Race for life...sexist?

Sorry it just annoys me greatly when I see things like " if some guys actually cared about raising money for Prostate/Testicular cancer and other cancers then they could prove a very good source of income for these charities. But no, just complain instead".
Your assuming that guys don't care about raising money for such charities and I find that pretty disgusting. I care about both genders and its attitudes like her's make me wonder if you actually care about men's health.

Then why don't you start campaigning for 'men's charities'? You think things like Race for Life came out of nowhere? People worked hard to gain awareness. As I said earlier, too much complaining and not enough action.

Then why don't you start campaigning for 'men's charities'? You think things like Race for Life came out of nowhere? People worked hard to gain awareness. As I said earlier, too much complaining and not enough action.

Only on TSR can a charity event be deemed racist.

Probably because despite being the 'biggest prostate and testicular cancer fund raiser' (which I would dispute) hardly anyone has heard of them. I'm a research student and know the various charities quite well as they are potential sources of funding. I had never heard of the eyeontheball event.

Events such as Race for Life etc. depend very much on advertising for their successes whether it be direct (TV ads) or because the organiser is a well known charity (as Cancer Research UK is). While it may be established as a brand in its own right now, this was not the case 10 or 15 years ago, when it very much relied on the CRUK name. Race for Life also benefits from companies clamouring to be associated with certain causes particularly breast cancer (with not altogether positive results).

www.dailyfinance.com/2009/10/12/pink-ribbon-overkill-companies-exploit-breast-cancer-campaigns/

Smaller charities struggle to put on such events because they tend not to be successful if people don't know about them. Compared with CRUK, Everyman is tiny.
The old adage 'you have to spend money to make money' is every bit as true for charities as it is for companies (although this has unfortunately led to charities embracing centralism and essentially operating as companies).

Who knows? It's fairly irrelevant really.

There is action, do you not think people are working hard for men's health to gain awareness? there is plenty of action just not enough support from women. If this big organisation such as Race for life exists then why does it not support men and actually allow men to race as well?

It came from the UK's largest cancer charity. It didn't start from "out of nowhere". There are thousands of charities most of which people haven't heard of. That doesn't mean they aren't trying to raise awareness, just that it is a particularly crowded area.

I also don't think setting up new charities is a good idea as it results in replication.

*sexist. If there are charities that have male only runs, I'd call that sexist as well. Female only gyms however, that's not sexist imo

I seem to remember Robbie Williams doing a video for them which was pretty famous at the time. They launched a Rachel Stevens testicular cancer website that received over 750,000 visitors in the first two weeks alone. They have had their publicity. Once again, perhaps some people don't care about it as much as they are making out.



What? So you're against both female only and male only events because it reinforces some unknown stereotype that you consider to be irrelevant anyway



Of course people are. I just think that many of the keyboard warriors do nothing but complain seem content to do just that, complain.

Cancer Research UK, the charity that Race for Life raises money for, does have male only and unisex events.



Well yes, back in 1994 it was relatively unknown.

I know other charities/events exist, what's your point

When you go on the Cancer Research site, the womens one is promoted quite a lot but I'm finding it a little tricky to find the mens stuff. Do you see how despite the efforts of many to promote mens-only stuff. Its just not effective.

What do you mean the women's one? On the homepage it has links to two events, Race for Life and Shine. Other than that it has various links to other parts of its site but not to any specific events or gender specific cancer (apart from its latest blog post which also mentions prostate cancer)

Well there you go, why don't they put a male-only event on the homepage.

What? So you're against both female only and male only events because it reinforces some unknown stereotype that you consider to be irrelevant anyway

They can't put everything on the homepage, don't you think it makes sense to have two of their most popular events on the homepage?


Click on 'Support Us' it has links for information about making donations, taking part in events, fundraising, volunteering, campaigning etc

I'm against all stereotyping, which ones are at play in this instance is irrelevant.

I can't foresee an argument for female only Race for Life that isn't based on some sort of stereotype. You have conveniently offered no explanation as to why women would not want men to take part.

I offered ideas, however, I cannot read the minds of everybody that's taken part in the event to determine why they picked Race for Life.

Let's ban it because it reinforces stereotype x

Don't you think it makes sense to create awareness for a charity that isn't one of the most popular.
God I can't be bothered discussing this with you anymore.

Let's open it up to men because it reinforces stereotypes.

always wondered what would happen if I took part...(trans woman) I imagine alot of abuse/wierd looks/frowns