We’ve been conditioned to believe that pink is good.
Pink is empowering.
Pink is solidarity, at least when it comes to the pink of breast cancer awareness campaigns.
I believed it too, especially thinking that pink consumerism would somehow benefit my best friend who fought breast cancer for close to eight years. She was glad to hear if I bought my bras during special October fitting events to benefit cancer research and was always happy to receive any pink gift I sent her way.
It’s easy to feel that we’re supporting the fight against breast cancer, especially in October which is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, when products in every shade of pink imaginable abound.
It wasn’t until I was approached to write an article about these breast cancer awareness campaigns that I realized that an increasing number of voices are asking consumers to be more skeptical. Sure, it’s great to support breast cancer research and awareness, but shouldn’t we take the time to ask questions about exactly how much money is being raised and where is it going?
Who is really the bigger beneficiary — breast cancer patients or the corporations sponsoring the pink products and events?
And, are there companies who are taking advantage of these campaigns to increase their bottom line who may actually be adding things to the environment or our cosmetics drawers that are potential causes of breast cancer?
I want to be pink this month, especially in memory of my dear friend Marjorie who lost her battle with breast cancer a year ago. And for my friends Pam and Debbie and Sam and mod*mom and others, like Elizabeth Edwards.
I want them to know that I am dedicated to the fight against the disease that they each have had to face in their own way, as well as to the mission to find the causes and the cures.
Selfishly, I am also committed because I’m scared that one day it will find me, too. Cancer seems to circle all of us, waiting to place its icy finger on our shoulder, so I don’t think my fear is unrealistic.
But my awareness of the awareness campaigns has been raised to a new level. I know now that if I want the pink watch or the pink bracelet, I should also be asking who’s getting the money and will it really help the next woman who finds the lump?
October 9th, 2007 at 11:46 am
I hope the pink reminds my friends to get the exam. It offers an opening for discussion.
But, I too, am in FEAR of this disease.
October 9th, 2007 at 5:30 pm
Dig it.
October 9th, 2007 at 5:39 pm
I am so glad you brought this up. I am ever cynical about the motives of such marketing campaigns. Being in the non-profit health care world, I know how much “fundraising” donations can be eaten up by fundraising costs. So, when I see a pink ribbon product, I’ll buy it if I needed it anyway, but I feel manipulated, and that the retailer is taking advantage of sympathy, fear, and philanthropic tendenceies inorder to add to its bottom line. I’d rather put a dollar in an envelope than buy an item just so they will donate a dollar to the cause. I guess the hitch is, if I forget to make my personal donation, the charity would have been better off if I had bought the item.
Essentially, though, it bothers me when someone makes a personal profit under the geise of non-profit charitable work. Tranparency is the answer, but only if we actually ask the question in the first place. Thanks for asking it.
October 9th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Very interesting point. I’ve been against ‘pink’ on girlie grounds, but I changed my mind because of the breast cancer associations. But now you’ve mention ‘big business’ that gives me cause for doubt again.
I think the answer is as you say, to check, who’s getting the $ and what %.
Cheers
October 9th, 2007 at 8:09 pm
Yes you should.
Great post.
October 9th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
thanks for the support pundit mom.
last october when i was in radiation + still bald from chemotherapy i really appreciated blogs turning pink for me + seeing all the pink stuff made me feel hopeful that other women would detect their cancers early + feel better for remembering lost loved ones + bring about a cure. it is a terrifying + depressing disease, + the color pink is supposed to have a psychologically uplifting effect.
i don’t want to discourage all that. i just wish some powerhouse like google would make a free publicly available + accurate early detection device, + effective targeted chemotherapies so we don’t have to endure surgery + radiation.
that’s where i want the money to go first, then let’s have a party!
October 10th, 2007 at 7:48 am
Amen, amen.
October 10th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
I refuse to buy anything pink for myself either to be “feminine” or to show support for the cause. I loathe the color and I hate how it has become the only color for women. Instead I’ll just give my support directly to the different charities involved and leave the pink to the lemmings who actually believe that girls have to like pink.
October 10th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Such a good point, pundit mom.
I refuse to give money to the American Cancer Society, for instance. Their board members are also CEOs of pharmaceudical companies and pesticide manufacturers- people who make a lot of money causing and treating cancer. That’s a bit too much like a fox in a henhouse for me.
I also only give to charities who acknowledge that caring for the environment is as important as what we eat or how much we excercise in preventing disease.
October 10th, 2007 at 10:43 pm
Personally, while any kind of cancer sucks and I don’t wish any of them on anyone, breast cancer is one of the best cancers to get because it gets caught early and is easier to cure. If I had to have cancer and got my pick and couldn’t get a simple non-melanoma skin thing, I’d go for the breast lump.
And that’s what gets me. Heart disease is a killer of more women than breast cancer is. Where’s the monthly campaign? LUNG cancer kills more women than breast cancer does. Where are all the cute little plushie lungs? I’d totally buy one.
Ever notice they still put cigarette ads in most mainstream women’s magazines…?
Then you’ve got the yo-yos who are misleading women about health matters. Like radical mama said, not enough emphasis is given to environmental factors. The other piece of it is, women often get all the WRONG information on how they should eat. For the last twenty to thirty years we’ve had it hammered into our heads that fat is the devil, low-fat, low-fat, low-fat, carbs are good, blah blah.
Well guess what? Cancer needs more glucose than healthy cells do.
Yep. Where does glucose come from? Glycemic carbs. If you’re eating low-fat, guess what you’re getting a lot of in your diet?
Interestingly, all those low-fat folks who cite Asian diets, one thing they fail to notice is that Asians eat a lot of vegetables and a lot of animal protein. Yep. Fish and poultry, mostly. Not so much starchy crap. Til they start eating like us, then they get the breast cancer.
I’m watching an LJ friend of mine slowly degenerate through late-stage breast cancer and grasping any straw she can and she’s… eating macrobiotic. Lots of rice. It makes me NUTS. But I don’t want to be seen as unsupportive, and she knows my stance on the whole thing. I haven’t heard from her for a while and I hope she is OK. But I wonder how many more like her have to happen before the Powers That Be give a damn, stop polluting our world and, most importantly, stop LYING to us.
October 10th, 2007 at 10:45 pm
Oh, and speaking of corporations making money off Think Pink, that was one reason I stepped away from Avon again and probably permanently. Yeah, guys, until you stop using phthalates and parabens in your products, good luck making me believe you really want to cure breast cancer. Kthxbi.
October 11th, 2007 at 11:36 am
i’m glad that the other side of the “pink” issue is being addressed on as popular a site as msn, but I think Barbara Ehrenreich’s famous and excellent Harper’s artice “Welcome to Cancerland” deserved at least a mention.
Check it out for as good an articulation of the problem as you will find anywhere.
October 20th, 2007 at 9:26 pm
hi punditmom!
i’m stopping by again, because i just got to read your full article + i want to thank you again
lalith: i’m going to google “welcome to cancerland.
dana: i feel bad that breast cancer gets more attention, but hopefully it can get the research done that will help all cancers + some other diseases. i’m in a study about heart disease, because chemotherapy damaged my heart (congestive heart failure) + a study about lymphedema (because i had my lymph nodes removed), so hopefully those diseases are benefitting. i think of it like when the environmental defense fund has a panda on their logo, but they’re really raising money to save the environment for all the animals + us.