I've been on the mailing list of Medex, a medical supply company, ever since I ordered some stuff from them for our Hospital Holidays party. Today I was treated to this way-too-pink-for-a-Monday-morning email:
When you click for more information, it takes you to this press release
, but to save you the trouble, here are some highlights.
MedexSupply Announces the Release of the ADC Limited Edition Pink Ribbon Stethoscope, With Proceeds Being Donated to Breast Cancer Research
Medexsupply, (http://www.medexsupply.com) a national leader in the supply of medical instruments and equipment announced the release of the ADC 603 Limited Edition Pink Ribbon stethoscope to the health market. The company will donate a portion of the proceeds from their versatile, new stethoscope to Breast Cancer Research.
Through the sale of our Pink Limited edition ADC 603 Stethoscope Breast Caner Awareness Merchandise, we will donate $5 for Breast Cancer Research for each stethoscope purchased
Look, the last thing I want to do is complain about money being donated to breast cancer research, or, as Medex calls it, Breast Cancer Research. But it's a pet peeve of mine when products say a portion of your price is going to something like that, and they don't tell you which research group/foundation/whatever. Is it the Breast Cancer Research Foundation
? Susan G. Komen
? Breast Cancer Action
? Is it mammograms for uninsured women, or lab funding for scientists developing new drugs? Is it some cutesy organization that spends more money on self-promotion than research?
Anyway, I've gone off plenty of times about the commodification of breast cancer and how companies exploit it to increase sales/profits. Also, how these marketing campaigns encourage the kind of armchair activism that leads people to believe they've done their part by buying the pink lidded-yogurt, so they never do anything else. Besides, it's coming up on Breast Cancer Awareness Month, when everything turns pink, so I'd better save some of my crankiness for that.
The press release goes on to detail more technical specs than I ever could have imagined a stethoscope to have, but not before a little dig at my self-esteem:
Current research has led to more and better treatment options, and many women are spared radical disfiguring surgeries.
I'm just going to pretend like they're talking about the chest-muscle-removing mastectomies from days of old.
If you're still reading, let's move on to the sordid John Edwards goings-on
. I've heard & read responses to this that are all over the map:
It's none of our business.
Why are we always surprised to find out politicians are human?
Someone screwing up their personal life doesn't necessarily mean they'd be a bad leader. Why does it make a difference that he did it while she was in remission? Like that makes it better somehow?
She should kill him.
She should castrate him.
She should divorce him and take him for everything she's got.
Live and let live, I say. But John Edwards is not doing much for the image of trial lawyers who have wives w/ cancer. Thanks a lot, pal. (this one was Dan's!)
Here are my thoughts. First, I've always admired them, so it's disappointing. Secondly, I'm usually not one to rush to judgment when we hear about people cheating; people have all sorts of different marriage arrangements, and who knows what's okay with them and what's not. Sadly, the fact that she "found out" about it implies it was not just a consensual part of a non-conventional marriage.
If he did use campaign funds to pay her for her videography even though she wasn't qualified or experienced, as some reports say, that's a misuse of campaign funds, and he should have to answer to his donors for that. So in that sense, at least, it is
other people's business - or at least people who gave him money.
Also, if the baby is his, that raises the disturbing possibility that he was having unprotected sex with someone outside his marriage. That means he was exposing his wife, who was immuno-compromised from around half a year of chemotherapy and radiation, to whatever the woman he slept with had. And whatever the other people she
slept with had, and so on. THAT possibility is what seriously gives me an emotional response to this story. 'Cause that shit ain't right. It's dangerous. He endangered her already fragile health.
I feel for Elizabeth, going through all this insanity while dealing with terminal cancer. God, what a shitty hand she has right now.
Related Reading:Breast Cancer for Fun and Profit
"AstraZeneca, a pharmaceutical company, first organized Breast Cancer Awareness month in 1985. This was an auspicious beginning because, as Breast Cancer Action, a breast cancer prevention advocacy group, notes, AstraZeneca manufactures an herbicide known to cause cancer."Crunch for the Cure
"What will happen to global consumerism if breast cancer is ever really "cured"? Luckily for SunChips, it seems unlikely that we'll find out in the forseeable future. [...] In other words, when you think of a breast cancer "survivor", you don't picture a poor black grandmother living in squalor without health insurance (and you certainly don’t imagine a woman who, because of sensible research efforts, never got cancer in the first place.) The Breast Cancer Brand woman is a pro-patriarchy white chick: middle-class, straight, virtuous, concerned with maintaining her femininity, and married with two above-average kids. [...] These circumstances, i.e. breast cancer, turn out to be, as King says, a lucky gift. In fact, breast cancer has given her such a marvelous opportunity for personal growth, she'd do it all over again in a heartbeat. We never hear about the dead women, of course, since their demise does nothing to reaffirm faith in the medical establishment, the government, patriarchy, the status quo, the Ford Motor Company, Avon cosmetics, or Hooters."Sneer of the Week
"I hate Komen because they’ve brainwashed millions of people into believing that if they buy pink shit they are “making a difference.” Snap out of it! All you are doing is buying pink shit. Komen is a marketing facilitator. They do not reduce breast cancer occurence. They do not reduce breast cancer deaths. All they do is hook up sanctimonious shopaholics with corporate leeches who want to shine up their tarnished public images."(Cross-posted - sorry to those who have to sift through it twice)