No sense of humor; no sense of priorities; a school bans sales of a t-shirt with an eye-catching message about breast cancer. The story is here.
-Ralph Michael Stein
P.S. The linked story by cnn doesn’t mention it, but the slogan is trademarked by Save 2ndBase, LLC and 50% of proceeds profits of t-shirt sales go to the Kelly Rooney Foundation, a charitable organization that seeks to reduce the incidence of breast cancer in young women.
-Bridget Crawford
I ordered five of these shirts last nights. You can’t pay online-you get a bill after you place an order.
Let’s support these kids and this cause with a truly novel item.
P.S. I don’t know to whom I will give these shirts but I’ll work that out later.
I don’t have quite so many positive feelings about this shirt. Labeling breasts as “second base” is literally objectifying, and the shirt sends a message that the reason why breasts are worth saving is due to their value as objects of sexual gratification. I would much rather a shirt that encourages people to save women’s lives, not to just save their breasts, lest someone be unable to reach “second base.”
The problem with the label of “objectification” is that it can be a real eclipser of that most valuable of motivational factors, humor. Breast cancer is grim and I’ve both lost dear colleagues and friends to it and been gratified by advances in medicine that have saved others.
Sex can be a fun subject and the breast as a sexual attraction – not the only one – is a reality for both genders. These teenagers who are selling the shirt aren’t interested in a dry, feminist critique of their personal crusade – they’ve lived with their moms’ breast cancer and seen one die.
And I view their open and funny approach to raising money as a sign that they are feminists who aren’t afraid of either their bodies or of sexual attractiveness.
I think Barbara Ehrenreich wrote a great critique of the focus on reclaiming femininity in the breast cancer movement in her essay “Welcome to Cancerland.”
http://www.bcaction.org/Pages/LearnAboutUs/WelcomeToCancerland.html
I don’t think objectifying women is okay just because it’s in the service making people laugh and hence donate money. Sure such T-shirts might get people to donate some money to breast cancer research, but at what cost? The message I get from these T-shirts is that when women get breast cancer, they lose their sexuality, hence their femininity. And, of course, women can compensate for that loss of femininity with a hot pink shirt.
Barbara Ehrenreich has a great critique of the breast cancer movement (esp. it’s focus on compensating for lost femininity and the way it infantilizes women) in her essay “Welcome to Cancerland”
http://www.bcaction.org/Pages/LearnAboutUs/WelcomeToCancerland.html
I don’t think objectification is okay just becuase it’s in the service of making people laugh. Sure the T-shirts might get some people to donate money to breast cancer research but at what cost. The shirts equate women with their breasts and their breasts with their sexuality. And when women get breast cancer, they lose their sexuality, hence their femininity. And of course, these women can compensate for that loss by wearing a hot pink shirt. This disease no longer effects women, just their breasts. Reducing women to their body parts is nothing new or radical. It’s the same tired, sexist message we’ve been getting for years.
I’m with “Ottermatic” and “Lawstudent77.” I didn’t like this tee shirt:
http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=1445
and I don’t like the one pictured above, though I wouldn’t censor it.
I’m not a fan of the Cult of Pink in any form, see:
http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=540
and
http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=1072
and more generally
http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=757
Barbara Ehrenreich has a great critique of the breast cancer movement (esp. its focus on compensating for lost femininity and the way it infantilizes women) in her essay”Welcome to Cancerland”
http://www.bcaction.org/Pages/LearnAboutUs/WelcomeToCancerland.html
I don’t think objectification is okay just because it’s in the service of making folks laugh. Sure the shirts might get some people to donate money to breast cancer research but at what cost. The shirts equate women with their breasts and their breasts with their sexuality (how radical). The implicit message is that breast cancer robs women of their sexuality, hence their femininity. And of course women can compensate for this loss by wearing a hot pink shirt. We’re telling women they’re less of women, less of sexual beings because of their disease. Reducing women to their body parts is nothing new or radical. It’s the same tired sexist message we’ve all been getting for years.
Also, it looks from this site:
http://www.save2ndbase.com/
that 50% of all PROFITS on the Second Base shirt go to the referenced foundation, (rather than 50% of the proceeds), which I’m guessing is a substantially smaller percentage. And why not all of the profits? Sorry to sound so grumpy and bitter, but I’ve lost friends and family members to cancer too, have a couple fighting it right now, and it bugs me to see all the pink crap making corporations rich. Here is one powerful statement on the subject from someone fighting breast cancer this very moment:
http://blawgcoop.com/lawmom/2007/10/think_before_you_pink.html
And from last October, this:
http://ourbodiesourblog.org/blog/2006/10/pinkd_out_on_breast_cancer.php
I have corrected the post to reflect accurately the statement at http://www.save2ndbase.com/ that 50% of the profits, not proceeds, go to the foundation. Thanks, Ann.