Pro-abortion feminist journalist Miranda Spencer wrote a 2,600 word article for Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting in February complaining that MSM does not spotlight factors contributing to the “epidemic” of breast cancer enough.
Spencer, who supports giving US taxpayer money to international abortion groups as well as the United Nations Population Fund, which helps the Chinese government coerce women to abort, had a lot of nerve, particularly by naming her piece, “Overlooking evidence.”
Of course Spencer refuses to acknowledge the obvious and proven link between abortion and breast cancer and instead blamed this “leading cause of death in women in their late 30s to early 50s” on the fact that The New York Times, et al, do not talk enough about the hazards of flame retardant clothing….
The willful ignorance is staggering. Admitting that “reproductive history,” i.e., delaying child-bearing or having no children at all, is a factor, Spencer and her ilk absurdly deny that stopping a pregnancy, which delays child-bearing or having any children at all, can possibly be implicated.
Spencer also complained that when MSM does broach the topic of breast cancer, it dares to place at least partial responsibility on the victim, this while admitting “hormone-disrupting substances” and “carcinogens” can be problematic. The prime culprit in both those cases is hormonal birth control pills, which not only disrupt natural hormonal regulation of a woman’s body, they slowly poison a woman with low-dose carcinogenic estrogen over the course of years.
I don’t know what Spencer and feminists expect. MSM must think it best to avoid the topic of breast cancer altogether rather than tow the line and ignore or lie about the most obvious 2 factors causing the breast cancer “epidemic.”
Click to enlarge…