The program is called the WISEWOMAN program, and it gives free heart and diabetes screenings to women aged 40-64 who can't afford health insurance. Now, I support access to healthcare, so I'm not against the existence of the program, I'm against the lack of program for men.

Keep in mind that despite the narrative seen in the media, men do have a greater biological risk from heart disease and heart attack- here are statistics from the American Heart Association. It can be seen that between the ages of 40-64, men have an approximately 2-3x higher chance of experiencing heart attack and fatal heart disease, yet are left without any similar program.

Feminists defend this by saying it's to counter how heart disease research was historically focused on men, but this logic fails for two major reasons:

  1. That has nothing to do with access to healthcare. WISEWOMAN is about people who cannot afford health insurance, so if a man can't afford to see a doctor at all, than prior research isn't going to help him. The argument that it's fair not to have a program for low income men because of prior research makes no sense because those men can't afford heart screenings in the first place. If a man cannot even afford to get a heart screening at all, what does prior research do for him?

  2. As the studies show above, men still experience significantly higher rates of heart disease, even today. Feminists often talk about allocating resources by "priority" and "relative" need, so by that logic, it would make sense that more men were studied for heart disease, and it makes no sense that men are the gender excluded from low income screening.