The Problem with Men’s Health

One of the great lies of feminism is that women’s health is more fragile than men’s health.  This lie is used to justify excessive privileges in spending on women’s health problems by governments.  Governments spend extra money on women’s health because they chase votes rather than focus on the best interests of the entire nation.  Barack Obama’s recent “Life of Julia” election campaign is a perfect example of politicians literally bribing women to vote for them.  No political party has ever offered the same deal for men.  Why governments don’t pander to men’s interests to win votes instead of women’s interests is an important question.  The best explanation that I’ve heard of is that men simply aren’t socialised to ask for something they want, whereas women are used to asking for things, and receiving them.  From shopping centres designed almost exclusively with women in mind, to (un)equal opportunity programs and occupational health and safety programs that were only introduced for the benefit of women as a form of affirmative action for women in the workplace.  Why women can’t simply compete for jobs in the same manner that men do is never questioned because of this delusional belief that women have it harder in life.

This article, and others to follow it, will spell out in no uncertain terms how and why the feminists are wrong about women having it harder than men.  This article is focused exclusively on health, specifically the better health that women enjoy thanks to generous state intervention purely on their behalf as well a general societal preoccupation with the health and well being of women.  You probably are aware that women live on average not just a little longer than men, but, depending on what country you come from, women typically on average live 4 to 7 years longer than men in all Western countries.

First let’s dispel some common myths about the sex discrepancy between men and women:

One myth is that men and women have about the same mortality rate throughout life, but after retirement men just start dropping like flies.

Another myth, which usually ties in with the first, is that men are somehow less genetically strong as women so they die more often at birth and have more fragile health.

There are a number of problems with these myths.  The first problem being that male mortality rates are higher than female mortality rates only after childhood.  The graph below shows the mortality rates calculated for males (blue) versus females (red) from 2010 in Australia.  At birth the mortality rates of males are virtually identical to women’s, then around the age of 2 they start to vary a little, keep in mind that at this range of the scale small variations can look big because it is a logarithmic scale.  These small differences aren’t as significant as the range higher up the Y axis.  Yet around the age of 12 the mortality rate for boys starts climbing sharply two years before it starts to climb for girls.  It then stabilises at a level around the age of 16 that women won’t match until they reach their late 30s.  Then his trend of men dying at a faster rate than women continues throughout life.  Again, the logarithmic scale of this graph makes the enormity of this difference harder to see.

Male mortality rates are much higher than female mortality rates

A graph demonstrating the male “privilege” to die earlier than females.

The second myth though could still be true, if men are dying at a faster rate throughout life compared to women, then the men might be dying because of their genetic weakness.  The best way to disprove this myth is to look at what is killing the men.  If they are dying from renal failure, cardio-vascular disease or haemophilia then it’s quite likely they are genetically weaker than women.  But if they are dying mostly from external causes, such as neglect, murder, suicide, accidents or warfare, then the genetic weakness hypothesis becomes invalid.

Infant mortality rates are slightly higher for males than females, and although the difference is higher for males in Australia, it is important to note that there are more males conceived than females.  Roughly, there are 105 male babies born to every 100 female babies born, this increased frequently of males, approximately an extra 25 per 1,000 births, more than compensates for the increased risk of infant mortality for males over females, approximately 0.5 per 1,000 births.  To put this into real numbers this means that for every 1,000 girls born, 3 will die and for every 1,000 boys born, 3.5 will die, but there will be an extra 50 boys born on top of these 2,000 births.

So higher mortality at birth isn’t a significant factor in males’ poorer health situation in life.  Even the 5% higher rate of male births does not explain the 57.68% higher mortality rate of males (82.34 / 100,000) to females (47.49 / 100,000) in Australia.   Since 51.2% of live births are boys, how do males end up accounting for 49.8% of the total population of Australia?  In 2010 females outnumbered males by 90,000.  However, when immigrants are taken into account, despite 67% of immigrants being male, that’s approximately 80,000 new males above the number of female immigrants per year, this extra influx of external males is not enough to compensate for the high mortality rate of men.  Leaving Australia with 11.12 million males to 11.21 million females in 2010.  Importing higher levels of male immigrants is also cheaper for the government when replacing the dying males than to actually pay for health programs that would actually keep the native male population alive.

So why are all the men dying?  There are two types of categories of deaths, the first is external causes (non-natural) and internal causes (natural).  However, separating these two groups is problematic as men denied medical treatment by the state would count as an internal cause.  But let’s examine the key causes of external deaths first.

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics, suicide accounts for 1.6% of all deaths.  However, these deaths are not equal, in 2010 only 545 women committed suicide, compared to 1,816 men.  This figure has been consistent for the last 15 years, however, before the Port Arthur Gun Laws were introduced male suicide was much higher and female suicide was about the same rate as it has been for the last 100+ years.   Male suicide didn’t actually become so high until the early 1970s, coincidentally at the same time no fault divorce and the family court were created in Australia.  However, this is still not the whole story, deaths from external causes in Australia account for 6% of deaths annually and of these deaths 69% were males.  Most of these deaths were from traffic accidents, these deaths are often quite likely to be suicides, it is impossible to determine.  Did they get drunk and have an accident, or did they get drunk to make it easier to drive off the road into a tree?  Sometimes it is argued that young men take more risks, however, depression in males is linked with risk-taking behaviour which again suggests they could be suffering from undiagnosed depression that is literally driving them to take life-endangering risks.  At this point the argument becomes a chicken and the egg scenario and without deep insight into each individual case it’s impossible to say one way or the other.  But far more men are committing suicide or dying from uncessary risks than women.

Violent assaults rarely result in death, but when they do it kills twice as many men than women.  Men are also more than twice as likely to be poisoned than women.  Murder is rare in Australia with only 266 murders committed between 2006-2007, however, again men were twice as likely to be murdered than women.  In fact the only statistical measure that indicated a higher mortality rate for women over men was for accidental falls at 52%, however the median age of fall victims was 85.9 years old, at an age when women vastly out number the number of men still living.

My hypothesis for explaining why male mortality rates is so high compared to female mortality rates is that we simply do not value male health and well-being as much as female health and well-being.  Furthermore that we have a culture that considers men’s ill health to be their own fault, while female ill health is just a tragedy and women are automatically deserving of compassion that men are deemed unworthy of receiving.

Evidence of this sexual favouritism towards women’s health can be seen in how cancer research is funded:  In Australia during 2010, 3,235 men died of prostate cancer, compared to 2,840 women who died from breast cancer.  26 men also died from breast cancer, no women died from prostate cancer of course.  The Australian government figures on research money directed towards treating breast cancer couldn’t be accessed at the time of writing, but the US government’s spending could be: in 2010 $631.2 million was spent on breast cancer research, (with an additional $1.3 billion for treatments in 2003, more recent figures not yet available) while only $300.5 million was spent on prostate cancer research.  A common myth is that breast cancer affects more people than prostate cancer when in fact 1 in 8 women get breast cancer in their lifetimes compared to 1 in 6 men getting prostate cancer.  Even adding the 1 in 110 men who develop breast cancer doesn’t negate the point out that prostate cancer is a more prevalent health problem.

Another issue for the men is the social panic over the increasing levels of female genital mutilation in Australia (we’re importing Arabs and Africans, what did we think was going to happen?  They’d just stop their customs of human genital maiming at the border?)  while at the same time completely ignoring the carnage and harm being caused to men through male circumcision, or as I like to call it: male genital mutilation.  Men with mutilated penises often experience difficulty enjoying their sex lives or function effectively sexually.  They can be under stimulated, impotent, emotionally to scarred to feel comfortable naked.  All traumatic things for men to go through, but are completely ignored by society.  Generally if you bring up the topic of female genital mutilation you’ll get a sympathetic audience, but bring up male genital mutilation and you’ll get told to shut up because you’re making people feel uncomfortable even though they’re usually the ones who didn’t get part of their body cut off them.  Over 100 baby boys are killed each year in the USA alone due to complications resulting from circumcision, yet most people still believe it is merely a harmless snip.  A harmless snip through 4,000 nerve endings that destroys a man’s ability to enjoy sex even if his urge to have sex is still intact.  Yes women, you can be assured that you do enjoy sex far more than your circumcised partner.

When considering internal causes of death, or “natural causes” men develop cardio-vascular, cerebro-vascular and renal diseases far earlier than women do, in fact the same is true for almost every health indicator.  The fact that men have it worse than women for almost every single health indicator should be driving public health policies to be focused more on men than women.  However, the contrary is true.  Despite historical data stretching back over 100 years indicating that women have always had better health and well-being compared to men in Australia, we still have an irrational obsession with female health and well-being.  Where is the compassion for men?  Where is the concern for men?  Any talk of compassion for men is usually ignored or shot down with comments like, “but men do it to themselves”, “men are genetically weaker than women” or “men are stronger than women and can take it,” however, none of these responses make any sense.  If men were stronger, they wouldn’t be dying so easily, if they were genetically weaker, they wouldn’t have the same mortality as girls until the age of 12, and finally if men do it to themselves, then presumably women do it to themselves too and don’t need all the extra funding for their health issues either.  Furthermore, if women live 4-7 years longer than men, then why do men and women retire at the same age?  In fact the only exceptions to the non-sex specific retirement age policy of most countries are the UK, Austria and Switzerland, but instead of making retirement at a higher age level for women, they make it lower by 5, 3 and 2 years respectively.   That’s right, women live longer, but they’re given far more time to enjoy their retirement than men do.  This sounds like privilege; however, it is not male privilege, but rather female privilege.

A recent example of this has been the HPV vaccine program which targetted immunisations only for women.  Each year in the USA the Human Papillo Virus (HPV) has been implicated in 6,200 cancers involving women and 7,500 cancers involving men.  It kills more men than women and it spreads both through vaginal and anal sex.  In Australia the government decided they would only immunise one sex to reduce the cost of the vaccination program.  So they immunised only the women.  Even though more men die from it, even though it wouldn’t protect homosexual men, even though there are less men than women in Australia so it would be cheaper to immunise the men, even though men earn more money and pay more taxes so the increase in their life span would maintain higher government revenues and last of all, even though this would be a waste of time because the HPV would continue to be persistent in the homosexual/bisexual male community and it would eventually mutate rendering the vaccine a waste of time and money.  Women, you clearly have some privilege over government spending that defies not simply rationality but greed.  The next time one of your sons, brothers, fathers or male friends is dying from anal or penile cancer caused by HPV, remember which sex got offered the vaccine.  You’re not a victim class, you’re a privileged upper class when it comes to health.

I could keep going on with more examples such as better funding for screenings from breast cancer, the $1.3 billion annually going to subsidise the treatment of breast cancer in women (but not in men) in the USA so that women don’t have to pay as expensive health insurance, while men are expected to pay the full cost of their prostate cancer treatment (and the women’s breast cancer treatment through their taxes).  I could talk about the 30 million men being tricked into circumcision because of a faked study suggesting it offered protection again HIV infection.  I could go into detail about how men suffer more stress from being treated to a higher standard of behaviour to women in all situations in life from the family to the workplace and how they have no respite from feminist demands that they “man up” to prove themselves at the cost of their physical and psychological health.  I could, but I would need another four or five thousand words to just do these topics justice.  So I will have to trust that if you’re interested enough in these health issues facing men, that is to say, that you give a damn about the well-being of men, that you’ll at least examine these issues yourself.

Feminism is wrong about which sex has it harder when it comes to health.  Men are the real victims of biased public health programs designed to help women at the expense of men.  But this section has only explored a few areas where feminism has created a false perception of which sex needs greater attention to their health issues.  It should be clear that men have no special privileges when it comes to health.  However, women’s health, both physically and psychologically, is taken very seriously, is far better funded, and women are privileged with longer healthier lives when compared to men because of the social and political privileges that are exclusive to women.  Hence health is a men’s rights issue that needs to be addressed.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Gender issues, Health, Medicine

Author:Jason Sutherland

Resist the temptation to assume that you're always right or wrong. Never succumb to thinking you're so insignificant to trust your own thoughts and feelings. Always be responsible and listen carefully to others before passing judgement. Don't trust governments bearing stolen goods.

Subscribe to Intentious

Be notified by email whenever new pieces are posted by the blogging team tackling controversial current events or issues.

26 Comments on “The Problem with Men’s Health”

  1. May 30, 2012 at 11:41 am #

    This really is a common problem. It seems every time I turn around someone is begging money for breast cancer research. Or you’re being persuaded to purchase assine pink items with the profits going to breast cancer being the incentive for purchase. How many times have I seen money being raised for prostate cancer? Exactly once…in the grocery store where it’s a receptacle for loose change. This bias is outrageous especially given the fact that when I’ve heard the subject of a fund-raising walk for mens’ health issues being raised it gets shot down because it’s ‘sexist’. What does this mean? Does it mean that men will be denied so long as there is a single disease that affects women? If that point is reached I wonder what else then will be then be decided as more important than our men dying.

    And really, Bravo for bringing up the circumcision issue. This is such an obvious issue that it’s astounding that otherwise ‘caring’ parents mutilate their male babies intentionally. The emasculation from such a practice is so wide-spread I doubt it could be comprehensively covered. The fact that it’s being passed off as ‘protecting’ men from STD’s is laughable. Research has been done that actually shows the foreskin can protect a man from such thing. Not many people seem to know this but this practice was brought into being by puritanical religious groups that thought of sex as nothing but shameful. Therefore, they would mutilate children to discourage it. In the beginning though, both males and females were put through this. Nowadays, people have forgotten the roots of this barbaric behavior but still mutilate little boys. They do this for no better reason than ‘tradition’. Essentially, why is it called mutilation when it’s a girl and why is it not for a boy? Bottom line, there is no good reason to mutilate your child no matter it’s sex.

    http://www.noharmm.org/IDcirc.htm

  2. May 30, 2012 at 11:43 am #

    It should be kept in mind that the above link only really discusses the PHYSICAL damage in the process. It says nothing about the social, mental, or emotional problems than surely result.

  3. Roxanne
    May 30, 2012 at 5:02 pm #

    It’s certainly an interesting issue, but I’ll admit I’m curious about the diatribe against feminism that I’ve been hearing so much lately. My interest was particularly caught by this “Despite historical data stretching back over 100 years indicating that women have always had better health and well-being compared to men in Australia, we still have an irrational obsession with female health and well-being.” It interested me because it seemed to suggest that women’s health was being considered and cared for more for those past 100 years, before the feminist movement even began. Now I agree with you that mens health needs more attention, and the gender differences shouldn’t be taken as inevitable or unimportant the way that they are, but I’m not sure exactly how this one can be directly blamed on feminism. It’s a small thing I know, but to me, blaming one group all the time starts to seem very biased and ranty after a while if it’s not consistently backed up, and I don’t really think that’s the image you want to put across.
    Thanks for bringing this issue up though, also, since you seem interested in this issue I wonder if you know (I read in my local paper this morning) that a Melbourne psychologist Dr Elizabeth Celi has published a book called “Breaking the Silence: A practical guide for male victims of domestic abuse” which could be rubbish or could be really good, I don’t know, but thought you might find interesting.

    • May 31, 2012 at 10:16 am #

      “It interested me because it seemed to suggest that women’s health was being considered and cared for more for those past 100 years, before the feminist movement even began.”

      There is this fantastic lie that women owe everything to feminism. This is simply not true, Susan Venker and Phyllis Schlafly rip this myth to pieces pointing out that women were never barred from higher education or the workforce nor was the US consitution written to exclude women. Rather women chose not do these things because they had a choice (the men didn’t) and they lived longer happier lived than the men. Their most recent book “The Flipside of Feminism” explores this in great detail, but one thing that stops me from calling this an excellent book is that they make it out as though the right-wing of politics have all the answers, but I don’t think they have a good case for that.

      Also, women have always been protected from difficult and dangerous occupations. From working in the fields, to hunting, fighting, mining, digging, construction, garbage collection etc… this is the case not only in the West but all cultures where inheritance moves through the male line (i.e. patriarchy). In fact, and ironically, the only societies where women do more work and more dangerous work, is in matriarchal societies where inheritance is via the female line. In societies where men can’t own the fruits of their labour to pass onto their children, the men simply don’t do any work and turn into thugs leaving women to do everything. So despite what feminism is telling you, feminism is all about getting women to do all the work (hence pushing women into the workforce) and displacing men from a breadwinner role inside the family making them outsiders and unmotivated to achieve anything creative. Post feminism, fewer and fewer women have been reporting satisfaction with their sex, family and working lives.

      I like Dr. Elizabeth Celi, she sounds like she understands the issues men face very well which frankly, it’s rare to come across a woman these days who understands men… even though men are expected to understand women at all times and ages.

      • Roxanne
        May 31, 2012 at 12:12 pm #

        Ok, maybe Uni is draining me, call me stupid if you want, but I’m having some trouble with this. It’s not that I think you’re wrong, it’s just that I want to understand clearly where you’re coming from.
        Where I’m having trouble is how feminism is directly responsible for mens health being unimportant? Is it because of their preoccupation with making women’s health a priority? Am I over-complicating it in my head and that’s all you mean, or is it more than that?
        I’m sorry that I can’t just leave it, but I’d much rather understand properly than assume something that might not be what you mean.

        • May 31, 2012 at 12:39 pm #

          “Where I’m having trouble is how feminism is directly responsible for mens health being unimportant?”

          That’s not what I’m saying. Feminism as you said hasn’t existed long enough to have affected men’s health in the distant past, and indeed, I don’t think feminism has affected men’s health except for the higher suicide rate for males which is directly proportional the spread of feminism in a society.

          What I was saying is that the biggest factor towards women’s superior health, is the superior attention women have always recieved towards their well-being. Men instinctively protect and look after women, look at the game young boys play: they enact battles, and heroic actions because they’ve been programmed genetically to be the tribe’s defenders. Women don’t have an equivalent instinct to protect men, rather they engage in social games predominantly. GirlWritesWhat has a fantastic series of videos about how not only do women favour women’s company over men’s (think of women’s magazines being all about women) but that men also favour women’s company over men’s (think of men’s magazine being all about women). To treat women as a privileged class is human nature. Perhaps start with this video from GirlWritesWhat: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gekyg7yy4Dc&feature=plcp

          • May 31, 2012 at 12:53 pm #

            “Women don’t have an equivalent instinct to protect men…”

            On this point, I can’t say I entirely agree. I feel feminism has REMOVED this need. It manifests itself in a much different way certainly but for a long time women were primarily home-makers. Caring for the home, cooking, cleaning, having rudimentary healing skills and generally being concerned for your mans well-being was how women showed this instinct. It’s just gone by the wayside these days since it’s considered ‘demeaning’ or old fashioned in this post-feminist world. It’s certainly not the same as picking up a weapon and DIRECTLY offering protection but to me it can be classified as such.

            • May 31, 2012 at 1:21 pm #

              Indeed, it is hard to tell where instinct ends and culture starts. Women almost certainly feel a nurturing urge to infants much stronger than men do. For men the urge to impress or to protect women is very strong from my personal experience as well as just watching young boys play.

              • May 31, 2012 at 1:51 pm #

                So it really could be said that men feel the need to protect women in general whereas women feel the need to ‘protect’ their specific man. It is an interesting question as to how much of this is culture and how much is instinct.

                In my personal experience though, it’s not just young boys that play war games. One of the absolute best games of my childhood was playing war with the ammo being water guns, water balloons, or for traps buckets. Of course, that being said I was the only girl that played so I do realize there is a sharp divide in development.

                • James Hill
                  June 1, 2012 at 12:50 pm #

                  I think Tamiko’s questioning has raised an interesting possibility: men’s health has been less of a priority at the organisational level because it’s less of a priority to individual men. I won’t go to the doctor unless I’m absolutely wretched, and when I broke my hand last month, I seriously considered just sleeping it off rather than going to the hospital. When I spoke to other men who had the same injury, many of them had done just that, and wound up with permanent issues resulting from a poorly healed bone.

                  Dealing with pain and getting past it is considered a manly trait, and if you want to help men’s health, it’d be much better to undo the stigma associated with seeking medical treatment.

                  • June 2, 2012 at 10:41 am #

                    If the virtue of ‘sufferance’ is a manly trait where does it start? Girls and boys are treated differently as children. This is something I think almost everyone can agree on. A great example of this that I can think of is the descriptive phrases parents use for their children. Ofttimes, little girls are ‘princesses’ or even ‘angels’ and little boys are ‘soldiers’. It becomes ‘normal’ for everyone, including the men themselves, to place less value on their health than on womens’ health. It really is an awful stigma. However, in the face of that I think mens’ health should become even more important at the organizational level. If health care was more freely available to men then wouldn’t it stop sending the message that mens health is less important? Out of the people I’ve known it was single men that don’t look after their health as much. Most times this was related to health care being so expensive.

                    • James Hill
                      June 2, 2012 at 11:42 am #

                      That honestly has not been my experience at all. Emergency healthcare is free here in Australia. I didn’t pay a single cent for xrays, casts, splints or follow up visits with the Occupational Therapists and fracture specialists. How much more freely available can you expect?

                      It’s a nice thought to imagine all the differences between men and women are merely social constructs, but I honestly do not believe that is the case. Children instinctively engage in gendered forms of play, with the vast majority of boys seeking out rough and tumble sorts of games, and there is evidence that men and women physically experience the sensation of pain differently. We can try to educate men about being smart and listening to the warning signs of their bodies and seeking help more readily, but I think men will always place a value on overcoming pain, because we put ourselves in situations where we’re likely to get hurt.

          • Roxanne
            May 31, 2012 at 6:58 pm #

            ok awesome, I see what you mean now, thanks for being patient and clearing that up for me 🙂

    • Amfortas
      June 4, 2012 at 2:07 am #

      A small side note, m’dear. Until approximately 150 years ago the major cause of female death in early adulthood was childbirth. Women who did not die giving birth had a range of debilitationg ailments afteward, to a large degree.

      For millenia men were excluded from the birthing process, by women, whilst the women kept their ‘secrets’ safe. In those millenia the health skills and knowledge of women, about women and this vital ‘women’s business’, did not advance one jot. Not even a tittle.

      Not one advance was made. Death was considered ‘commonplace’.

      Men, who were left to pick up the family pieces (yes, Veronica, Fathers were not just breadwinners back then; they were often single parents) eventually broke through this wall of mafia midwives and intervened. Within a very short time death in childbirth and loss of infant lives was cut to miniscule, as it is today.

      One could argue that most medicine has been devised for women’s health needs. By men. Very little, if anything – and nothing comes to mind – has been done by women for men’s health needs. Apart from deriding men when they get the flu.

  4. Amfortas
    May 30, 2012 at 10:27 pm #

    Excellent Jason.

  5. dah
    June 1, 2012 at 3:38 am #

    i couldn’t finish this article.. sometimes it seems as if the world will go to hell and no one can stop it..

    anyways good article..

    • June 1, 2012 at 9:48 am #

      I certainly understand that sentiment. The world is run by people who cannot accept criticism without flying into an infantile rage of self-justification. As a result our governments are getting increasing less competent and more corrupt. Frankly, I’m convinced western civilisation will fall hard soon because we can handle this level of corruption for so much longer before the infrastructure starts breaking. Only when we see collapse will enough people snap out of their complacency about the state of the world.

      • Beaver
        June 2, 2012 at 7:59 am #

        “The world is run by people who cannot accept criticism without flying into an infantile rage of self-justification.”
        – Jason Sutherland

        (Just thought it was quoteworthy)

        • June 3, 2012 at 11:25 pm #

          lol, yes, I get enraged when people make stupid ad hominem attacks against me. You’re making a strawman there.

  6. June 19, 2012 at 3:12 am #

    Another reason I support Movember (despite the chance to grow an awesome *cough* mo), not only are we raising money for men’s health, but awareness too!

    Just as an aside, there was a recent government program for free prostate screening at home, if I am correct …

  7. Victoria Cooper
    June 25, 2012 at 3:44 pm #

    “women were never barred from higher education or the workforce.” Oh please, get your facts straight. Do some elementary research before making such monumentally unsupportable claims. What an insult to the many women who fought, literally, for the right to an education.

    Melbourne: In 1881 legislation made minor reforms to the University, including allowing for the admission of women. This confirmed a decision previously made within the University after a long and bitter battle. At first women were confined to arts, the first woman graduate being Bella Guerin in 1883. In 1887 women were admitted to medicine.
    http://www.unimelb.edu.au/about/history/

    Oxford: Women were not admitted to membership of the University until 1920, although they had been allowed to sit some University examinations and attend lectures for over forty years by that date. It was thanks to individual initiatives, and the pioneering work of the Association for Promoting the Higher Education of Women (AEW) that women’s colleges came to be established in Oxford. http://www.ox.ac.uk/about_the_university/introducing_oxford/women_at_oxford/index.html

    Yale:
    1969: Yale College admits women for the first time. Women have attended other schools at Yale since 1869, when the first women enrolled in the School of the Fine Arts. Alumna Maya Lin’s The Women’s Table (1993), located in front of Sterling Memorial Library, commemorates the women of Yale.
    http://www.yale.edu/timeline/1969/index.html

    • jason
      September 26, 2012 at 1:41 pm #

      Interesting you dont preface any of the other points covered in the article… guess they just arent important enough.

      • April 9, 2013 at 12:58 am #

        I think the most glaring problem with education in Australia today is that boys are falling behind in all areas of curriculum and it is either being ignored or it is said that boys are just lazy. The other issue is the decline in boys even making it to the end of high school, the ever decreasing number of boys who make it to university or graduate. When there was a perceived problem about girls in education, programs were made and funded to target it. Now the reverse is happening and no one seems to care. Where’s the gender equality in that?
        The gender bias against men in all areas of health funding is shameful.

  8. May 9, 2013 at 8:26 am #

    Woah! I’m really enjoying the template/theme of this blog. It’s simple, yet
    effective. A lot of times it’s very difficult to get that “perfect balance” between user friendliness and visual appearance. I must say you’ve done a very good job with this.
    Additionally, the blog loads extremely fast for me on Opera.

    Exceptional Blog!

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Dying in Silence | Intentious - September 16, 2012

    […] the street. Observe the advertisements: breast cancer awareness, women get your free HPV vaccine (HPV actually kills more men than it does women), women get a free breast exam, women talk to your doctor about your health and fitness, women get […]

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: