Susan G. Komen vs. Planned Parenthood: Who Should I Support?

A public fight has broken out over the last week between Susan G. Komen, a charity dedicated to preventing and curing breast cancer, and Planned Parenthood, a nationwide family planning organization. The throwdown between two popular charities has left many supporters conflicted over which organization they should support. Today, I will help provide some guidance through the complex ins and outs of the feud so you can better decide for yourself.

First, men are lucky that they do not need to have an opinion on the subject. Since Susan G. Komen is dedicated to curing breast cancer and Planned Parenthood gives abortions, men can simply shrug and say that they do not care whenever the topic is brought up. In all likelihood, women will indignantly insist that these issues affect men, too, and that such indifference is insulting and sexist. Obviously, they are wrong and are probably either on their period or suffering from a bout of hysteria. Men: you can stop reading right now, unless you ever want to get laid again.

[RIGHT: What I imagine a fight between employees at Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood may well look like.]

For those of you who want to get to know the issues, it is important to understand why Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood are fighting. The story starts with a few rich donors to Susan G. Komen who paid a Congressman to open an investigation into whether Planned Parenthood failed to report cases of possible sexual abuse against minors for whom its doctors were caring. If you are thinking that it sounds illegal to pay a Congressman to open a Congressional investigation for self-serving purposes, then apparently you have never heard of a little Supreme Court case called Citizens United that makes it illegal to tell rich people not to do things. Anyway, when Planned Parenthood objected to the investigation as unwarranted and discriminatory, Susan G. Komen’s rich pro-life backers pressured the organization to stop giving grants to Planned Parenthood.

At least that’s the public story. Don’t rule out the possibility that this controversy was manufactured to get more sympathetic press for Planned Parenthood. They have certainly received much more money in private donations in the last week than they lost in the withheld grant from Susan G. Komen. If the pro-life donors really wanted to defund Planned Parenthood, it probably would have been wiser to do so in a way that did not massively increase donations to the organization.

If the public façade of the conflict is to be believed, then it might be constructive to consider what both of these organizations do for society. Susan G. Komen raises millions of dollars every year to cure breast cancer. To achieve that goal, the organization has also trademarked the color pink and the “Race for the Cure” name, and has paid high-level executives exorbitant salaries. While these aggressive business practices may sound de rigueur for a successful business, Susan G. Komen is not actually successful. Contrary to popular belief, they have NOT cured cancer and have in fact succeeded only in making themselves rich. Planned Parenthood, on the other hand, has cured all sorts of varied diseases, from gonorrhea to chlamydia to syphilis. They have even had some success preventing down syndrome through early detection and aggressive treatment protocols.

Some of Susan G. Komen’s most ardent supporters have pointed out that the organization remains committed to helping the American economy stay vibrant. While they say that Planned Parenthood stifles the growth of the American workforce, Susan G. Komen provides financial support for job creators, particularly those in the straightened-out wire hanger manufacturing industry.

The most important difference between the two organizations may not be operational, but relational. It has become increasingly clear over the last week that Susan G. Komen, for all of the unblinking goodwill it has accumulated over decades, is a slow moving behemoth, a relic institution of a bygone age. In other words, the organization is less viable because it does not have the ability to manipulate social media to support its actions. Clearly, the greatest sin had nothing to do with reallocating grant money, and everything to do with hiring a PR firm that could not convey dogmatic bits of social control in 140 characters.

In conclusion, the safest way to go is to post a link to an article condemning Susan G. Komen on Facebook with a snarky comment about how they bend to the whims of rich donors. Anything less risks social ostracization, so steer clear.

STFU Hippie, Vol. 3: Cancer Awareness

I saw a young man with a patchy, whispy mustache this week and I asked him why he decided to grow out facial hair that his genetics could not support. “I’m growing a mustache because I’m raising awareness of men’s cancer,” the man responded. I bit my tongue and I let him have his moment, but what he said was preposterous. If he told a middle-aged man to get a professional prostate massage once a year, and- TA-DA!- some whiskers magically appeared on his upper lip, then he would be growing a mustache because he raised awareness of men’s cancer. In reality, he is falling victim to an inane fad, but he learned from the Pogs debacle that it is much better to link your stupid behavior to a social cause, lest someone questions the sheep-like mentality.

Raising awareness of cancer! We live in a time where we can conjure full movies to our telephones and cars can parallel park themselves. Believe it or not, the information age has allowed pretty much everyone in the world to be “aware” of cancer. What the hell is cancer awareness supposed to accomplish? Are a few more donations going to push the billions donated every year over the top to finding a “cure?” Are the scientists researching cancer not trying hard enough and need to see your ribbon or your mustache so they know how important it is that they cure cancer? You have no role in curing
cancer, you ignorant, solipsistic, arrogant prick.

I have heard some people say that the importance of raising cancer awareness is that it encourages people to take preventative measures. There are two reasons that this logic would only convince the hopelessly stupid. First, most of these stupid awareness campaigns are ultimately fundraisers. Most of the money that is raised is used to perpetuate the cancer awareness industry through marketing and paying staff. There is some small percentage that actually goes to cancer research, but how do you think that research money is spent? It is spent on pharmaceutical trials for treating cancer, which require people to have cancer, which is directly adverse to the idea of preventing cancer. In other words, raising money for cancer treatment research provides an economic incentive for doctors and pharmaceutical companies to NOT prevent cancer, because then who would they treat? Second, how the hell does a mustache or 15 minutes of power walking raise prevention awareness? Susan G. Komen isn't racing for a cure, she's racing for self-satisfied notoriety and money. If I was a betting man- and I am- I would wager everything I own that the vast majority of men who didn’t shave in November in order to raise cancer awareness could not tell me what the appropriate screening practice for prostate cancer is. And by majority, I mean 98%. And by 98%, I mean everyone. If you fit into that category, please don’t take this as a suggestion that you should go learn th

e screening process so you can preach about it down the road. Take it as a suggestion to shut up because you’re dumb.

[RIGHT: If people who are dumb enough to think this shirt is funny are aware of cancer, then I think you can stop wearing your pink batting gloves, Jose Reyes.]

Speaking of dumb people who think they are doing a good deed but are actually accomplishing nothing, the cancer awareness bug has seemingly bit every American professional sports team. Every NFL team, bastions of public health and welfare that they have always been, seems to have added neon pink to its color scheme this year in order to… I don’t know, blend in? Further obscure the off center racing stripes on their pants? Baseball players have even taken to using pink baseball bats. If I had to guess why they think this is a good idea, I’d probably say that they think they come out even on the cosmic accounting scale when you add the benefits of the pink bats and subtract the fact that they are actively causing cancer by chewing tobacco. What possible impact could a pink towel have? Is a researcher seeing it and saying “Oh crap! I better go administer this double blind clinical trial during the seventh inning stretch?” Okay, I suppose it is fair to acknowledge that the pink memorabilia is a way to sell yet another alternate color jersey without seemingly besmirching a team’s rich heritage, but let’s do without the charade next time- we know you’re running a business.

So what do we really know about cancer? Well, cancer was first classified as an illness around 400 B.C. by Hippocrates. You might be familiar with his big hit single- the Hippocratic Oath, for which he is the namesake. Judging by his career, the oath might as well have been, “First discover cancer, then fail to cure it, then do no harm.” Think about that, we have been “aware” of cancer since hundreds of years before people decided it was a bad idea to crucify people. We have been “aware” of cancer since before there was such a thing as “paper” on which to write the word “cancer.” But it’s good to see that you have that ribbon, so I guess we’re covered. Now please shut up and shave your face.