Cervical cancer is one of the most class conscious diseases in our socie- doesn't mean ty. It mainly attacks working class women. screening services and cuts is all very well — and very, very important — on but it cannot be separated from the fact that our society is killing women! the cover that Wendy cervical cancer can hopefully be prevented from becoming worse - be cured. OI even The September socialists it's time we started to look at the the causes of cervical cancer instead the symptoms. cervical cancer and heterosexual interesting raises potential Health Education Council campaign... Become a lesbian"?) in her and cervical class and for yourself — Get Rich"!). maternity Community obvious answer
Cervical cancer: time to think of causes as well as symptoms All the hoo-hah about "dirty" jobs? We have to fight for the screening services, to ensure all women at risk can be adequately screened so that But surely as of just fighting for the treatment of the There is a definite link between sex. Nuns don't get cervical cancer and it's very rare among lesbians (it ideas about "Look after yourself — male There is also a link between social rich cancer: women don't get it anywhere near as often as poor women ("Look after What makes poor women more vulnerable to cervical cancer? The victim". is poor diet, bad overall state of health, and all the Socialist Viewpoint, No. 6, June 1985. Page 9
usual problems of being a working class woman: but a big factor which has not been adequately researched is the occupation of the women's sexual partner. The sexual partners of men with "dirty" jobs are greatly at risk from cervical cancer... and how many rich men do you know with
A GMBATU official once described it to me as "oily rag syndrome". The man wipes his hands/machinery with the oily rag and stuffs the rag into his overall pocket... right next to his penis. Even if he baths or showers after work the chemicals and toxins from the dirt on the rag cannot always be removed. And when he has sex with his partner they are passed onto her cervix... it's that simple.
This also links with the question of circumcision. Jewish women have a lower incidence of cervical cancer in the same social class. This could be because a penis without a foreskin is easier to clean.
If there was a vaguely similar link between female circumcision and a
disease they would have declared female circumcision compulsory at birth by now.
The answer given by some doctors to the fact that Jewesses have lower incidence of cervical cancer is that they are "not as promiscuous" as gentiles. In other words "let's blame the
I have already said there is a link
Women organise to take forward gains of
between cervical cancer and heterosexual sex; and the more partners you have may increase the risk (especially if they all have dirty jobs!). monogamous, your risk you even are
cervical cancer is increased if your partner sleeps around.
(Incidentally the medical profession says the greatest risk can be to women who were "promiscuous at an early age". I spent some time trying to find out what their criteria are for "promiscuous" and "early age". I only found one doctor willing to commit himself, and then not on paper... "Women who have had more than one sexual partner before the age of 20..." If that is the dividing line, then I don't know a heterosexual woman who is not in the "greatest risk" category!)
To return to the questions of the partner's occupation: this topic must be raised as a health and safety issue by trade unionists. Not just by the women, but the men.
There is no point me, as a woman, raising through my union with my office/hospital/shop/school, am at | miners' strike Over 200 women attended the May 4 Conference of East Midlands Women Against Pit Closures - and participated in the launch of what could potentially be the long-needed working class women's movement in Britain. JENNY FISHER reports. The Conterence was called to keep the movement of "miners' wives" and "non-mining women supporting miners' wives" going; to remember the pledges of miners' wives ("no return to the kitchen sink"') and to broaden our horizons together by thinking about other struggles: e.g. Ireland, Powell, etc. It was surpris ingly broad. Miners' wives were there; and some left groups - though no group had a very dominant intervention.
There were two central themes up for debate in the discussion about where the women who've been in-
risk of cervical cancer from my partner's job in the factory/-mine/workshop.
Yes I can raise demands for cervical screening in works time, and women in "dirty" jobs are at greater risk than other women: but men have to see our health as an important
While men see health and safety (and/or women) as a side issue for trade unions, women are dying.
The other factors we must look at are chemicals and drugs. There are many articles, books and papers link ing oral contraception (The Pill) with the increase in cervical cancer, particularly the "new" fast growing type
The question of effective contraception has to be linked with the issue of the other risks involved with that particular torm of contraception. It is an interesting fact that most of the women working in family planning do not take the Pill.
The other issue that has been lost in the "effective contraception" argu ment is the positive side of barrier contraception. Sheaths, diaphragms volved in the miners' strike go from here. The need for Miners' Wives to stick together and keep going. In summer '84, there was general talk of the need for the various WAPC groups to come together nationally Two wives of leading NUM Executive members called a national meeting - not least to head off the rank and file aspects of the groupings, and
movement under control. National WAPC was formed. It met -and still does — on the basis of one
Teach WAPC group which is based in the mining com"membership" of at least 75% miners wives). There have always been problems in WAPC groups, over who the delegates should be and the lack of information from national WAPC channels through to local groups.
The problem with this grouping is that by its composition it excludes women who are not based in the minSocialist Viewpoint, No. 6, June 1985. Page 10
and caps all actively reduce the risk of cervical cancer (and many other diseases). In research done in American women found to be in the early stages of cervical cancer who had no surgery but reverted to using sheaths (condoms) when they had sex were cured of cervical cancer at as good a rate (and in some research better) than the women who had surgery.
What this article has done is pointed out how complex health is. Yes we must campaign for more health care and against cuts in the NHS which will only make things much worse. But we must not let capitalism continue to kill us in the name of profit - whether through lack of health and saftey ceedures,
Unless we take these issues seriously now, it will be too late "after the revolution". I can't take seriously the prospect of a campaign to "look atte ourself - only sleep with a rich nonogamous,
orker who uses a sheath' ing communities, but who have ex
Tas local Women's Support Groups throughout strike. However, it is probably best that there is a clearly defined grouping of actual miners' wives, which can have a relationship with the NUM on that basis, and then find some other way of bringing in other women supporters. Moves to democratise national WAPC, though, should be supported (and they are coming from rank and file WAPC groups and individuals).
Locally, WAPC groups are facing hostility from the NUM. one miner's wife put it "it's as if they needed us during the strike, but now it's over, they can do without us" although there was a unanimous view that the NUM were wrong on that!
However, with the lack of focus after the strike, it seems that many groups are diminishing as quickly as Miners Support Groups. In the Doncaster Area, for example, only one WAPC group remains. That Group is the one Group which raised its funds all by itself during the strike: the ones
which have disappeared are the ones which existed on funds coming from the NUM.
Nationally, WAPC has tried to maintain its existence by asking the NUM for "Association" on the basis of a 30p levy from WAPC members 10p of which would go to the local tional, 10p to the NUM. This Associa- WAPC group. 10p to WAPC nation was discussed, apparently, by the NUM and thrown out. It is now, as far as the NUM is concerned, off the agenda, disposed with; and is not going out to branches for discussion. WAPC is having a conference in July: and it is to be hoped that they pursue the Association there.
Ideas that came up - at least in workshops — about all this were that WAPC should pursue Association, and should try to work on the levy basis in the meantime in order to keep going as a national Group. The question of support for the sacked/victimised miners came up, with the women present being, generally, very strong on reinstatement. Most miners wives there seemed to be supporting money going nationally to the NUM for the sacked miners. To keep the links, though, it was pointed out that Women's Support Groups could collect funds for WAPC groups, to give them funds to organise with.
One idea the miners' wives suggested which Support Group should pursue is the support of miners in prison. Firstly, find out their prison number and write to them; but secondly, wives pointed out that the miners are being imprisoned as far away from home as possible. Miners' Support Groups and Women's Support Groups can find out if there are any miners in prisons near them. They can then offer to help imprisoned minres' wives by offering accommodation overnight to help women visiting, offer visiting wives a meal, and offer to look after their children while the women are visiting. How typical this aspect should be pointed out by women... The need for the women who have come together to support mining commuity women to keep together and to keep their links with mining community women. It is probably best that non-minio community women keep WAPC, though there was a feeling that WAPC should be asked to admit visitors to the July Conference. I can only say this happily, because the May 4 Conference undertook moves to keep the non-mining area women's support movement going, which I think should be welcomed and encouraged as much as possible. The May 4 Conference was called by the East Midlands Women Against Pit
Closures (which spans miners' wives' groups and women's support groups outside the immediate mining area which is a very representative, legitimate body, and it is good to see a real body try something out on a regional basis, and then undertake the responsibility of going national, rather than some artificial attempt to go national.
The most surprising thing about the Conference, for me, was the range of groups women there came from. At the workshop I was in, we started out by introducing ourselves, and saying where we came from and what we were involved in. We had about 20 women, who introduced themselves as being from: National Abortion Campaign, various Irish solidarity campaigns, various anti-racist/deportation (etc.) campaign Women's Labour Party: Spare Fightback, Workers Power, Wages for Housework, WAPC, etc. It was amazing that many different