Housework and breast cancer

[HydrogenBond]

A study was conducted in Europe that involved 100,000's of women. This study was far more extensive than most studies. It was found that women who get their exercise from housework were 20% less likely to develop breast cancer. Housework, as exercise, was found to lower the rate of breast cancer, even more than any other form of exercise.

One logical explanation for this is that housework is an instinctive maternal thing, i.e., prepares the nest for her family. This natural maternal activity appears to favor the health of breast, which are also natural maternal things. This study appears to indicate a mind over matter affect, with maternal behavior producing the proper chemical balance needed to maintain the health of maternal breasts. I always believed that if women wish to act like men they don't need breasts, thereby causing the body to abort them at a higher rate than natural.

[Buffy]

Sounds like a bit of motivation for you guys to do more housework!

Any reason you refuse to cite your reference?

Its been statistically shown that people who spend lots of time trying to put women in their place get less sex. There's probably a correlation there.

Did you know that breast cancer is rapidly becoming one of the leading causes of death in men because of a refusal to recognize it as anything other than a "women's disease"?

Uppity woman,
Buffy

[HydrogenBond]

The reference was on a AM talk radio program, i.e., Rush Limbaugh. He is usually very careful about being accurate with his data and tends to bring up things before they become widely known or reported. The increased breast cancer in males is probably due to males becoming more feminine. Their feminization is causing them to meet the masculine women in the middle to form a new androgenous sexuality that is more vulnerable to breast cancer.

I did not mean this to be sexist. The traditional divide of choirs was the women cared for the inside of the house and man cared for the outside of the house. On the farm or in the burbs, this worked fine. The work outside is typically less maternal nesting and more manly physical. The outside work is often too tough for wimp men who hire someone or leave it for their manly wife to deal with, so they can do the dishes. It makes their hands nice and soft.

[Buffy]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

The reference was on a AM talk radio program, i.e., Rush Limbaugh. He is usually very careful about being accurate with his data and tends to bring up things before they become widely known or reported.

Well why didn't you say so? Rush is Right! (tm) There's not a single documented case of Rush ever voicing an opinion that was not completely even handed and objective.

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

The increased breast cancer in males is probably due to males becoming more feminine. Their feminization is causing them to meet the masculine women in the middle to form a new androgenous sexuality that is more vulnerable to breast cancer.

Yes, I too am a Larmarckian. I am amazed at how reading feminist propaganda turns men into wimps. They're no good in bed either. It all started back with Suffrage, and those men who were hypnotized into thinking that letting women vote and have jobs have passed it on and through interbreeding over the last 3 or 4 generations with feminists that caused this trait to become dominant.

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

I did not mean this to be sexist. The traditional divide of choirs was the women cared for the inside of the house and man cared for the outside of the house. On the farm or in the burbs, this worked fine. The work outside is typically less maternal nesting and more manly physical.

You're not being sexist, but you're still a bit wrong about this. The real demons in all this are Thomas Edison and the industrialists who invented the electric stove, the washing machine, the vacuum cleaner. I tell you, we house wives today are complete wimps compared to my great grandmother who could chop a tree to kindling for the stove, rub the entire house's linens on a washboard, sweep every room, milk the cows, collect the eggs from the hen house, and still have the energy to cook Sunday supper from scratch with iron cookware that she scrubbed herself. If you're looking for a culprit, *that's* it. Did you notice that that study was *not* historical? You'd find a *much* bigger increase in breast cancer from 100 years ago and its these wimp-making appliances that are *solely* responsible and a much bigger influence than Roomba vs. Xerox machine.

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

It makes their hands nice and soft.

Ewww. Soft hands. Give me a man who works in a mine, doesn't shave except for church on Sunday and has never heard the words "Ban Roll-on"!

Die Alan Alda wimps,
Buffy

[infamous]

Originally Posted by Buffy

Sounds like a bit of motivation for you guys to do more housework!

Did you know that breast cancer is rapidly becoming one of the leading causes of death in men because of a refusal to recognize it as anything other than a "women's disease"?

Being retired and doing the housework for my wife now, I should have the healthiest male breasts around............................Infy

[Michaelangelica]

In History, it has never been know for a woman to kill man while he was doing the washing up.

You also heard about the Man who was killed by P.M.T.?
His wife shot him

Seriously breast cancer is a serious issue I saw a disturbing article linking it to underarm deodorants the other day.

My own, totally unsupported theory, is that the breasts are where many chlorinated hydrocarbons are stored by the body. (Women excrete them in breast milk) CH's are carcinogenic. It is our overuse of these chemicals in the last 50 years; and their ability to bio-accumulate, that has led to the rising breast cancer rate.

In passing I note the Germans at one stage outlawed complete mastectomy as treatment for B cancer, saying it was unnecessary.

[maikeru]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

The reference was on a AM talk radio program, i.e., Rush Limbaugh. He is usually very careful about being accurate with his data and tends to bring up things before they become widely known or reported.

IMO, Rush Limbaugh and his goons are anything but accurate.

HB, couldn't another theory be that the women in the study may have had children (maybe the reason why it correlates with housework?), and bearing children often lowers a woman's risk of having breast cancer?

ACS :: What Are the Risk Factors for Breast Cancer?

Not having children: Women who have had no children or who had their first child after age 30 have a slightly higher breast cancer risk. Having multiple pregnancies and becoming pregnant at an early age reduces breast cancer risk.

[KickAssClown]

Hydrogenbond, I must say you seem to like to walk a fine line.

I wonder from reading your posts, and how you present them, if perhaps you are not aware of the fact that sexism, racism and other such things tend to be insidious. That is such biases tend to arise in such a way as to be almost invisible to the person who holds them.

I say this because, well, it would seem from reading your posts that you feel that these things that you have to say regarding the gender role (here and elsewhere on hypography) are innocent of harm.

However, I see much in terms of the Is-ought to be problem.

Furthermore I would have to ask, what standard is it that you feel that a man or a woman should live up to? It sounds like you are advocating the woman as the mother-nesting type, barefoot and pregnant, I think the saying goes.

Which, is extremely unstable territory to come from. In fact, if that is the claim, then it is extraordinary and I would ask that you give extraordinary evidence to back such a claim. Quoting history is not good enough, as much of what is historical ok does not mean that it ought to be ok (see the "Is-ought to be" problem above). What you have present here also is subject, in my mind, to the correlation does not imply causation fallacy.

In short, your view of what a man or woman should be is to me highly questionable and in most ways reprehensible.

En garde!