Check your chest breast cancer awareness/charity.

[LostMyPantsAtGatwickAirport]

I keep hearing adverts from a charity (Coppafeel) about checking your chest - not breasts - and it amazes me how happy women are to see off our language and anatomy and allow inclusion to basically write us out of an issue that mainly affects us.

I know men can also get breast cancer, but it’s in breast tissue, so using breast is entirely clear and anatomically correct.

On the same radio station I’ve heard adverts aimed at men to have their prostate checked - not once is this information muddied at all by falling over backwards to be inclusive to a small minority.

I thought we were heading out of this abysmal wasteland, but apparently not.

I have complained, but blah blah blah inclusion, kindness etc.

I have now tried this experiment on male family members, without telling them why I was asking.

So far it's an even split between sternum and collarbone touches. They've not gone anywhere near their nipples.

Why be coy about language as part of a generalised campaign? That’s just stupid.
If you want to be truly inclusive you need different campaigns targeting differed audiences, so using ‘chest’ for a breast cancer campaign aimed at women is ridiculous, and if you want to make men and trans people aware of the risks promote different campaigns targeting them specifically. All this fudging is just daft and weakens the message.

But this is an awareness campaign, not a step-by-step how to check for lumps (though they do have one of those on their website which this campaign is obviously designed to drive people towards).

They aren't "rendering the word taboo", they use the word "breast" quite clearly and often and it is plain in all their advertising material what kind of cancer they are talking about. But the fact is, while men do indeed have breast tissue, they don't usually refer to their pecs as their breasts, and many will switch off when they hear the word "breast" as they assume it doesn't apply to them. Campaigns like this are about actually reaching people, and to do that you've got to reflect the kind of language people will actually respond to otherwise they are not achieving their aim. Insisting on using the medically technical term even in the knowledge it will alienate some of your target audience is not how you do an outreach campaign.

Same.

They're a small charity, they probably don't have the budget to run a different campaign for every possible patient group.

Then they've touched the right place - you're supposed to check the whole area, you don't just get breast cancer in your nipples. Well done them.

An effective awareness campaign is literally a step-by-step guide on how to check for breast cancer.

They aren't "rendering the word taboo", they use the word "breast" quite clearly and often and it is plain in all their advertising material what kind of cancer they are talking about

So what is the relevance of 'chest'? The implication is that some people should be using breast and some people should be using chest.

they don't usually refer to their pecs as their breasts, and many will switch off when they hear the word "breast" as they assume it doesn't apply to them.

It's more likely that they think there is some other kind of cancer called 'chest cancer' and they won't understand what it is.

and to do that you've got to reflect the kind of language people will actually respond to

I am. I don't think you are.

Insisting on using the medically technical term even in the knowledge it will alienate some of your target audience is not how you do an outreach campaign.

I certainly feel alienated and I have had breast cancer.

I would also feel alienated if I got a letter from my doctor inviting me to have my 'front bottom' checked instead of inviting me for cervical screening.

Did you understand that they weren't touching their nipples?

Luckily, the context here is that this is a breast cancer awareness campaign and is very clear about the fact.

It's more likely that they think there is some other kind of cancer called 'chest cancer' and they won't understand what it is

No it really isn't "more likely", especially not in the context of Coppafeel being extremely visibly a breast cancer charity. You're making up problems with this that don't exist.

I would also feel alienated if I got a letter from my doctor inviting me to have my 'front bottom' checked instead of inviting me for cervical screening

Speaking of problems that don't exist.

They haven't checked the whole area! They touched themselves on the sternum or collarbone and none moved their hands below the sternum.

I've now asked them to check their chests for lumps. Only one has participated so far (although he has registered his objections to being "a social experiment"). He's poked his sternum for lumps and no further up or down.

Coppafeel are a fantastic charity who have done a great job at campaigning towards young women who think it can’t happen to them. I don’t particularly like the use of the word chest, but if it results in more girls and women, and men, checking for breast cancer then in my view it’s a good thing.

I'm not sure what you think you're proving to be honest. If you tell someone to "touch your chest" without context why would they check for lumps? If you told them to touch their breast without context they wouldn't check it for lumps either.

And now you've found when you do tell them to check for lumps, they are either reluctant to participate or don't know how to do it - hey, it's almost as if they'd benefit from some kind of awareness campaign to encourage them to check themselves and teach them how to do it, I wonder if there's any charities out there trying to do such a thing...

Good, as so far, the limited data collected supports our thoughts that context is very much needed to any campaign using the term chest.

Look, you're the one who said I think everyone, if you told them to touch their chest, would understand what part of their body you were refering to.

What do you expect MNers to do, other than check?

They could do that without changing the language.

You have made it seem as though their brilliant work depends on using the word ‘chest’ for breast but I don’t agree that is the case.

As a man, and one who has attended the breast clinic to have a lump aspirated, I cannot detect this "vitriol" you refer to.

i absolutely haven’t made it sound that their work is brilliant by using the word ‘chest’. I’ve been impressed by their work over the years. In this instance I don’t particularly like the use of the word, but I still think they are doing a good job.

I'm glad you've checked.

You checked and you proved that if you tell someone to touch their chest, even with no other context at all, they know whereabouts on their body you mean. No one you asked has touched their foot or their wrist or tried to force their hand down their throat to touch their lungs, they all correctly touched their chest.

You've also proved that if you add context - check your chest for lumps - you get a level of awkwardness, some people didn't want to do it, one person tried but didn't know how. So you've proved that many people who might not traditionally be the target of breast cancer campaigns don't actually know how to check their chest for lumps, or don't know that they need to, or are reluctant to do it even if they know it's necessary.

So what's your objection to Coppafeel trying to outreach to those people exactly? Haven't you actually proved exactly why a campaign like this could be useful?

All the more reason to correctly name it as breast cancer!

What we've got is data points suggesting that telling people to check their chests to detest breast cancer is misleading. It only works with lots of supporting information, because when people hear "chest", they hear "the area outside the breasts". There is an etymological term for this process of definition via exclusion, but I forget it.

Then they're wasting everyone’s time and money, and let’s face it, we’re only taking about four groups here so hardly a stretch. Besides, they raised a cool* *£5,821,402 last year alone, so they're hardly brassic.

Why do you think it's a waste of time and money to ensure that trans people and men are included in your breast cancer campaign?

Coppafeel probably creates jobs, and it wouldn't survive if some people didn't like its style of campaigning. This thread has reminded me of other times its advertising campaigns have got up my nose, but I suppose plenty of other cancer charities exist.

I’m sorry, is reading comprehension an issue for you?
I specifically said in my first post TARGETED CAMPAIGNS.
But no, I know you understood perfectly well and have deliberately chosen not to as a way of trying to score cheap points rather than add any actual substance to the conversation.
If YOU were genuinely interested in ensuring trans people and men were actually included, you’d understand the importance of targeted campaigns, not weakly justifying this lily livered wording that seems more keen to not offend than be genuinely helpful to under serviced groups.
Is not being offended more important to you than effective targeted campaigning?

Indeed they do and most breast cancer charities explicitly target women in their outreach so maybe people could manage to hold their noses and tolerate one that also wants to reach non-traditionally targeted groups. Perhaps your male relative who doesn't know how to check for lumps should take a look at their website.