Chat

Language and rhetoric aside for a moment. Isn’t the premise of even curing cancer a flawed one at best? I’ve heard (and I’m no doctor), that theoretically cancer is the disease that takes us after we’ve cured everything else, that the body will either succumb from dementia (mental) or cancer (physical) because our aging and depleting cells are no longer capable of fending off disease.

So yes, it would make sense to me that we (as a society) should focus on cancer as a thing worth understanding and coping with rather than on conquering or battling it. But there’s the macro and the micro. And if it treating it like a disease worth conquering produces the psychological will for an individual to cope with it and perhaps overcome it, then they should do what feels right for them.

As a cancer patient I was heavily opposed to the "fight" language as well. I just broke down and cried a lot after my diagnosis.

I've always felt very uncomfortable when people and news outlets describe someone as having "lost their battle" with cancer. To me it was almost a projection of weakness on that person for not "putting up a better fight" or something. I know obviously this is never the intention, but I think this highlights how the use of such language can be problematic.

Some really good points I hadn't considered there.

I think it's important that the medical professionals do not use such terminology and instead try to be as neutral as possible, e.g. "coping with" or "receiving treatment for". If a patient wants to say they're fighting cancer, that's up to the patient. For some it might help them feel like they have a bit of control over a situation where they're powerless, for others it might make it worse.

When you put it that way, yeah, the whole "fight" thing doesnt make sense. Like how would you even go about fighting it? Youre at the mercy of your doctor and the medical treatments they prescribe to you.

I feel like we've seen a lot of violence twinged rhetoric slowly worm it's way into the main stream. "So-so SLAMS, UTTERLY DESTROYS other so-so in new interview."

Thanks for the TLDR and it's a very intriguing idea.

On one hand, "battling/fighting" cancer kind of gives a kind of strength to the patient that they can possibly overcome and survive the illness, while struggling, coping etc. would not.

On the other hand, the article is right that by using that term, many patients and people around them may implicitly pin the failure to fully treat cancer as a failure of the patient themselves.

The best thing I can come up with off the top of my head is "dealing with cancer". Terms like coping with cancer imply a weakness. Dealing seems like a neutral middle-ground to portray the strength of the patient through the ordeal while recognizing that the situation isn't all in the patient's control.

When I was going through cancer treatment, I utterly despised the “fight” and and “battle” metaphors. Envisioning the chemo as fighter jets blasting evil cancer cells felt wrong, too. The entire adversarial attitude bothered me.

Cancer cells are still my cells, still me. They aren’t alien or evil, they are malfunctioning. They lost the instructions that tell them when to turn off, so we have to use chemo or whatever to turn them off. Force-quit the little buggers.