I need to coin a phrase for a phenomenon that drives me crazy. It’s interesting as a cultural phenomenon. It’s fascinating to watch how society settles certain controversies, but I don’t know quite what to call it. It’s a whole lot of false dichotomy, but it’s more than that. It’s also straw men, and ad hominem, visceral polarization, vicarious identification, and STFU.
It’s an absolute failure to recognize the existence of nuance in reality. For example, it’s possible to object to torture while supporting our troops. Or object to bigotry against Muslims without supporting terrorists. Or object to the “I [heart] boobies” bracelets in public junior high schools and yet still manage to support breast cancer research in other ways.
Tracy Clark-Flory had a great piece about these bracelets in Salon earlier this month. Here’s an excerpt:
“But, you know what? I’m offended by the bracelets, too — just for a very different reason.
A growing number of activist campaigns are attempting to raise awareness (and perhaps other things) by simplifying the fight against breast cancer as a fight to save breasts. Not people, but breasts. Of course the implication is that lives will also be saved, but “boobies” are treated as the real star of this show. There was the infamous “Save the Boobs” ad, with a pair of bouncing bikini-clad breasts; the Men for Women Now campaign, which features famous(ly fratty) male celebs waxing poetic about breasts; the push for women to reveal the color of their bra in a Facebook status update; and the Booby Wall — just to name a few.
I’ve always found this approach to awareness-raising rather tasteless, but it wasn’t until my mom was diagnosed with metastasized stage IV lung cancer that they became truly enraging. Not only are women reduced to their breasts, but men are reduced to their love for breasts — as though they will only pay attention to the cause if presented with a pair of luscious, jiggling tits. Over the last few months, I’ve watched my dad give my mom shots twice a day, methodically dispense her meds, drive her to appointments, wash her hair, rub her feet, sit with her in the hospital for hours and hours and hours on end. He does it without complaint; there is simply nothing he would rather be doing, given the circumstances. It isn’t her lungs or her hair, now gone, that he loves — it’s her.”
I enjoyed reading her piece and found her arguments poignant and compelling. Then I moved on. Until now. Now I’m having junior-high PTSD. A local kid named Kollin wore one of the bracelets to school, the principal asked him to turn it inside-out while at school, and now people are losing their minds in the comment section of the local paper. Evidently his father survived testicular cancer, and that is why he is wearing the breast cancer bracelet. Perhaps this young man’s intentions are purely grounded in altruism. I don’t know and it doesn’t matter. I object for all the reasons Clark-Flory listed above and because I think the flip slogan diminishes the seriousness of this disease.
Imagining what these bracelets must represent for cringing and awkward pubescent girls brings back a flood of traumatic memories of my own experience of junior high. I endured junior high in a less-enlightened age. An age when boys would have drawn nipples and aerolae on the curves of the cartoon hearts. An age when boys would have used such bracelets as one more attempt to exert power over girls. In an age when girls had to duck the soiled athletic garments the (religious) boys threw around the school bus, administrators wouldn’t even have blinked at these bracelets. Here’s what this bracelet trend would have looked like when I was in junior high (except more pimples and less facial hair):
The local principal asked Kollin to turn the bracelet inside-out while he was at school. This gives me hope that teachers and administrators are intervening in issues of sexism and bullying. I’m sure junior high school girls today are much more empowered than my generation. Surely the school environment is far more egalitarian. Girls in junior high today are probably too busy in science and math classes to pay attention to this distraction anyway.
As a friend pointed out, it’s fascinating to see the variety of personal emotional issues that people express in objecting to the principal’s decision. What’s most disappointing about the comments against the principal is the accusation that anyone who thinks this is inappropriate for school must therefore be uncaring about the suffering and deaths of breast cancer patients.
Here’s just one example. I said this:
“I read an interesting discussion of this trend elsewhere, and many of the arguments echoed Common Sense II [another commenter]. It seems insensitive and dehumanizing to me, and what is the message to women who have endured mastectomy?
Perhaps the discussion at school should focus on sexism and empowering young women and teaching them science so they can go on to develop new therapies for all types of cancer. ”
And someone responded with this:
“I am a female and don’t find this dehumanizing, insensitive, derogatory, or sexist. I don’t see the big deal. I think people are COMPLETELY overreacting to this situation. Obviously the people who disagree with this bracelet haven’t had to go through the demands of having cancer and chemo. When you do then you have room to talk. This young man is supporting something he believes in and he is only in junior high. I would say that is pretty mature and grown up of him. How many of your junior high kids do the same? Go Kollin!”
Just off the top of my head: appeal to authority (only a woman has the right to an opinion on this topic–and I love the implied assumption that I am a man and therefore could not know what I’m talking about); argument from personal incredulity (since I don’t find them dehumanizing etc. they must be okay); straw man (if you disagree you don’t know what cancer is); STFU (only cancer patients have room to talk–also an implicit appeal to authority); straw man two-fer (Kollin is mature, and if you disagree your kids are idiots); and, of course, false dichotomy (it’s not possible to find this bracelet inappropriate in pubic junior high schools and also support breast cancer research in other ways).
Many of the comments attack school administrators for cowing before the evil forces of political correctness:
“[...] as people who have watched our loved ones fight cancer we understand that there is nothing “politically correct” about cancer. Cancer usually involves areas of the body that are not “polite” to talk about. In order to have understanding and education about cancer we must sometimes be controversial. It is great that you are mature enough to see this, but sad that the staff and faculty of LJHS are not. I support your need to bring awareness and education about cancer to your community”
Appeal to authority, straw man, personal incredulity, false dichotomy, and another straw-man two-fer, plus a red herring about “educating.”
How sad that the haters/sexual deviants can’t see that this boy is fighting the good fight:
“You know it’s really sad that the Teachers, and Principal at LJHS. All have their mind in the gutter.I think what this student is doing is great. Maybe I should have some T-shirts made up for all 700 of the students to wear that says the same as the bracelets, just to get a major point across to these Teachers, and the Principal. Way to go Kollin keep up the good work. Teachers and Principal pull your head out from your behind and take a breath of fresh air it will help clear your mind.”
Thankfully there are some thoughtful comments amid the drek. I am not the only local who believes that it is possible to object to these bracelets in junior high schools and still manage to support breast cancer research:
“I support the fight for cancer every year by donating hundreds of dollars through the American Cancer Society, Breast Cancer walks, and even through Livestrong’s campaign. Which brings up a question. If supporting cancer was the point, why not support wear a yellow wrist band to support Livestrong? Lance Armstrong himself was a testicular cancer fighter and survivor. Sounds like a pretty good role model to me? I am not taking anything away from your son’s effort to support his father and a cure…but “I heart…”…not sure I see the connection to testicular cancer… ”
Or this:
“If your father had testicular cancer than wear a “Livestrong” bracelet. The founder of Livestrong, Lance Armstrong also went through this form of cancer and has made a POSITIVE organization in support of ALL cancers. As a health care professional “b**bies” is not a politically correct world and sorry but grow up and be mature. You go to a public school that is free to you, when you go to college and pay for your education then wear whatever you want. If it offends anyone in the school than it is inappropriate, period.”
Which gives me hope that nuanced reason might prevail–even here in Geographic Isolation.
I haven’t seen these particular bracelets, but I am surrounded by a sea of pink products that allegedly support breast cancer research. And I find it worrying for so many reasons. It feels so liberating to say that, I generally can’t because that would mean I don’t care about breast cancer.
Some of my reasons? My father-in-law died last year of leukaemia. My Granny (85) died several years ago of pancreatic cancer. My Nan (93) recently died of who-knows-what type of cancer, it was heavily metastasized and no-one wanted anything invasive. My ex-husband had suspected breast cancer, luckily it wasn’t. I have breasts. And I’m very uneasy about slacktivism or placebo activism.
There’s a whole huge post in here and you’ve already covered it very well, but it boils down to a few main points.
I find it really disturbing that breast cancer is pushed so heavily when other cancers are practically invisible. There may be very good reasons for this, and not being a cancer or medical specialist I don’t know, but I suspect they aren’t what I would consider good. If the reasons are related to how common the cancers are, or how devastating they are, or how likely there is to be a breakthrough that will revolutionise treatment, that’s good. If it’s because breasts are sexier than the pancreas, that’s bad.
It’s so sexist. It’s like the token women’s health issue and we can all feel good that we’re doing something important for women, so we can continue sweeping all those other icky things under the carpet. And the way it is done, without repeating your point – it’s all about the breasts.
And I truly wonder how much good any of it does. How much of the money makes it to breast cancer research? How many people are actually dissuaded from donating directly because they buy pink things? What other effects are there if people feel like they are ahead morally because they bought the water with the pink lid?
I don’t think I need to put in the disclaimer – I do care about breast cancer research. But I don’t like breast cancer research marketing. You’re right, those two positions are not at odds but so many people seem to think they are.
My step mother died of Breast Cancer. It metastasized into her lungs, brains and other organs. It didn’t have to happen, because she distrusted doctors and therapies and none of us could convince her to seek the right treatment until it was too late.
I don’t want to see another person die from this disease or from any form of cancer, including leukemia which took my Grandfather. Your point is spot on, this isn’t about a body part, it is about human lives, people who are loved, who have friends and family who have to stand by and see them suffer, who mourn their loss when the fight ends with death. Cutsie slogans and ad campaigns to not negate the pain one single bit.
I support research, education and empowerment, but there are better ways, then plastic bracelets and perky t-shirts. I suspect that companies are profiting on this marketing method, taking away from actual research funding,but I am unsure. I do know that some proceeds do go, but companies still get a profit. Is that the right way? I am not certain or comfortable with that notion. We need to get serious, in hopes of eradicating all cancers one day.
Deb: awesome point about the token women’s health issue! Also, yes, how much more good would it be to take a meal to a patient and his/her family, or some other tangible form of help? The bracelets seem to let people off the hook. Like they’ve done this one tiny thing and are then free to ignore all other means of help.
Sylvie: So sorry for your loss! So terrible that she distrusted modern medicine! Totally agree that it seems silly to pay a middle-man company to market bracelets when it might do more good to donate directly to research hospitals.
Thanks for the kind words. My parent’s religious beliefs played a major part in the whole medical distrust issue. I lost my mother at age 6 because of appendicitis. She too believed that seeking a doctor was showing lack of faith. My step mom took it further trusting quacks to mail her “proven cancer treatments” that did absolutely nothing. There wasn’t even proper labeling on the bottles, and we couldn’t refute or question this stuff to her or my dad. Only my step sister was finally able get through to Mom to get her to listen to reason, but by the time she did, it was too late, and only a little time was bought. Most of us are still bitter about this 7 years later….Yeah, its a sore spot.
I may add that I am of a completely different mindset when it comes to Christianity then my dad, still a Christian, but rejecting a good deal of the beliefs of his church.
I guess that is why, I do not look at those Breast Cancer campaigns as many do. There are better ways.
We have an annual event here in the UK called ‘The Race For Life’ that is a sponsored 5km walk/jog/run to raise money for Cancer Research UK. Only women are allowed to take part and everyone has to wear pink.
I have taken part twice and both times I was surrounded by people dressed as fairies, in boas, with wigs on etc. and although I get that it’s an event everyone comes together to make a difference at, I slowly began to wonder just how and why we were all making breast cancer so fun and frilly.
Also, the whole aspect of only women being allowed to run in the Race For Life is a disgrace, men get breast cancer too, men die from it just as women do. I have a male friend whose father was killed by cancer who was not allowed to take place.
I will raise money for cancer charities as they are a good cause and I know many people who have been killed by this horrible illness, but I will do so with dignity because when I watched my relatives waste away while desperately clinging onto hope and trying to live a normal life but not being able to, there was nothing girly, pink, cool or glittery about it.
I feel that making cancer that way takes away just how brutal cancer is :(
OK, I am feeling the pressure of being the odd one out on this one, but I’m unclear on the overall damage that these bracelets cause.
I remember when I was a kid, my mom began getting sick when I was quite young. She was diabetic and had most of the common problems associated with the disease in its advanced stages (as in, when someone has had it so long, the battle is completely uphill). She lost a toe, she had neuromas in her feet and she went blind. When I was 19, she also had breast cancer. With all of her health issues, I ended up doing far more work than any other teenager that I knew. I had a job, because my parents couldn’t afford all the things I needed unless I helped. I took care of my younger sister because nobody else was able to do so. I cleaned house and cooked and tried to keep up with whatever I could. I sat, evening after evening, with my mother to ensure that her blood sugar stayed at an acceptable level in the toughest parts of her day, massaging the lumps in her feet and playing cards. I’m not using this as an argument, but as something to draw examples from, so bear with me.
When I see people fight for cancer in ways that seem positive, with the colorful bracelets or dressing up for the Walk for Life, I see it as a way for people to make something horrible more palatable. As people, we often need this in order to face the struggles that we deal with all the time. I had a lot of sucky experiences as a kid, my brother shot me and didn’t like me and my mother thought I was stupid and ugly. But, I can view those experiences in a different light when I joke about them or laugh at them with friends. Yes, the experience SUCKED, but I still have to find a way to deal with it without damaging myself.
When my mother lost her toe to diabetes, it was a pretty traumatic experience for her. Her body was falling apart and she couldn’t even take care of her household the way that she felt was her duty. So, her best friend and her devised a plan to make it less difficult. With great humor and all the trappings of a fantastic comedy about death and the way we feel about our body parts, my mother and her friend held what they called the “Toemorial.” It was a memorial service for my mother’s toe. It was full-serivce, with a bunch of my mother’s friends and my siblings and I and it was great fun. A comedic eulogy was read and people shared their own stories about their experiences with my mother’s toe. The important thing was, it helped my mother cope. She needed it.
When my mother lost her breast to cancer, the ordeal was much greater. She didn’t get to hold a service, but she came up with other ways to try to cope. There is nothing like the experience of seeing a person you love suffer for so long and lose something that she sees as so important to her self. Many women see their breasts as a part of their identity. This isn’t because they think they amount to the sum of their breasts, this is because our breasts serve us in ways that other parts don’t. They are a part of the system in our body that nurtures our offspring and they are related to our reproductive health. We may not be the sum of our parts, but our breasts are still a part of what *does* equal the sum of our parts. After my mom’s struggle with cancer, we often participated in the local fund-raising events for cancer research. We made breast jokes and talked about how cancer affects all those who have had it. Nobody seemed to think that the body parts they lost or had to beat up in order to survive were the grand sum of themselves, even the breast cancer patients didn’t think this, but they all still valued what they had lost.
You cite where you see other people commit fallacies, but I don’t really think that your own arguments are logically sound, either. I think you’re a fantastically brilliant person, and I admire you for that, but I just can’t see the foundation for your claims. I don’t see how the image of how people would have reacted to these bracelets when you were young has any bearing on why people are buying bracelets for this purpose now. I see the young person’s being forced to turn his bracelet around as being a form of censorship which I despise, no matter what. Why? Because someone is offended by the word ‘boobies’? Isn’t it the case that when people are afraid of words referring to a sex-specific body part that such a fear is what oppresses the owners of that body part, not the opposite?
I also disagree that these efforts imply that women amount to boobies. I just don’t see that someone wearing a bracelet, in any way, reduces the cause to being just about a person being nothing but breasts. I also don’t think it is unjustified that this disease does have a sexual theme when people discuss it. Breasts are a part of our sex and reproductive system, no matter if we like it or not. It seems completely natural that we would link the two.
I do agree that the focus on breast cancer seems to diminish the need for research into other conditions. I really wish we could make the public see the various afflictions in a more objective manner so that things that should be addressed now are given proper attention. However, I don’t think that means we should reduce the attention to breast cancer, I just think we need to increase attention to other things.
I also agree that breast cancer seems to be a token women’s disease, but I don’t really think that is rooted in the same social issues that others seem to. Cervical cancer is given a feminine tone and it is because we’re women and we happen to own breasts and vaginas and so when those body parts break, it becomes a women’s problem that we need to inform others about in order to survive it. Similarly, when men suffer from prostate or testicular cancer, it is a man’s problem that they have to share in order to survive. In fact, testicular and prostate cancer gets *less* attention for reasons that I do think are sexist. I think that the focus on manliness in culture makes it difficult for men to address issues such as cancer in their sex organs or other issues, like ED.
Then again, maybe I’m just dense. Maybe I don’t see the sexism for the trees. Maybe if the argument was fleshed out for me more, I could see how the boobies bracelets were somehow holding women down. For now, I just don’t get it.
I’m generally a non conformist for most things, but if there was reason to believe that buying a little bracelet and wearing it on my arm would prevent another person from going through what my mom did, I’d do it. Of course, I have no problem wearing my boobies on my sleeve.
Interesting discussion, and to be honest I’m not entirely sure I have a clear position on it personally. But I can see plenty of room for debate and research into it.
I do, however, have some gut feelings about it based on both my science communication experience and some of my current medical anthropology study. I feel the subtle sexualisation of certain fields of health communication has side-effects we tend to ignore.
There is a desperate need to ‘promote awareness’ when it comes to health, yet from a sci-com perspective it’s a term that is used with more passion than definition. Correlating individuals being aware of a situation and changing their behaviour is sketchy at best, and indicates it’s a complicated picture we’re still struggling to comprehend. In other words, campaigning to make people aware and thinking simple messages necessarily translate into complex behaviour changes, such as routine breast exams, is at best naive. Flippancy also carries the risk of negating the fear factor of health problems that act as a significant driver of behaviour change (think drink-driving campaigns and the 1980s AIDS campaign, both of which demonstrate greater success in resulting in behaviour changes in target demographics as emotional impact increases).
I can’t make solid connections here, as I don’t have stats on the effectiveness on such campaigns or the means to make an objective comparison, so am only going on intuition that such a campaign might not be as effective in eliciting behaviour change in spite of seeming to have significant public interest. Again, from a sci-com point of view, output (e.g. audience size) is not always correlated with outcomes.
On matters of sexualisation, my personal view is that it is a shame that flesh is sexualised as often as it is. Don’t get me wrong, I’m completely sex positive, however I also feel that such campaigns do little to address the culture of skin = sex. I explain it better in this blog post: http://bit.ly/aV0FoG While it’s not overt, associating a love of ‘boobies’ with breast cancer carries a subtle sexual connotation thanks to the colloquial expression for breasts.
I realise few look so deeply into it. It’s fun and flippant therefore expected to gather a wider reach of audience in a non-intimidating fashion, to get past the off-putting seriousness of cancer. I get it, and am not opposed to the intention. However I don’t think this approach is entirely without subtle repercussions and the desire to find a useful method of public health engagement can blind us to the real impact it might (or might not) have.
Sophie, thanks for the thoughtful comment. So sorry about your mom! What a moving account of your history!
You, brilliant reader, flatter me, but really, I’m just trying to figure out and explore this issue. Thanks for challenging my opinion! I do agree that some people might find the boobie campaign positive and lighthearted while others (like Barbara Erenreich) find the whole cheery-pink-flirty campaigns lacking in substance. I’m not personally offended by the word “boobie,” although I prefer the word breast. Nor do I think we should ignore the existence of breasts as secondary sexual characteristics. IMO, sexualizing breast cancer seems to trivialize the disease and demean women in general–like it’s more about preserving breasts for men to enjoy than about saving lives. Not that I’m against anyone of any gender enjoying breasts… just that this aspect should not be the primary concern.
Someone in the comment section asked hypothetically if it would be appropriate for a Jr High teacher to wear the boobie bracelets, or if that might make the girls (and their parents) feel uncomfortable.
I agree with you generally about free speech, but I do have concerns about creating a hostile environment inside the Jr High. The ACLU is involved now, so it will be interesting to see how this shakes out.
Yes, I also agree more funding for all types of cancer research!
Tribal Scientist: And, while AIDS awareness and drunk-driving have specific, targeted behavioral-change goals, I’m not exactly sure what the specific goal of the boobie bracelets is. Is it that women should do more self-exams, or talk to their doctors the minute they detect a lump? Or just to raise charitable funds?
You said: “It’s fun and flippant therefore expected to gather a wider reach of audience in a non-intimidating fashion, to get past the off-putting seriousness of cancer. I get it, and am not opposed to the intention. However I don’t think this approach is entirely without subtle repercussions and the desire to find a useful method of public health engagement can blind us to the real impact it might (or might not) have.”
Which is far more brilliant than anything I have said!
Evidently the family of the ACLU, the kid and his family, and the school reached an agreement. Although this article is not very clear, my understanding is that he has to turn the bracelet inside-out, exposing the web address for the Save A breast Foundation while he’s at school.