Field of Women ?

RomlaRomla AdelaideMember Posts: 1,913
With Matt joining today am reminded yet again that breast cancer is not gender exclusive although it does effect women in greater numbers.

Reading the posts welcoming him I went clunk ,omg - the major promotional event for this bloody disease is Field of Women ? The long used advertising brand worldwide is Pink Lady .No wonder blokes may be reluctant/ embarrassed to seek support on the blog let alone participate actively on it.

I realise blokes don’t talk about personal stuff as much as women and that could be another factor.And there may be some uniquely male issues they would prefer to talk to a bloke over.However if the shoe was on the other foot would you have the courage to join a blog/organisation targeting a male dominated cancer that you also had the misfortune to have - I’m not sure I could.

It’s time marketing of this bloody disease was less medically and socially antiquated worldwide.It is a barrier to entry for support that we all so warmly are willing to give.

PS Maybe some of the blokes might step up to create a group specifically for blokes to talk to each other about aspects that effect them specifically or that would create embarrassment on an open forum.

Comments

  • RomlaRomla AdelaideMember Posts: 1,913
    Just reflect a little about hard it was to start on here yourselves with total strangers as well as being very anxious at your diagnosis . Even though you were warmly greeted it was a very hard first step - how might a bloke feel ?
  • kmakmkmakm MelbourneMember Posts: 7,516
    @Romla I'm with you on this one. I understand the arguments for brand recognition and historic goodwill etc but in this day and age, the breast cancer branding in this country is very old fashioned. I don't feel it stands for me and I know my sister felt the same way. I am not comfortable with the pink wash.
  • SisterSister Adelaide Hills, SAMember Posts: 4,340
    Couldn't agree more, @Romla
  • SisterSister Adelaide Hills, SAMember Posts: 4,340
    I've copied my post here with a couple of changes from the thread "A little embarrassing" as I think we hijacked @Matt 's very brave introduction post and turned it into a discussion about gender inclusiveness...  

    Personally, I have mostly avoided pink all of my life (perhaps started as it being what nice little girls wore) and so, have never identified with it.  I agree with the Love Your Sister statement about the colour - something along the lines of it being soft and this battle against bc is not soft.  And the cardboard cutout to me doesn't just look like a dunny door sign - to me it represents cookie cutter women - keep us in our box - so we'd better be soft and sweet and nice and, well...pink.  It's incredibly dated and will only become more so.  It's rather cringe-worthy, to be honest and patronising and I'm speaking as a woman in her 50s - I can't imagine what a 30 yo would think of it.  There's always a flurry when a well-known brand updates their look, but people get over it and no-one looks back until it's so long ago that it's nostalgia.  I'm so glad that the magazine name was not changed.  Before anyone gets upset with me, that is my feeling about it - I understand that others feel differently.

    That's me talking of a branding that is obviously only aimed at representing women (and Love Your Sister will struggle with that, too).  If we are serious about being inclusive, no matter what colour is used, the pink lady silhouette and name should be retired.  Again, just my opinion and I know that others may disagree.


  • kmakmkmakm MelbourneMember Posts: 7,516
    Hear hear
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 0
    The user and all related content has been deleted.
Sign In or Register to comment.