How come men cannot do the race For Life. I thought everyone got cancer, not just women. Also im sure men will want to raise money for their loved ones who have cancer and everyone with it.

So what is going on!?

:confused: :mad:

wasn't this for breast cancer? which obvoiusly affects mainly women, i guess if they did one for testicular cancer then it would be men only.

either way - as long as it raised a shed load of money i don't see the problem!!!

Race for life is not just for breast cancer. And just think how many people would do the race for life if men were allowed to aswell. It would raise even more money! I do not see any signs of an event that specifically targets men only. So why does Race for Life have to target women only.

About 15% of breast cancer cases are in men. It can affect anybody with breast tissue.

I though that entrants to the Race For Life were people who had had breast cancer, in which case, they really should consider allowing men in.

--
JGH

Originally posted by Colonel
I do not see any signs of an event that specifically targets men only. So why does Race for Life have to target women only.

From the race for life website:

"Race for Life is the only women-only event of this type organised by Cancer Research UK. We restrict entry to women due to the wishes of our participants. It is one of our most successful events because it is a unique opportunity for women to come together in a non-competitive and celebratory atmosphere." (emphasis mine)
http://www.raceforlife.org/allaboutus/yourquestionsanswered/details.asp?catid=4&nsecid=5#24

It appears it is women only because the participants wanted it to be. No good reason at all. The phrase 'unique opportunity for women ... non-competitive and celebratory' is weird. What is so unique about it?

Let's hold a 'men only' charity event and see how fast the feminists swoop :twisted: (only kidding, before anyone starts...)

edits because I clicked submit instead of preview. D'oh!

Originally posted by spiffymonkey
From the race for life website:

(emphasis mine)
http://www.raceforlife.org/allaboutus/yourquestionsanswered/details.asp?catid=4&nsecid=5#24

It appears it is women only because the participants wanted it to be. No good reason at all. The phrase 'unique opportunity for women ... non-competitive and celebratory' is weird. What is so unique about it?

Let's hold a 'men only' charity event and see how fast the feminists swoop :twisted: (only kidding, before anyone starts...)

edits because I clicked submit instead of preview. D'oh!

aren't all athletic events sex segregated anyway?

Originally posted by Phanerothyme
aren't all athletic events sex segregated anyway?

Marathons aren't. Or are they?

It's because you insist on wearing floppy shorts with your bits swinging about - not a pretty sight.


:heyhey:

If any men want to race for a charity I am looking for some for Great North Run and London Marathon to raise money for Amy's Retreat, a charity that helps families with kids with cancer.

Just pm me I will do rest for you

It was Race for Life - Breast Cancer, a branch of Cancer Research, thus meaning that women are the only ones who are supposed to have breasts- see quote below

jgharston-
"About 15% of breast cancer cases are in men." !!!

and about it being non-competitive - well with men involved they always want to race and see who can do it fastest, well its not about that its about celebrating recovery and in memory of those we have lost from breast cancer...

hope i didnt come across mardy but just couldnt understand why you couldnt grasp it was a women only event!

Originally posted by Charlie01
with men involved they always want to race and see who can do it fastest, well its not about that its about celebrating recovery and in memory of those we have lost from breast cancer..

What a sweeping sexist genralisation!. Men have lost people to breast cancer and apparently 15% of cases are men. I'm sure any man wanting to enter the race for life isn't just doing it so he can thrash all the women at running he'll want to do it for exactly the same reason women want to do it!!!

Are you sure it's women only?

I'm doing the Playtex Moonwalk in June (a marathon powerwalk round London in your bra at midnight) and I thought that was women only, but apparently men are allowed to di it too as long as they wear a bra!

Originally posted by Charlie01
It was Race for Life - Breast Cancer, a branch of Cancer Research, thus meaning that women are the only ones who are supposed to have breasts- see quote below

jgharston-
"About 15% of breast cancer cases are in men." !!!

and about it being non-competitive - well with men involved they always want to race and see who can do it fastest, well its not about that its about celebrating recovery and in memory of those we have lost from breast cancer...

hope i didnt come across mardy but just couldnt understand why you couldnt grasp it was a women only event!

Another comment - I find your post very bizzarre Charlie01. You sound like you've got a right chip on your shoulder.

If you've got breasts then breast cancer affects you, but if you like breasts (or the women attatched to them!) then it also affects you.

I very much doubt that all the husbands, fathers or sons of women with breast cancer would take part in the Race for Life just to see if they could to if faster than everybody else.

And it's very true that 15 per cent of breast cancer cases are in men. In fact, hereditory breast cancer is actually more likely to be passed from mother to son than mother to daughter.

Finally, I actually feel a bit sorry for men where cancer's concerned. It the nature of women to band together and so we champion the cause of breast cancer (and rightly so), but testicular cancer still has a certain stigma attatched. That's very sad.

Amy was 5 when she died, she didn't have breasts, but she suffered 3 of her 5 years with cancer. Anyone want to stop all this bickering and run to raise money for others in her parents position.

If so pm me

i dont have a chip on my shoulder jbee, all i was saying was that i couldnt understand why these men were wondering why they couldnt particpate, its a women only fundraising event and thats the end of it.
i didnt set the rules.
so all you men out there feel free to set up a man only fundraising event and dont worry us women wont feel rejected by it!
boppin bruce- i agree lets stop the bickering, and help others in the same situation..

Well my boyfriend's dad and his two friends ran it. They applied as women and dressed up as women on the day...all involved took it very lightheartedly and let them run :)

The Race for Life is fully subscribed every year, so it doesn't really matter whether the runners are men or women, the benefit to charity is the same, innit. There are hundreds of similar races you could join in if you wanted to.

That's quite sexist isn't it!

I think there is a mens only event organised by cancer research uk, i think its a bike ride.

We've had this conversation already, before Sheffield's own Race for Life - go here (http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?s=&threadid=41350&highlight=race+for+life)

Scoop is right, there is a men-only event in aid of testicular cancer - it's a series of bike rides; see here (http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/getinvolved/events/bikerides/)

One of the most touching things for me, racing on the day, was seeing all the women racing and the (mainly) men supporting and cheering us on. It was amazing. Thank you so much anyone who was there to support us, it made so much difference.

So often it's the other way around; women supporting men; women in passive role, men in active role. I can't express how deeply touching it was to experience the reverse of this; men getting behind a women's cause for a change. You CAN support Race for Life if you're male - you just can't run in it.

JfG xx

You don't need permission to do stuff, folks.

Just remember JEDI - Just 'effing Do It.

Give a charity the money, arrange your own events, whatever.

Joe

Chortle - like the JEDI acronym, Joe! Sounds like a good motto for life . . . if I could add a bit though -

JEDI AHANSDA

Ahem! Introducing"Just 'Effing Do It . . . And Have A Nice Sit Down Afterwards"

;)

My son who was 11 at the time ran in the race with me, along with his male friend - both had lost grandparents to cancer. No one stopped him, we even got permission albeit it was on the day.

Originally posted by jgharston
About 15% of breast cancer cases are in men. It can affect anybody with breast tissue.

Woah! Holy missing decimal point, Batman!

That sould say: 1.5%.

There were about 400 cases of male breast cancer diagnoded in the UK in 2002, and about 38,000 female cases.

--
JGH

Originally posted by BoppinBruce
Amy was 5 when she died, she didn't have breasts, but she suffered 3 of her 5 years with cancer. Anyone want to stop all this bickering and run to raise money for others in her parents position.

If so pm me

As I said in my earlier post, I'm doing the Playtex Moonwalk later this month in aid of breast cancer, and also the Great Scots Half Marathon later this year. 'Fraid that's all I can afford to do this year because of the entrance fees and taking time off work.

But I agree with you... Cancer is cancer, anyone can get it and everyone can do their bit to raise money to help stop it.

A great charity that organise sponsored powerwalks like the Moonwalk are at www.walkthewalk.org so why not check that out as a starting point everyone?

I'm afraid that one's mostly aimed at women, but if you google cancer charities and contant one of the main ones I'm sure they'll point you in the direction of events for blokes and uni-sex stuff. Or organise your own fundraiser!

I can understand the points raised here. As a runner myself, I would naturally applaud anyone taking part in any run of any distance and for any worthwhile cause.

I hope I'm not making too sweeping a statement when I say that there are a lot of women who are put off taking part in some sports (whether deemed competitive or not) because they feel 'a bit daft'. By that I mean they would probably spend a lot of their time worrying about what other people think of them. 'I'm too slow to run, too heavy to run. Look at the shape of me. I can't run with these bouncing around', and they feel the presence of men only makes it worse! Hence, Women Only sessions in gyms. (The big knockers bit is actually something my wife has regularly cited. Lucky me eh?)

There's no problem with this. Many men and almost everyone new to a sport, be it running, cycling or simply visiting the gym, feels this way. That's the nature of sport. The good thing with running a marathon, a 10k or even a 3k is that whilst it IS competitive, the only person you're really up against is yourself. You do one race in a certain time; you do another and want to beat your previous time. And you raise money in the process!!

So, whilst I'd love to partake in a Race For Life run, it's true there are many, many other races I can choose to run in that allow both sexes instead. I can always sponsor myself for similar charities to Cancer Research.

The last thing we want is for men to be allowed into the Race For Life at the expense of the many thousands of female competitors who take part because they feel happy to do so. I don't think we need term the entry rules as sexist. It's live and let live, which is the whole point in raising money to keep our loved ones, of either sex, or ourselves here on earth, free of cancer, for a little bit longer. My father died of cancer but it's nice to know there are thousands of people out there prepared to do their bit in the name of cancer research.

I hope I didn't come across as patronising in this post.

Originally posted by Ousetunes

I hope I'm not making too sweeping a statement when I say that there are a lot of women who are put off taking part in some sports (whether deemed competitive or not) because they feel 'a bit daft'. By that I mean they would probably spend a lot of their time worrying about what other people think of them. 'I'm too slow to run, too heavy to run. Look at the shape of me. I can't run with these bouncing around', and they feel the presence of men only makes it worse!

Yay, Ousetunes! That's exactly it for me. I think it might be hard for some men to imagine how difficult it is to feel that you're being stared at and commented on - and it happens all the time. I'm a regular runner, just on the streets where I live, and every single time I go out, I get heckled/wolf whistled/commented on, by someone. Every single time.

Recently I was in Millhouses Park, and running directly behind a male runner. He ran by these two blokes - not a flicker. I ran by - comments and heckles aplenty. Why? Why can't they just respect me as a runner and let me go by, unhassled?

It really hurts, and it makes me so angry. Some people say - why not feel flattered? Well, because it's not about them being nice. Let's not fool ourselves that they're saying these things to be flattering and complimentary to me. It's an act of aggression, and the evidence of this is in what happens if you answer back, as I have a couple of times - things immediately turn hostile and ugly.

What was amazing at Race for Life was running a whole race without one single heckle. It was bliss. I felt safe - I felt respected.

That's one of the reasons why it's a women-only event - because of the **** that we still have to put up with daily, when all we're doing is going out to get some exercise.


JfG x

Originally posted by JoyfulGrrl
Yay, Ousetunes! That's exactly it for me. I think it might be hard for some men to imagine how difficult it is to feel that you're being stared at and commented on - and it happens all the time. I'm a regular runner, just on the streets where I live, and every single time I go out, I get heckled/wolf whistled/commented on, by someone. Every single time.

Recently I was in Millhouses Park, and running directly behind a male runner. He ran by these two blokes - not a flicker. I ran by - comments and heckles aplenty. Why? Why can't they just respect me as a runner and let me go by, unhassled?

It really hurts, and it makes me so angry. Some people say - why not feel flattered? Well, because it's not about them being nice. Let's not fool ourselves that they're saying these things to be flattering and complimentary to me. It's an act of aggression, and the evidence of this is in what happens if you answer back, as I have a couple of times - things immediately turn hostile and ugly.

What was amazing at Race for Life was running a whole race without one single heckle. It was bliss. I felt safe - I felt respected.

That's one of the reasons why it's a women-only event - because of the **** that we still have to put up with daily, when all we're doing is going out to get some exercise.
JfG x

Well excuse me. I hope you are not putting all men into a category just because of a couple of stupid men giving you a bit of grief. Its ridiculous. So, if men ran The Race For Life, you would be wolf wistled. Don't get rapped up in it because one day when you think some male runners are talking about you or heckling you, and you have a go at them, you are going to look a right prat. Or to be honest, maybe you are going a bit :loopy: and think that all men do this to you all the time.

I think we should protest... :suspect:

//www.change.org/petitions/let-men-join-the-race-for-life

spread the word!

wasn't this for breast cancer? which obvoiusly affects mainly women, i guess if they did one for testicular cancer then it would be men only.

either way - as long as it raised a shed load of money i don't see the problem!!!

W:loopy:ell if men were involved you would have two sheds.

Went down to the race for life today to give the OH and daughter some support and there were 2 blokes walking a staffy through the finish line.

The staffy must have been a girl, she had pink fairy wings on. As soon as i saw them i thought it must be some sort subdued protest about men not being able to do it.

From the race for life website:

(emphasis mine)
http://www.raceforlife.org/allaboutus/yourquestionsanswered/details.asp?catid=4&nsecid=5#24

It appears it is women only because the participants wanted it to be. No good reason at all. The phrase 'unique opportunity for women ... non-competitive and celebratory' is weird. What is so unique about it?

Let's hold a 'men only' charity event and see how fast the feminists swoop :twisted: (only kidding, before anyone starts...)

edits because I clicked submit instead of preview. D'oh!

Its not that the participants want it to be female only but because the organisers want it that way. Do the organisers consult every woman who turns up and ask their opinion?

Whatever way you look at it it is sexist and needs to change.

There is this one, a unisex charity race.

http://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/showthread.php?t=779601

Funny how the thread stopped after that last comment though.

wasn't this for breast cancer? which obvoiusly affects mainly women, i guess if they did one for testicular cancer then it would be men only.

either way - as long as it raised a shed load of money i don't see the problem!!!

Mainly but not only.

My husband ran in the MEN-only 5k in Hull a few years ago, organised by the Bobby Moore Fund for bowel cancer. The next year, it was cancelled due to lack of interest!

I think we should protest... :suspect:

Well excuse me. I hope you are not putting all men into a category just because of a couple of stupid men giving you a bit of grief. Its ridiculous. So, if men ran The Race For Life, you would be wolf wistled. Don't get rapped up in it because one day when you think some male runners are talking about you or heckling you, and you have a go at them, you are going to look a right prat. Or to be honest, maybe you are going a bit :loopy: and think that all men do this to you all the time.



Sorry, couldn't resist.

Scoop is right, there is a men-only event in aid of testicular cancer - it's a series of bike rides



Isn't cycling a contributor to testicular cancer ?

if girls can be in the scouts, i don't see why men cant be in the race for life.

Does anybody know what the % of the money raised from race for life actually gets used for the work cancer research does, once admin, set up cost ect are taken into account. Does the entry fee cover all the charitys cost for setting up such an event.

if girls can be in the scouts, i don't see why men cant be in the race for life.

Its called possitive discrimination and is allowed nay activliy encouraged these days :(

I hope I'm not making too sweeping a statement when I say that there are a lot of women who are put off taking part in some sports (whether deemed competitive or not) because they feel 'a bit daft'. By that I mean they would probably spend a lot of their time worrying about what other people think of them. 'I'm too slow to run, too heavy to run. Look at the shape of me. I can't run with these bouncing around', and they feel the presence of men only makes it worse! Hence, Women Only sessions in gyms. (The big knockers bit is actually something my wife has regularly cited. Lucky me eh?)


But that argument does not work as many men were also on the sideline cheering people on and although not taking part, were there.

How come men cannot do the race For Life. I thought everyone got cancer, not just women. Also im sure men will want to raise money for their loved ones who have cancer and everyone with it.

So what is going on!?

:confused: :mad:

Why not organise one?

Its called possitive discrimination and is allowed nay activliy encouraged these days :(

but any discrimination on the grounds of sex, race and ethnicity is generally illegal in the uk.

A young chap from Sheffield has organised one called "chase for life"

google it and join in or start your own.

Men have Movember . Not many women can grow a moustache in a month !

Men have Movember . Not many women can grow a moustache in a month !


And there's money to be made from those who can

but any discrimination on the grounds of sex, race and ethnicity is generally illegal in the uk.

Tell the race for life people.
I dont think they know.

apparantly from next year men are able to do the race too,not sure how true it is

As far as I'm concerned cancer is indiscriminate whether it affects male or female. We need better understanding.

Race for life is not just for breast cancer. And just think how many people would do the race for life if men were allowed to aswell. It would raise even more money! I do not see any signs of an event that specifically targets men only. So why does Race for Life have to target women only.

because funnily enough, women are the only ones allowed to be sexist. its like car insurance.

It's because you insist on wearing floppy shorts with your bits swinging about - not a pretty sight.

i think youd rather that than me wearing small skintight shorts with my bits flopping about :hihi:

:heyhey:

Why not organise one?

wed get abuse for sexism.



wow, talk about reviving the dead :hihi: just read the dates on the thread :hihi:

Some women participate in the Movember Mens cancer event :)

Chesterfield has this men only race.

www.thebestof.co.uk/local/chesterfield/events/292334/fancy-drag-race-men-only

I personally think this is sexism that slips through the net by virtue of attaching itself to a 'good cause', which is ridiculous, that doesn't mean it is above any criticism ever. Also, to the poster that said women feel self conscious and often get jeered at when running in public... well I'm a man, I get things shouted at me when I run. Usually it is 'run forest, run', it happens, deal with it. There's an article about the Race for Life being sexist at webbymcwebsite.com

I personally think this is sexism that slips through the net by virtue of attaching itself to a 'good cause', which is ridiculous, that doesn't mean it is above any criticism ever. Also, to the poster that said women feel self conscious and often get jeered at when running in public... well I'm a man, I get things shouted at me when I run. Usually it is 'run forest, run', it happens, deal with it. There's an article about the Race for Life being sexist at webbymcwebsite.com

Yep spot on.

I personally think this is sexism that slips through the net by virtue of attaching itself to a 'good cause', which is ridiculous, that doesn't mean it is above any criticism ever.
I think anyone criticising a charity is an absolute idiot. A huge raging idiot that needs an empathy transplant.

Any organisation that raises money for charity can be seperatist if they wish. Doesn't make one sodding ounce of difference. If you want to raise money for breast cancer go and do it and shut up. But you don't want to raise money. That'd be effort. Sitting on a computer and crapping over everyone else's efforts is much easier, and much more fun.

Do you rage against ex-servicemen when they raise money for Help For Heroes? "I know I've never served in the army, and I know I never went to war, and I know that I never lost a leg by standing on a landmine, but it's not fair that I'm not allowed to walk to the North Pole! Boo hoo.". The Royal British Legion have the audacity to sell poppies, and give the money back to help soldiers - the gits. How dare they?

As for this muck:

There's an article about the Race for Life being sexist at webbymcwebsite.com
Yeah, he's a real genius, that one. You've really picked a spokesman for your 'anti-women rasing money for charity' movement there. Keep up the good work and you might find a more humourless blogger than this foul toad.

First off, men can get breast cancer. I figure we should get that fact out there right at the beginning. Sure it isn't as common, but it happens. Aside from that however, so what if we couldn't get it? Men love boobs more than any other living creature does: we love boobs more than babies love boobs, we love boobs more than Jesus loves boobs and most importantly, we love boobs way more than women love boobs.

You perfectly highlight my point, because it is a charity they are not allowed to be criticised? That is stupid, I am not saying 'let's stop the race for life', I am not saying lets take cancer research uk to court, I am saying lets let more people be involved in it.

Also, the only way your logic about ex-servicemen raising money for wounded soldiers would hold up is if they were restricting entrance to people that had directly suffered from cancer. Which they are not, even if they were this would still be ridiculous since even if you or a relative haven't had it, we all potentially COULD get it, the same isn't true of being shot in a war zone. Since most of us don't go to war zones.

To say I don't want to raise money simply because I dared to criticise an event is just plain daft. As stated, I want to be able to join in raising cash for the biggest cancer charity in the UK in its biggest event. What is wrong with that? The more people that voice their opinions about this and say the same thing, the better chance there is of this happening.

With regards to the blog, it approached it in a daft way which I liked, rather than all the other stuff I read that seems to preach about how men are the ones that suffer sexism in this country now. Which personally I think is utter crap most of the time, this one example shouldn't be used to strengthen that daft argument.

I think anyone criticising a charity is an absolute idiot. A huge raging idiot that needs an empathy transplant.

Just because its a charity doesn't make them right all the time or exempt from criticism.

You might remember a few years ago OXFAM were criticised for handing out aid (i think it was wellies and blankets) at a flooded Glastonbury.

I am not saying lets take cancer research uk to court, I am saying lets let more people be involved in it.
Loads of people are already involved in it. Cancer Research is a huge charity. Race For Life is one event which is aimed at getting women involved, and what's wrong with that? If you want to have a 5-a-side tournament that is only for blokes then go and do it. Give the money to testicular cancer. Nothing stopping you doing that at all.

Loads of people are already involved in it. Cancer Research is a huge charity. Race For Life is one event which is aimed at getting women involved, and what's wrong with that? If you want to have a 5-a-side tournament that is only for blokes then go and do it. Give the money to testicular cancer. Nothing stopping you doing that at all.

More people could be, this would be even better. Especially since the cost of organising and promoting the event wouldn't be that much greater whilst potentially doubling participation and therefore sponsorship.

There's nothing wrong with trying to get one of the sexes involved in something, there is clearly something wrong with it when it is via the exclusion of the other sex, it becomes completely hypocritical.

Also, why did you pick testicular cancer as your example? Cancer is not and should not be a gender issue, it is a human issue. Anything that portrays it as otherwise is potentially harmful IMO.

Either way, we obviously have different opinions on this, I have voiced mine, you have voiced yours (essentially calling me a raging idiot in the process but hey ho), undecided people will read them all and make their own minds up. Job done.

Also, why did you pick testicular cancer as your example? Cancer is not and should not be a gender issue, it is a human issue.
Then donate. You're the one calling the event sexist.

It is possible to have segregation within a good cause, aslong as it isn't rooted in ideology. If 'Race For Life' is marketted at women then let them run and stop grumbling. If you wanted to do a 'Male Race For Life' and Cancer Research rejected your idea, then you'd have a point. Up to now all you've done is attack people for raising money for charity.

This will be the last reply because the back and forth is not really going anywhere it seems. Segregation is not the same as exclusion, if they had both male and female events (and Run for Moore is a joke of a token effort) then I would not have an issue, this isn't segregation, it is exclusion. Even exclusion I could deal with if it somehow helped the cause since it is obviously a good and worthwhile one, but in reality halving the amount of people that can raise sponsorship in an event is not helping the cause. (As a side note, many people would argue based on past behaviour including other female marketed campaigns, and disproportionate funding for female only cancers when compared to male only, that this in fact IS rooted in ideology)

Considering I and many people have signed petitions and put this forwards to them year on year and this has been rejected (with Cancer Research showing it on their website as a frequently asked question) you have just agreed that I and all others that have brought this up do in fact have a point, so thank you for recognising that.

Lastly you say I have attacked people 'fro raising money for charity' well that is a misleading statement that is phrased in a way as to make your argument look more valid. That is a pretty immature technique for any argument/debate. (Not that I am saying you are immature, I don't know you, just that you used an immature technique to superficially strengthen your point of view). Clearly I am not attacking people for raising money for charity. I have said nothing about the people that join in this event, I am not attacking them. I am not even attacking the charity, I aimed to state an opinion that is obviously shared by many others so our collective voices can hopefully change things and make this event more inclusive. Considering this could potentially earn more money for the charity, I fail to see how this is an attack. I just disagree with their policy, disagreeing with something is not necessarily a negative, nor is it moaning, grumbling, attacking or any of those. If you see something that can be improved, why not true to improve it?

Also I could donate, and obviously if I am bothered enough by this subject to spend time talking about it, it is isn't such a stretch to imagine I may well be bothered enough by it to reach into my wallet. But that is besides the point.

The last thing I want to say is, it doesn't matter if I or others can contribute a different way, I of course do that as I'm sure the vast majority that have issue with this do (though many may pick a different cancer charity because of this). What matters is simple, a charity should always seek to waste as little money as possible (I'm sure everyone can agree with that) and to make the money they use as effective as possible. They could raise much more money from this event for relatively little extra cost (no extra ad campaign cost per year for example) than they do currently. As a charity they have a duty to this, otherwise they are wasting money that people have donated in good faith that as much as possible will go help the cause represented.

That is pretty much the whole of my argument. Feel free to respond obviously, I will likely read it, but I have said all I have to say.

Segregation is not the same as exclusion, if they had both male and female events (and Run for Moore is a joke of a token effort)
No no no. You can't say "if they had both male and female events" and dismiss the fact that they do have male and female events. You can even run in other events that aren't exclusive if you wish (Great North Run, Half Marathons) and give the money raised to Cancer Research if you wish. You have plenty of opportunities to involve yourself.

I didn't even know about Run For Moore, my knowledge of this topic comes from my Mum doing Race For Life with her workmates - but you can't dismiss things as you wish. Cancer Research do have an event marketted at men. So this isn't exclusion as an ideology at all.

What matters is simple, a charity should always seek to waste as little money as possible [...] and to make the money they use as effective as possible. They could raise much more money from this event for relatively little extra cost (no extra ad campaign cost per year for example) than they do currently.
How does 'Race For Life' waste money? It is an event for raising money, so thus it is an income for them. You can claim they are missing the opportunity to involve lots more people by letting men run, but then we are back to the point above that men can and do run in other events. That doesn't make it a waste. If you claimed that the event would raise more if they allowed men to run than that would be supposition, because you'd have no way of predicting that.

I still say that people complaining and putting effort into criticising charity money making events are not doing a good thing. There are all sorts of exclusive charity events. Homeless people sell the Big Issue and exclude other people from selling it - is that wrong? No, it is a cause which effects them and it is a fund-raiser which helps them. Through the same logic women can run in women only events to raise money for a cancer which affects them. It isn't a bad thing at all.

A lady called Jenny Dodd ran the race in memory of a dear friend of mine Sue Brooks who died last year, I was pleased and proud to give my donation, RIP Susie
http://www.raceforlifesponsorme.org/jenn-dodd

About 15% of breast cancer cases are in men. It can affect anybody with breast tissue.

I though that entrants to the Race For Life were people who had had breast cancer, in which case, they really should consider allowing men in.

--
JGH

Very valid point. My uncle had a lump removed 10 years ago and the divs at his work thought it fun to joke about his man boobs.