We
live in societies full of all kinds of ridiculous taboos that keep us
prisoners without even a warning. You have to learn by yourself and
often by mistakes, what you shouldn't look, do, say ... like little fish
born in the fish-bowl swimming round and round, not knowing there's a
big wide world just on the other side of the glass. One of these topics
is that you never publish that someone has died of cancer. Or even being
sick of cancer. On print it usually says someone passed away 'after a
long illness', the habitual euphemism.
I don't understand this at all. Why do we have to keep quiet about cancer? One would only say it openly when a lost case is talked about, like for instance, when the legendary singer composer of 'The girl of yesterday', Antonio Vega, recently died, and his biography had already included worse things, like drugs.
It's quite incredible that cancer continues stigmatising in some way who suffer it, as if the mere mention of it is a shame, not just a illness. Given that we all know cancer is not a contagious disease, I wonder from what and where this taboo is being taken as taboo subject. Some say that the oncological patients is seen (mistakenly) as guilty of his tumours. Like venereal diseases are so considered. At least the latter carries the probability, but equally likely contracted by accident or misuse of contaminated needles or open wounds.
On the other hand, medical scientists and laboratories are desperate to get financial help with intense and further investigations, and charitable organisations are eager and working hard to do their part. But, if people are ashamed of even to acknowledge the existence of this disease, and refuse to even talk about it, how could they be expected to fully understand the urgency of it and to do what they can to help?
Current Mood: 
Anxious
Anxious
Artistic
Accomplished