issues regarding one of it's articles) but the issue here is cancer.

Using the word "people" does not take away from the importance of getting regular check ups for a range of medical issues dependent on your age and medical/family history.

My dad had prostrate cancer and my ovarian cancer was apparently inherited through that same gene of his. How can you explain that without referring to sex.

It's stupid, but my gut feeling is that it isn't likely to change many men's minds one way or the other. IME most men think genderism is stupid anyway and are less likely to give it credibility than women.

I don't think it's wrong to say that it generally affects older men. Statistics like that don't mean there are no outliers. But it's how screening programs are developed.

There was a whole load about this on R4 this morning. Not a single mention of ‘persons’.

It is mentioned on the site but 2 or 3 clicks in.

@Artichokeleaves very well said.

My father died of this in his 50s when I was in my early 20s, when he was diagnosed I looked it up to see if I would also be at risk, then obviously discovering women don’t have prostates. I mean I was university educated (not that it means much!) and I didn’t have a clue. Loads of that you’d class as intelligent people don’t particularly know what a cervix, ovaries etc. are. It’s kind of assuming a level of knowledge that’s not there.

Well, there you go, I have done something for the menz today and made a complaint.

It’s prioritising inclusivity over clear information and accuracy.

I know what you mean, but in truth it is not prioritising inclusion.

Inclusion would also include the needs of men for clear information, men with learning difficulties, men who speak English as an additional language, men who may not know they have a prostate, and men who politically don't agree with being vanished into a vague mixed sex category.

It is very important not to let the word 'inclusion' be used to hide what it actually is. Which is centering an elite political position over the needs of everyone else, demonstrating political bias, excluding and removing accessibility to every other vulnerable group, and therefore failing in their brief. 'Inclusive' it is not. Inclusion would be 'men and (insert here words for male people who would prefer not to call themselves men). And lets face it, more than 99% of the males they are talking to will call themselves men. This is not even vaguely proportionate.

Prostrate cancer UK has men in large letters on its website. There can be no confusion there.

Terrible article. My brother died at 56 from Metastatic Prostate Cancer, it's far from an old man's disease

Prostate obviously. Must read before posting

One of my parents has prostrate cancer. Have a guess which one.