Bumps for Boobs, a 24 Hour CharTitty Mammarython.

@Gerhabio said:

@NickdeClaw said:

@Gerhabio said:

There's always better ways to help...

Therefore one should never do anything, because only the best way to do something should ever be used.

Your first post and you use it for this sillyness? I never advocated doing nothing, that is flagrant misconstruction of my words. There are ways that dont hurt women. All ethical methods should be tried. Just because a way to solve --excuse me-- to attempt to solve a problem is creating more funds doesn't mean it is exempt from creating other problems.

The OP made an alternate account so there'd be someone siding with him. That's why this guy's first (only?) post is so silly.

@Gerhabio said:

@Rudyftw said:

@Gerhabio said:

Ugh... I'm sick of repeating myself so much in the forums.http://www.volanteonline.com/opinion/column-stop-sexualizing-breast-cancer-1.2391523#.Tp5P2Jt3TCU

I mean, is it really that difficult to see that sexualizing the cancer cause is fucked?

Save the boobs? Fuck you, save the women and men (they get breast cancer too but god forbid we mention their unsexy breasts) who suffer from cancer.

Some men and women lose their breasts to cancer. It's not the breast that matters, it's the life.

There's many more articles like that to read, there are also plenty of scholarly ones, go out there and see the points of views of women's groups, social organizes, feminists, and victims of cancer.

Hey... at least they are raising money for it.

The "by all means necessary" and "ends justify the means" arguments are unethical, misguided and non-comforting.

There are more ethical ways to get money for the cause that don't hurt the women, that they are ostensibly trying to help, in the long run by reinforcing gender stereotypes and objectifying women and their breasts.

These campaigns only feed the business sides of bigger companies that seek to commodify women as primarily sexual objects for money.

Plus, breast cancer is overexposed because of the sex appeal attributed to it by pinkwashing public relations business machines. Lung cancer kills way more people but lungs aren't sexy so fuck them right?

There's always better ways to help, like emphasizing the humanity of the victims and appealing to decency and empathy.

For one, these are virtual women. They aren't real. You're acting as if they're making breast cancer porn. It's really not that big of a deal as far as the exploitation of breasts. They are using these means to get men more into supporting the cause to fund Breast Cancer. Also, breast cancer and lung cancer are COMPLETELY different. Most lung cancer victims smoked their entire lives and gave themselves cancer. Im not saying these people are not as important as breast cancer victims or don't deserve life as much as them, but there is a huge difference between self infliction and just flat out bad luck. There are many MANY other charitable foundations that fund research on things like autism, lung cancer, down syndrome, turners, parcinsons, AFS, IDS, and about every other thing out there. In reality you can't help the cause of EVERY single problem/disease/illness out there. You don't see me throwing it in your face that you don't care about causes like Alzheimer's.... And since when was "emphasizing the humanity of the victims and appealing to decency and empathy" not ever used to receive funding from people? Those means are used far more frequently than sex appeal...

@Gerhabio said:

Ugh... I'm sick of repeating myself so much in the forums.http://www.volanteonline.com/opinion/column-stop-sexualizing-breast-cancer-1.2391523#.Tp5P2Jt3TCU

I mean, is it really that difficult to see that sexualizing the cancer cause is fucked?

Save the boobs? Fuck you, save the women and men (they get breast cancer too but god forbid we mention their unsexy breasts) who suffer from cancer.

Some men and women lose their breasts to cancer. It's not the breast that matters, it's the life.

There's many more articles like that to read, there are also plenty of scholarly ones, go out there and see the points of views of women's groups, social organizes, feminists, and victims of cancer.

Breast cancer charities work for both men and women... Why are you being such a prick? A charity is a charity weither its talking about boobs or not. If talking about how sexy boobs on women are will turn into people giving money to help those with the cancer, then why not? Why would it matter is sexualization is used in the promotion of the charity if its going to help SAVE A LIFE like your trying to say. Why dont you go to another forum and talk about "Why do people start charities in the first place?" instead of criticizing those who are taking the time to do one themselves.

This is a disease that people die from. Just sayin!

No jokes about terminally ill kids on Tested's charity stream, jus sayin.

@Gerhabio said:

@NickdeClaw said:

@Gerhabio said:

There's always better ways to help...

Therefore one should never do anything, because only the best way to do something should ever be used.

Your first post and you use it for this sillyness? I never advocated doing nothing, that is flagrant misconstruction of my words. There are ways that dont hurt women. All ethical methods should be tried. Just because a way to solve --excuse me-- to attempt to solve a problem is creating more funds doesn't mean it is exempt from creating other problems.

How is this hurting women? It is just a person who is streaming himself playing games for 24hours and just so happens to pick games with women with big breasts since it is Breast cancer awareness month. When people see boobs during this month, it helps them remember how much they love them and want them to stick around as breast cancer can kill people to you know, it its not treated in time. Also, Lung cancer is mainly due to people smoking (I know you can get it without ever touching a cigarette). But the majority is that people obtain it themselves instead of just stop smoking or just never smoking in the first place. If this was done, lung cancer would be reduced by a minimal 50% easily if not even more. Reason alot of breast cancer charities show off boobs as sexual objects is because SEX SELLS! <----- Read that again a few times to make sure it sinks in. Who cares how you get the money if it isn't hurting people as that money will go to helping the lives of those with this cancer which include both men and women. Also i have seen more women promoting breast cancer in sexual ways then men in every way possible. My old highschool promoted breast cancer in a way you might thing was them trying to make them into sex objects which it did but yet it raised a Ton of money from students and townsfolk alike. Which to get money from kids who probably dont have a job is pretty damn good if you ask me. And how would promoting boobs create problems except showing how awesome they are and that we need to put in our part to help save them. Get over High and mighty self and lets see you start a more "Ethical" charity to help solve this Boob Dilemma!

Now, i leave you with a movie pic that goes with this Topic.

Company of Heroes?

Oh man, have you seen the boobs in that game?!

Incredible!

People should pull those solid gold poles out of their butts and donate them at this charity fundraising stream. He'd raise a mint judging by how far they seem to be jammed up there.

@Rudyftw said:

@Gerhabio said:

@Rudyftw said:

@Gerhabio said:

Ugh... I'm sick of repeating myself so much in the forums.http://www.volanteonline.com/opinion/column-stop-sexualizing-breast-cancer-1.2391523#.Tp5P2Jt3TCU

I mean, is it really that difficult to see that sexualizing the cancer cause is fucked?

Save the boobs? Fuck you, save the women and men (they get breast cancer too but god forbid we mention their unsexy breasts) who suffer from cancer.

Some men and women lose their breasts to cancer. It's not the breast that matters, it's the life.

There's many more articles like that to read, there are also plenty of scholarly ones, go out there and see the points of views of women's groups, social organizes, feminists, and victims of cancer.

Hey... at least they are raising money for it.

The "by all means necessary" and "ends justify the means" arguments are unethical, misguided and non-comforting.

There are more ethical ways to get money for the cause that don't hurt the women, that they are ostensibly trying to help, in the long run by reinforcing gender stereotypes and objectifying women and their breasts.

These campaigns only feed the business sides of bigger companies that seek to commodify women as primarily sexual objects for money.

Plus, breast cancer is overexposed because of the sex appeal attributed to it by pinkwashing public relations business machines. Lung cancer kills way more people but lungs aren't sexy so fuck them right?

There's always better ways to help, like emphasizing the humanity of the victims and appealing to decency and empathy.

For one, these are virtual women. They aren't real. You're acting as if they're making breast cancer porn. It's really not that big of a deal as far as the exploitation of breasts. They are using these means to get men more into supporting the cause to fund Breast Cancer. Also, breast cancer and lung cancer are COMPLETELY different. Most lung cancer victims smoked their entire lives and gave themselves cancer. Im not saying these people are not as important as breast cancer victims or don't deserve life as much as them, but there is a huge difference between self infliction and just flat out bad luck. There are many MANY other charitable foundations that fund research on things like autism, lung cancer, down syndrome, turners, parcinsons, AFS, IDS, and about every other thing out there. In reality you can't help the cause of EVERY single problem/disease/illness out there. You don't see me throwing it in your face that you don't care about causes like Alzheimer's.... And since when was "emphasizing the humanity of the victims and appealing to decency and empathy" not ever used to receive funding from people? Those means are used far more frequently than sex appeal...

It is not whether he had actual porn or was using virtual women or pictures of round fruit. It's the language utilized emphasizing the sexuality of breasts over the danger the women who possess them are under. Even if it helps the overstated cause of "awareness" (which most of the time just means public relations campaigns and drives to give money to companies that sell mammography machines, etc instead of actual funding for research and treatment) it causes its own problems and there are alternatives.

The comparison with lung cancer is apt in the sense that it takes away more lives (almost 3 times as much) than breast cancer but it doesn't have the huge drive (a month dedicated to it) behind it that the latter does. Part of this is because breast cancer gets misguided attention through sex appeal and part of it is because there's not as much money in it as in pinkwashing. Colon cancer is another good example. I'm not even going to address that implicit "they deserve it" victim blaming bullshit you attached to somehow justify the disparity.

Also, you are saying that because there are operations that do not sexualize cancer it makes it ok for there to be others that do? That's akin to saying, oh because there is way more people helping the old it's ok for a couple of them to be neglected or because 2+ is ok that 1-.

If you think "ends justify the means" or worse that the reinforcement of gender stereotypes and underlining of women as sexual objects over their personhood is not wrong, then you are not going to care.

Don't reply, I'm not answering: It's my b-day and I don't wanna deal.

@McShank: I already answered in other posts, read 'em. It's not this peculiar drive, this guy is just one problem in a continuum of sexualization of cancer and he is cementing this type of language further. Again, read what I wrote already.

It's not the breasts you should be trying to save, it's the women and men attached to them. Some times they cut them off to save the women, you know? Yes, sex sells but it also comes at a cost of hurting women in the long-term. Women are constantly portrayed and treated as sexual objects without agency or personhood in all kinds of media. The breast cancer sexy awareness campaigns are another example and an incredibly disturbing one at that where even when it comes down to horrible painful decease, women have to be sexually exploited to be even considered worthy of help.

@Gerhabio said:

@NickdeClaw said:

@Gerhabio said:

There's always better ways to help...

Therefore one should never do anything, because only the best way to do something should ever be used.

Your first post and you use it for this sillyness? I never advocated doing nothing, that is flagrant misconstruction of my words. There are ways that dont hurt women. All ethical methods should be tried. Just because a way to solve --excuse me-- to attempt to solve a problem is creating more funds doesn't mean it is exempt from creating other problems.

The OP made an alternate account so there'd be someone siding with him. That's why this guy's first (only?) post is so silly.

@McShank: I already answered in other posts, read 'em. It's not this peculiar drive, this guy is just one problem in a continuum of sexualization of cancer and he is cementing this type of language further. Again, read what I wrote already.

It's not the breasts you should be trying to save, it's the women and men attached to them. Some times they cut them off to save the women, you know? Yes, sex sells but it also comes at a cost of hurting women in the long-term. Women are constantly portrayed and treated as sexual objects without agency or personhood in all kinds of media. The breast cancer sexy awareness campaigns are another example and an incredibly disturbing one at that where even when it comes down to horrible painful decease, women have to be sexually exploited to be even considered worthy of help.

@Gerhabio said:

@Rudyftw said:

@Gerhabio said:

@Rudyftw said:

@Gerhabio said:

Ugh... I'm sick of repeating myself so much in the forums.http://www.volanteonline.com/opinion/column-stop-sexualizing-breast-cancer-1.2391523#.Tp5P2Jt3TCU

I mean, is it really that difficult to see that sexualizing the cancer cause is fucked?

Save the boobs? Fuck you, save the women and men (they get breast cancer too but god forbid we mention their unsexy breasts) who suffer from cancer.

Some men and women lose their breasts to cancer. It's not the breast that matters, it's the life.

There's many more articles like that to read, there are also plenty of scholarly ones, go out there and see the points of views of women's groups, social organizes, feminists, and victims of cancer.

Hey... at least they are raising money for it.

The "by all means necessary" and "ends justify the means" arguments are unethical, misguided and non-comforting.

There are more ethical ways to get money for the cause that don't hurt the women, that they are ostensibly trying to help, in the long run by reinforcing gender stereotypes and objectifying women and their breasts.

These campaigns only feed the business sides of bigger companies that seek to commodify women as primarily sexual objects for money.

Plus, breast cancer is overexposed because of the sex appeal attributed to it by pinkwashing public relations business machines. Lung cancer kills way more people but lungs aren't sexy so fuck them right?

There's always better ways to help, like emphasizing the humanity of the victims and appealing to decency and empathy.

For one, these are virtual women. They aren't real. You're acting as if they're making breast cancer porn. It's really not that big of a deal as far as the exploitation of breasts. They are using these means to get men more into supporting the cause to fund Breast Cancer. Also, breast cancer and lung cancer are COMPLETELY different. Most lung cancer victims smoked their entire lives and gave themselves cancer. Im not saying these people are not as important as breast cancer victims or don't deserve life as much as them, but there is a huge difference between self infliction and just flat out bad luck. There are many MANY other charitable foundations that fund research on things like autism, lung cancer, down syndrome, turners, parcinsons, AFS, IDS, and about every other thing out there. In reality you can't help the cause of EVERY single problem/disease/illness out there. You don't see me throwing it in your face that you don't care about causes like Alzheimer's.... And since when was "emphasizing the humanity of the victims and appealing to decency and empathy" not ever used to receive funding from people? Those means are used far more frequently than sex appeal...

It is not whether he had actual porn or was using virtual women or pictures of round fruit. It's the language utilized emphasizing the sexuality of breasts over the danger the women who possess them are under. Even if it helps the overstated cause of "awareness" (which most of the time just means public relations campaigns and drives to give money to companies that sell mammography machines, etc instead of actual funding for research and treatment) it causes its own problems and there are alternatives.

The comparison with lung cancer is apt in the sense that it takes away more lives (almost 3 times as much) than breast cancer but it doesn't have the huge drive (a month dedicated to it) behind it that the latter does. Part of this is because breast cancer gets misguided attention through sex appeal and part of it is because there's not as much money in it as in pinkwashing. Colon cancer is another good example. I'm not even going to address that implicit "they deserve it" victim blaming bullshit you attached to somehow justify the disparity.

Also, you are saying that because there are operations that do not sexualize cancer it makes it ok for there to be others that do? That's akin to saying, oh because there is way more people helping the old it's ok for a couple of them to be neglected or because 2+ is ok that 1-.

If you think "ends justify the means" or worse that the reinforcement of gender stereotypes and underlining of women as sexual objects over their personhood is not wrong, then you are not going to care.

Don't reply, I'm not answering: It's my b-day and I don't wanna deal.

Dude. Not every campaign against breast cancer utilizes in the sexuality of breasts. I would understand your argument if that was the only way awareness was being dished out, but its NOT! NOT EVEN CLOSE! These people are just some dudes playing videogames to gain money for a charity that just so happens to fund breast cancer research. You're right. There are plenty of other alternatives, but what works works. Also your whole "ends dont justify the means" argument is invalid. Mostly because their are no means being used to justify anything. NO ONE is getting hurt by this... what could you possibly mean by that? Are you really going to sit there on your high horse and point out that these cancer campaigns are enforcing stereotypes and underlining woman as sexual objects when FUCKING shampoo commercials and just about every other goddamn thing on this planet do the same thing. Woman are beautiful. They know it and we know it. Why not capitalize on that to hopefully save many other women's and men's lives someday? Is your pride really set that high to just continue to let thousands of people die simply because they aren't saving them the RIGHT WAY? Do you know that makes you sound like? It makes you sound like a toddler who's throwing a fit because he got apple juice instead of grape juice. Its simple. Either go out there and go help fund breast cancer research or colon cancer research or any other cancer research your way, or just shut up about it and just accept it for what it is. At least these guys give a rats ass to do something like this in the first place. I only replied because I dont like being told what to do! Happy Birthday!

I think it's an interesting debate we've started here about sexualization in the media, or more specifically in Breast Cancer awareness charities. There's a lot to say about ethics, and certainly a few different opinions flying around.

I just want to say that whatever your opinion of the ethics here, that I feel I'm doing a good thing here and contributing to a good cause. You've said what you've will about the "how," and perhaps I'll re-consider laying out another charity like this for next year. I could argue that this is the most ethical way to run this charity, simply because it's naturally going to gain the most attention and donations. For the time being, however, the wheels are already in motion.

We're doing this the day after tomorrow, and we're doing it in a way that will be successful in raising money for a good cause.

Sweet. Though its kinda a shame breast cancer receives so much attention and funding compared to other cancers.

@Teleri: Thank you for doing this.

@TaliciaDragonsong said:

@Teleri: Thank you for doing this.

How strangely convenient, no?

@SeriouslyNow Breast cancer (and cancer in general) runs in my family as well, that doesnt change the many problems different drives have. From pinkwasing to sexual exploitation of disease, these things come back to hurt women in general and not just victims of mammary cancer. I care about how society treats the women I love and about what it expects from them. That defeatist and apologetic attitudes that let implicitly sexist attitudes run rampants is akin to putting on a minstrel show under the excuse of giving the money to poor black communities. Yes, it might help them financially but it also contributes to their opression.

Also, women have about the same probability of surviving malignant mammary cancer

Edit: It cut me off

... as they did in 1960. Most of the drives today focus on "awareness" which usually means pink paraphernalia and money for companies that make mammography machines. The thing is, most women find their cancer through self-examinations in the shower. I don't know what OP's charity is but most of the time you are better off giving money to organizations that seek to help women pay for treatment or to fund research.

@Gerhabio said:

@Rudyftw Told you, I'm not dealing with this shit today. I didnt read your post. Read up on structural violence if you are interested on invisible forms of agression against women.

Dude, fuck you. Read up on not acting like such a prick. I don't give a flying fuck about invisible forms of aggression against women. HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

@Rudyftw: I'm not being a prick. I really don't want to get into arguments today. As a pro-feminist I often encounter people who think the status quo of things is perfect and thinking otherwise is heretic. It's difficult and stressful to try to convince them otherwise since most of the time they are either men who benefit from it or go with the flow or women who internalize their own oppression and just want to be "one of the guys" so they become women-haters.

I already told you a bunch of reasons why I think it's wrong to approach this sort of thing raunchily but you're not going to be convinced. You said it yourself, you don't care about structural violence against women. How am I going to convince you of anything if you don't care about women?

Thanks, Rudy, I'll try to enjoy the day.

@SeriouslyNow Breast cancer (and cancer in general) runs in my family as well, that doesnt change the many problems different drives have. From pinkwasing to sexual exploitation of disease, these things come back to hurt women in general and not just victims of mammary cancer. I care about how society treats the women I love and about what it expects from them. That defeatist and apologetic attitudes that let implicitly sexist attitudes run rampants is akin to putting on a minstrel show under the excuse of giving the money to poor black communities. Yes, it might help them financially but it also contributes to their opression.

Also, women have about the same probability of surviving malignant mammary cancer

Edit: It cut me off

... as they did in 1960. Most of the drives today focus on "awareness" which usually means pink paraphernalia and money for companies that make mammography machines. The thing is, most women find their cancer through self-examinations in the shower. I don't know what OP's charity is but most of the time you are better off giving money to organizations that seek to help women pay for treatment or to fund research.

Hope you guys raise a ton of money, man. I've always thought it was appropriate that I was born in October, Breast Cancer Awareness month, considering how much I love boobs, and always try to be aware of them. Seriously though, GLHB.

....I'm torn a little bit about this. It is cool you guys are doing this for charity. But...'CharTitty'? 'Bumps for Boobs'?

...I just...man.

Yep. Definitely no bullshit. :)

Too bad I don't have any game suggestions, though. Two of 'em were already mentioned.

Yeah the name seems innaproproiate...

@Gerhabio: Thank you for making your valid points, about time someone did. I like how raising awareness on breast cancer means, "boobs, bro!" Does anyone even know the starting symptoms of breast cancer? The chance of survival? The probability of getting it? What the fuck all this supposed billions of dollars in research money has been funding? Fuck breast cancer awareness month.

I'd just like to add that men get breast cancer, too. Very, very rarely, but I still wish the media acknowledged this every once in awhile.

Otherwise, I love this idea. I lost my grandmother and great-grandmother to cancer (pancreatic and breast), and every bit of money for research helps. And hey, if you can advertise a bunch of indie games that need more love in the process, even better.

I think weirdly chauvinistic things like this actually belittle the struggles of women dealing with breast cancer. It draws attention away from the seriousness of the issue. I feel the same way about the "I <3 Boobs!" T-shirts. It's just a way for guys to get away with saying things that would normally be considered disrespectful of women while simultaneously making them feeling like they're helping something, when in reality they're turning the very serious issue of a deadly disease into a juvenile joke.

@Gerhabio: I'm glad at least one person on here has some sense.

@SeriouslyNow said:

@Gerhabio said:

@SeriouslyNow Breast cancer (and cancer in general) runs in my family as well, that doesnt change the many problems different drives have. From pinkwasing to sexual exploitation of disease, these things come back to hurt women in general and not just victims of mammary cancer. I care about how society treats the women I love and about what it expects from them. That defeatist and apologetic attitudes that let implicitly sexist attitudes run rampants is akin to putting on a minstrel show under the excuse of giving the money to poor black communities. Yes, it might help them financially but it also contributes to their opression.

Also, women have about the same probability of surviving malignant mammary cancer

Edit: It cut me off

... as they did in 1960. Most of the drives today focus on "awareness" which usually means pink paraphernalia and money for companies that make mammography machines. The thing is, most women find their cancer through self-examinations in the shower. I don't know what OP's charity is but most of the time you are better off giving money to organizations that seek to help women pay for treatment or to fund research.

The women you supposedly care and love don't give a damn what you think and many of them are quite happy to be sexualised, especially if it brings more awareness and funding to specific issues that they as women face more than men. The minute you realise this is the minute you edge closer to a level of maturity which stretches beyond wanting to be man and reaches toward actually becoming one. Good humour is far more valuable (in this situation, but also more generally) than being able to balk and quote supposed statistics. That these things may come back to 'haunt' women (your language is dramatic and pretty indicative of your lacking maturity) is pretty debatable when the games that allow for this situation to occur already exist and the fact that things like this have been happening throughout history and will continue to happen in the form of male and female sexy calendars and beyond. Adults are OK with sexualisation and nobody is up in arms at the potential failings of humanity to judge fairly. Idiots and the childminded will always struggle in these situations but if we up end these positive processes to suit them them then we may as well drop almost every adult element of entertainment and turn our society toward Huxley's Brave New World. No, the problem here isn't the situation, the problem here really is you.

First, I don't know why you think you can speak for the women in my life. Second, what I know about the sexual objectification of women and the ways that reinforcing (yeah, that's what I wrote, let me write it again: r-e-i-n-f-o-r-c-i-n-g) gender stereotypes hurts women's causes and chances at equality I have learned from women: In family as well as from community managers, professors, activists and other women's rights advocates. Third, this has degenerated into petty personal insults and I'm not interested in that.

@SeriouslyNow said:

@Gerhabio said:

@SeriouslyNow Breast cancer (and cancer in general) runs in my family as well, that doesnt change the many problems different drives have. From pinkwasing to sexual exploitation of disease, these things come back to hurt women in general and not just victims of mammary cancer. I care about how society treats the women I love and about what it expects from them. That defeatist and apologetic attitudes that let implicitly sexist attitudes run rampants is akin to putting on a minstrel show under the excuse of giving the money to poor black communities. Yes, it might help them financially but it also contributes to their opression.

Also, women have about the same probability of surviving malignant mammary cancer

Edit: It cut me off

... as they did in 1960. Most of the drives today focus on "awareness" which usually means pink paraphernalia and money for companies that make mammography machines. The thing is, most women find their cancer through self-examinations in the shower. I don't know what OP's charity is but most of the time you are better off giving money to organizations that seek to help women pay for treatment or to fund research.

The women you supposedly care and love don't give a damn what you think and many of them are quite happy to be sexualised, especially if it brings more awareness and funding to specific issues that they as women face more than men. The minute you realise this is the minute you edge closer to a level of maturity which stretches beyond wanting to be man and reaches toward actually becoming one. Good humour is far more valuable (in this situation, but also more generally) than being able to balk and quote supposed statistics. That these things may come back to 'haunt' women (your language is dramatic and pretty indicative of your lacking maturity) is pretty debatable when the games that allow for this situation to occur already exist and the fact that things like this have been happening throughout history and will continue to happen in the form of male and female sexy calendars and beyond. Adults are OK with sexualisation and nobody is up in arms at the potential failings of humanity to judge fairly. Idiots and the childminded will always struggle in these situations but if we up end these positive processes to suit them them then we may as well drop almost every adult element of entertainment and turn our society toward Huxley's Brave New World. No, the problem here isn't the situation, the problem here really is you.

First, I don't know why you think you can speak for the women in my life. Second, what I know about the sexual objectification of women and the ways that reinforcing (yeah, that's what I wrote, let me write it again: r-e-i-n-f-o-r-c-i-n-g) gender stereotypes hurts women's causes and chances at equality I have learned from women: In family as well as from community managers, professors, activists and other women's rights advocates. Third, this has degenerated into petty personal insults and I'm not interested in that.

You're just trying to insult me, if you want me to "shut up and go away" stop replying.

I talk about what I believe and has been taught to me by feminists in my own life. I am conscious of different divides within the feminist movement, especially between older feminists (first wavers being the most different) and younger ones.

Also, sorry but this is the internet, not an invitational party so I'll say whatever I like. And there IS noticeable inequality when it comes to women's representation in the media.

Look, just stop replying already, I'm not going to convince you of anything and it is pretty clear you are upset. So just drop it.

@Teleri said:

I think it's an interesting debate we've started here about sexualization in the media, or more specifically in Breast Cancer awareness charities. There's a lot to say about ethics, and certainly a few different opinions flying around.

I just want to say that whatever your opinion of the ethics here, that I feel I'm doing a good thing here and contributing to a good cause. You've said what you've will about the "how," and perhaps I'll re-consider laying out another charity like this for next year. I could argue that this is the most ethical way to run this charity, simply because it's naturally going to gain the most attention and donations. For the time being, however, the wheels are already in motion.

We're doing this the day after tomorrow, and we're doing it in a way that will be successful in raising money for a good cause.

If I must repeat myself, read my quote above.

In other news, we've selected our charity! Check out http://ww5.komen.org/for info about how your donation money will be used to help save lives, empower people, ensure quality care for all, and energize science to find the cures.

Charity starts tomorrow!

We're live!

@Dagbiker said:

I also want to see some Custer's Revenge, and Leisure Suit Larry Box Office Bust.

I'm disgusted that you even mentioned using Custer's Revenge, I don't care if you were simply joking, it was in poor taste given the subject mater of the game. I find it disgusting that you would want to view a racist game that dehumanizes American Indians, and specifically American Indian women, to merely objects that are acceptable to rape at any point for sexual pleasure.

@Teleri said:

@Teleri said:

I think it's an interesting debate we've started here about sexualization in the media, or more specifically in Breast Cancer awareness charities. There's a lot to say about ethics, and certainly a few different opinions flying around.

I just want to say that whatever your opinion of the ethics here, that I feel I'm doing a good thing here and contributing to a good cause. You've said what you've will about the "how," and perhaps I'll re-consider laying out another charity like this for next year. I could argue that this is the most ethical way to run this charity, simply because it's naturally going to gain the most attention and donations. For the time being, however, the wheels are already in motion.

We're doing this the day after tomorrow, and we're doing it in a way that will be successful in raising money for a good cause.

If I must repeat myself, read my quote above.

In other news, we've selected our charity! Check out http://ww5.komen.org/for info about how your donation money will be used to help save lives, empower people, ensure quality care for all, and energize science to find the cures.

Charity starts tomorrow!

Susan G Komen for the cure uses donated founds to sue other charities for using "for the cure"

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