• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

"Save The Boobies!"

Crux

Evermore
1,302
Posts
11
Years
    • So, I'm sure we've all seen these:

    Spoiler:


    Uh... the pin. I mean the pin...

    How do you feel about the campaign for Breast Cancer?

    Would you say that it's over-sexualized? Or is it just a good intentioned way of helping support a cure?

    While we're here, do you feel there's any type of cancer that should be supported more? Or, maybe, that there should be less seperation of cancer types, and that people should support the search for a cure of cancer in general?

    Feel free to futher discuss the matter, and remember, save the tatas. Don't blow your top…. Or do. don't be insensitive, or rude. I will report you.
     

    Kanzler

    5,983
    Posts
    15
    Years
    • Woah... this is probably just a thing done by some people. Slapping a pair of tits on anything tends to make that thing 100x more noticeable. I'm going to comment on the "sexualization for attention" phenomenon in general, because it's not specific to breast cancer research. Like PETA, for example.

    It works. Or so they think. Over-sexualization isn't very important to me.

    Cancers are different creatures though. While they may all share uncontrolled cell proliferation, you can't just slap a one-size fits all "cure" on it. Oncogenes that correspond to a specific cancer tend to be specific to that tissue, so diagnosis really has to be tissue-specific. While there is research looking for a treatment that seeks out cancer proliferation in general, it'll probably have to be specialized to work with whatever tissue. I think chemotherapy works that way, you can't give every cancer patient the same cocktail of drugs. Delivery is also important and specific to whatever tissue needs to be targeted. The human body is just complex like that.

    I know that research tends to be specific though, it's just the nature of research itself. Not much we can do about that. I don't know too much about what important and not-so-important cancers are. I guess we should focus on the most deadly ones? We should invest a lot in diagnosis as well, as early diagnosis makes a big difference. This might involve patient education, letting the public know and be aware of screening, as well as improving screening methods, so you don't have false-positives going through invasive procedures and false-negatives dying.

    Also, I haven't seen the pins before.
     
    Esper

    Esper

    10,769
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Well, I guess that it would be best to focus on the cancers that affect the most people. I mean, that makes a simple kind of sense, right? I'd prefer that all kinds of cancers get attention though, since someone is going to be suffering unless all types find treatments or cures.

    About breast cancer specifically I've read that the Susan G. Komen Foundation for a long time has been quietly threatening other cancer awareness groups for "infringing" on their use of the color pink or even the phrase "for the cure." (Maybe because of all their corporate deals they have.) I haven't followed up on this in the last half year or so, but it tells me that there is only so much space in the public attention to care about stopping cancer so there's a kind of fight among the different groups to get what donations there are. Kinda sad, really. Really sad, actually.
     

    Crux

    Evermore
    1,302
    Posts
    11
    Years
    • @BIS:
    Cancers are indeed different, but comprehending, or even better, finding a cure for, even one would lead to strides in understanding more about each.

    @Scarf:
    I've heard of other unscrupulous things that they've allegedly done, but nothing about that before. I'll look into it.

    Edit:
    All I've found thus far was an article from 2010:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/07/komen-foundation-charities-cure_n_793176.html
     
    Last edited:

    Mage

    Wizard Eyes
    24
    Posts
    10
    Years
    • VA
    • Seen Oct 28, 2013
    BlahISuck said:
    Woah... this is probably just a thing done by some people. Slapping a pair of tits on anything tends to make that thing 100x more noticeable. I'm going to comment on the "sexualization for attention" phenomenon in general, because it's not specific to breast cancer research. Like PETA, for example.

    It works. Or so they think. Over-sexualization isn't very important to me.

    Cancers are different creatures though. While they may all share uncontrolled cell proliferation, you can't just slap a one-size fits all "cure" on it. Oncogenes that correspond to a specific cancer tend to be specific to that tissue, so diagnosis really has to be tissue-specific. While there is research looking for a treatment that seeks out cancer proliferation in general, it'll probably have to be specialized to work with whatever tissue. I think chemotherapy works that way, you can't give every cancer patient the same cocktail of drugs. Delivery is also important and specific to whatever tissue needs to be targeted. The human body is just complex like that.

    I know that research tends to be specific though, it's just the nature of research itself. Not much we can do about that. I don't know too much about what important and not-so-important cancers are. I guess we should focus on the most deadly ones? We should invest a lot in diagnosis as well, as early diagnosis makes a big difference. This might involve patient education, letting the public know and be aware of screening, as well as improving screening methods, so you don't have false-positives going through invasive procedures and false-negatives dying.

    Also, I haven't seen the pins before.
    Click to expand...

    I have to agree with you and on the topic of over-sexualization of the support, I think it is highly unnecessary. I understand that they want males to help as well and really, if someone doesn't want to help because they think it's unimportant enough unless "boobies" or "tits" are put into the sentence then I wouldn't want to take their money.

    As for the rest, I agree as well. Cancers adapt to each individual differently and while there may be one thing that they all have in common, it's the uncommon attributes that protect that one aspect from being destroyed completely. With cancer it really is person specific and unfortunately I don't think that they will find a "one-cure is all" treatment without studying that person's infected tissues and see which combinations work best to fight it.
     
    Esper

    Esper

    10,769
    Posts
    14
    Years
    • Mage said:
    I have to agree with you and on the topic of over-sexualization of the support, I think it is highly unnecessary. I understand that they want males to help as well and really, if someone doesn't want to help because they think it's unimportant enough unless "boobies" or "tits" are put into the sentence then I wouldn't want to take their money.
    Click to expand...
    I dunno. As much as I think it might be a mixed message, or just not a good message, I think that when someone wants to help, for whatever reason, they should be given the chance. Like how around Christmas you get lots more people donating or volunteering, a lot just because it's that time of year and they want to feel good about themselves. Would it be better if they didn't at all?
     

    CoffeeDrink

    GET WHILE THE GETTIN'S GOOD
    1,250
    Posts
    10
    Years
    • What to do, koff~

    I think it would be okay I suppose. It does call attention to the cancer issue, and really, what else are you going to slap on a breast cancer awareness button (ribbon, bracelet, T-shirt, etc)? I believe it also depends on the maturity of the society at large. Sure, boobs, wow. Big deal. Know what? I'm almost certain that 99% of females are able to obtain a pair. Now if you were to place a bunch of breasts in a camouflage bra and say "support our troops!" I think that might be pushing the limit a tad, koffi~
     

    Silais

    That useless reptile
    297
    Posts
    10
    Years
    • Seen Jul 17, 2016
    Any attempt at raising awareness and funds for breast cancer is, in my opinion, just fine. Breasts are already sexualized; what's using them to bring breast cancer to people's attention going to do that would sexualize them even more?
     

    KittenKoder

    I Am No One Else
    311
    Posts
    10
    Years
    • I car not what they do, finding a cure for such an ailment is worth it, so long as it does not cause direct harm to anyone, basically as long as they don't test unwilling subjects with possible medications/procedures. Face it, sex sells, the largest and most profitable industry in the world is based on that, it's about time someone uses it for good causes.

    BlahISuck said:
    (clipped) ...

    Cancers are different creatures though. While they may all share uncontrolled cell proliferation, you can't just slap a one-size fits all "cure" on it. Oncogenes that correspond to a specific cancer tend to be specific to that tissue, so diagnosis really has to be tissue-specific. While there is research looking for a treatment that seeks out cancer proliferation in general, it'll probably have to be specialized to work with whatever tissue. I think chemotherapy works that way, you can't give every cancer patient the same cocktail of drugs. Delivery is also important and specific to whatever tissue needs to be targeted. The human body is just complex like that.

    I know that research tends to be specific though, it's just the nature of research itself. Not much we can do about that. I don't know too much about what important and not-so-important cancers are. I guess we should focus on the most deadly ones? We should invest a lot in diagnosis as well, as early diagnosis makes a big difference. This might involve patient education, letting the public know and be aware of screening, as well as improving screening methods, so you don't have false-positives going through invasive procedures and false-negatives dying.

    Also, I haven't seen the pins before.
    Click to expand...

    Actually, a "one size" cure could work for cancer, because of the fact that cancer cells are what they are. It's a matter of slowing their growth rate back to the regulated growth rate of the body itself, it's not that complicated really, just figuring out how to do that is complicated. What is different, and what most of these organizations are aimed at funding, is how it begins, what triggers the uncontrolled growth rate of the cells. Which you did mention that as what we "should" do. Well, luckily that is what they are doing. Most research goes into prevention and detection methods, the best way to cure any disease is to prevent it, best way to save lives is to detect it.
     
    Last edited:
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top