In an ideal world, there will be no such thing as ‘men’s issues’ or ‘women’s issues’; they will just be ‘issues’. Inasmuch as breast cancer is primarily a woman’s disease, it needs to be noted that actor Richard Roundtree, like thousands of other men, was diagnosed with it. In 1997 there were 1400 new cases of breast cancer in men and 290 deaths. If Shaft can get it, so can anyone, and he’s one bad motherfu–I’ll shut my mouth.

So while breast cancer can and does affect men directly, indirectly there are still an estimated 2.3 million women living with it, with an expected 40,500 women expected to die of it this year. The only cancer that affects and kills more women is lung cancer. These women are our sister, daughters, mothers, and grandmothers; makes one reconsider differentiating between ‘direct’ and ‘indirect’ in breast cancer’s affect upon us. It behooves as men to put our time and resources toward breast cancer research.

Some events toward this effort make it easy to participate: In mid November of last year, three women put the ‘fun’ in ‘fundraising, with their second annual evening of blue follies to raise several thousands of dollars for breast cancer research, involving a fire eater, a girl-to-gorilla act, and a dozen of New York’s finest striptease artists—The Miss Hollywood Follies II: Burlesque Against Breast Cancer was a crashing success.

However, they encountered an identical problem with certain charities that recently plagued the Canadian fundraiser, Exotic Dancers for Cancer: the source of the funds is too questionable and controversial for the charities to accept the donation.

It’s ironic and sad that breast cancer research can, in some cases, refuse to benefit from a celebration of breasts themselves. The argument tends to be that major contributors to said charities might withdraw their support should they receive funds from less than moral sources.