Ed over at Gin and Tacos is glad that the Susan G. Komen Foundation has pulled its funds from Planned Parenthood because he thinks more people will now see the Foundation for the scam he believes it to be:
[T]hat’s all Komen is – a consulting firm that helps large corporate clients sell more of their products through pinkwashing campaigns. By slathering everything from pasta to baseball bats to perfume to fast food with the Pink Imprimatur, consumers are led to believe that their purchases are making meaningful contributions to breast cancer research. Somewhere down the line a few cents per purchase may trickle into those bloated coffers, but the immediate and motivating effect of that pink packaging is to get you to buy things. In short, Komentm is a group of salespeople selling image. Whatever money benefits the sick, researchers, or recovering patients is ancillary. Getting those big, fat tax-exempt checks from their Partners for the Curetm is what drives their business model.
{ 26 comments }
The main purpose of Komen’s scam was to clothe the Planned Parenthood abortion mill with legitimacy and distract the public from its primary mission of enforcing a racist population control policy by coercing women into killing their unborn children. That’s why Planned Parenthood is shrieking so loudly — their cover is gone. No one could seriously argue that Planned Parenthood, with a billion in revenue including $250 million in taxpayer funds, is being hurt by the discontinuance of Komen’s $600 thousand stipend. That’s why the abortion lobby never complained about Komen as a “scam” until it could no longer profit from the scam.
Cool Elizabeth – our side will get Bernie Saunders (or any lefty state representative) to “announce investigations” of every conservative group you like and they can be dropped too, since you support this insane rule. Or is it you can dish it out but can’t take it?
Rusty,
I never said anything about Komen’s rule or its justification for dropping Planned Parenthood. Re-read and try again.
The only “ism” here is misogynism. Women deserve the right to control their own reproductive lives – regardless of whether they have the means to afford an abortion, birth control, etc.
The Republican anti-reproductvive rights agenda against birth control brings together two interests. The first is the financial interest of large corporations of having a huge supply of poor, undereducated individuals who are willing to accept whatever is offered to them in terms of employment. The second is a falsely pious protection of life, even at its most roughly defined. The irony with the latter is the fact that these so-called lives are treated poorly, their so-called “rights” trampled upon by these same people, once they’re born.
The hypocrisy of the right is astounding and best, downright sickening at worst.
“The first is the financial interest of large corporations of having a huge supply of poor, undereducated individuals who are willing to accept whatever is offered to them in terms of employment.”
They already have ready access to this in the international labor market. What sort of idiotic Evil Overlord would *want* to create an underclass in a country with a minimum wage?
Well, Republicans can be pretty idiotic when they put their minds to it.
Ari, excellent post
I couldn’t agree with you more! We must fight hard against RepubliCONS in this election. The heart, soul and our Democracy is at stake, nothing less.
“Women deserve the right to control their own reproductive lives.”
-Or you know, they could just control their hormones.
Well, the same criticism could be leveled at any charitable foundation. The tacos meet the gin when you look at the percentage of revenue that actually get dispersed in areas consistent with the mission statement. Wiki says that last year, Komen paid out 70% of its revenue in research, education and health services.
unfortunately, ‘education’ often means advertising their events, partnerships, spreads in glossy magazines, and so on.
Citation needed.
This may be true, but you’ll have to back that up.
You’re right. This doesn’t exactly support what I said before, but here’s an interesting article about their education funds. http://gaylesulik.com/2011/02/komen-by-the-numbers-education-in-focus/ After reading it, I’m still not clear on what exactly gets called “education” in their budget; I’ll be interested in more information about this. The breakdown presented here is: “In 2009, from an Education program allocation of $135.5 million, Komen made actual education awards and grants of $46.7 million or 34% of the total Education allocation. Other notable expenses included $11.6 million on Salaries; $13.6 million on Professional fees (generally includes legal and accounting fees); $6.1 million on Production expenses for Race for The Cure; $4.9 million on Printing and Publications; $2.9M on Postage and Shipping; $2.5M om Travel; $1.5M on Conferences and remaining operating expenses totaling $45.4M million. To summarize, actual Education grants accounted for 34% of the Education allocation of $135.5 million. Education program operating expenses accounted for 66% of the Education allocation of $135.5 million.
I spent some time today looking at their financial statements.
I’m not terribly impressed.
I’ve been reading up on Komen more generally and I’m coming to the same conclusion.
21% of SGK expenses are for research.
21% of SGK expenses goes to fund-raising/administration.
http://ww5.komen.org/uploadedFiles/Content/AboutUs/Financial/AUDIT_FINAL_FY2010.pdf
Komen isn’t all bad. The really do put money towards breast cancer research, and I can understand their desire not to get caught up in the abortion debate, nor to get involved with any organizations that are under investigation for wrongdoing.
In all honesty, I think the reaction against Komen has been a little overblown, but I think it is reflective of the amount of anger on the left that is being directed against those individuals and organizations who are supposed to be on our side of the debate, yet who seem to be caving to Republican/conservative pressures. This includes Congressmen (the so-called “blue dogs” and even the President, who has shown, instead of a toughness we needed, a Clintonian (Bill) softness and “triangulation” technique, which clearly hasn’t worked.
Komen isn’t caving. They are led by a Republican.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Brinker
I stopped believing in the Komen foundation when they started suing anyone using ‘For the Cure’, this is just icing on the cake.
The Gin&Tacos post is not entirely accurate, though. Planned Parenthood does not do mammograms. They do early screenings and make references for those that need them to clinics that do perform mammograms.
You cant get a mammogram without a reference or a referral….at least not without paying full price for it.
Just like you cant just walk into a hospital and expect to get a CAT scan without a referral and expect it to be covered on your insurance.
Kevin – that depends on your age, health plan and the state you live in. In Washington it is covered by insurance for women over 50 with no referral required
Only 20% of the money Komen rasises goes to research.
Awareness and education are key … survival rates for breast cancer are dependent on whether it’s local, regional or distant (e.g. spread to other organs). 5-year survivorship for breast cancer is local = 98%, regional = 84% and distant = 23%. The real kicker is the prevalence of the disease in each of those buckets … which is of 100 people who get breast cancer, local = 60%, regional = 33% and distant = 5%. Komen has been spending it’s money trying to help the first 2 buckets … as with ALL cancer, early detection does mean the difference between life and death (as an Ovarian cancer survivor … we have similar stats on survivorship, just a real difference in prevalence with upwards of 60+% being distant)
But back to Breast cancer.
The challenge with Komen’s mission and messaging is that they are trying to get people to think that they are in a “race for the cure”. They are not … they are in the race to get people screened early and regularly. There are many women with ‘distant’ breast cancer who feel abandoned and are basically fed up with the “pink”. As a woman of “teal” (ovarian), I can relate.
Komen “spent” more money on “raising” money in 2010 than was raised for all gynelogical cancers (Ovarian, Uterine, Cervical, etc) COMBINED. Yet these diseases combined take the lives of as many women each year as breast cancer does … Komen has become a marketing machine … that is different than an organization that is focused on trying to save the lives of woman.
As a college student, Planned Parenthood allowed me access to both birth control and healthcare that did two things for me … it ensured that I never had to make the difficult decision about having an abortion. It also did something that saved my life … my first doc there explained to me the absolutely necessity to learn from my body and when my body told me something wasn’t right … to keep questioning until it was identified or fixed. Ten years ago my family doc sent me away 4 times before he finally ordered the ultrasound that detected my Ovarian Cancer at stage IIC (regional). My PP doc saved my life … even though she wasn’t involved when it occurred.
Komen has lost it’s way and PP has been dragged through the mud … in neither case are women benefiting from these activities. This is something we should all be concerned about … because even if you aren’t a woman … you have a mom, sister, wife or daughter who is …
When I was 17 I stage managed my high school’s production of Wit (or W;t if you prefer). Ever since than I have been particularly sensative about late stage cancers and gynecological cancers specifically. It saddens me to see so much attention and money is given to a specific type of cancer “research”. This type of thing just irritates me.
I am reminded of an Autism Society conference I attended not too long ago. There was a lot of talk about money for research and bringing awareness, but hardly any consideration for the people who are living with Autism Spectrum Disorder today. Yes, prevention is great and will ultimately decrease (or hopefully illiminate if we are lucky) the need for services, but that does not improve the lives of the people who are experiencing late stage cancer or profound Autism (or anything in between) in the present. Sometimes people get caught up in the future and forget about the people in need now. We have a certain social responsibility and we need to use our resources wisely. Perhaps Komen and similar organizations not the most effective use of our time, money, and energy.
Who’s got your undies Walter?
I realize that Komen G for the cure and Nancy Brinker has really messed things up, but this non profit organization located in the United States of America is right neck and neck with her with her antics and pink washing schemes, only she hides behind her MD title. And so? She is offering nothing and as the word is out, the cure for cancer is an impossiblity due to the laws enforced by the United States of American Governement….
https://vimeo.com/39749614
Comments on this entry are closed.
{ 4 trackbacks }