Typical America, choosing politics over science, AGAIN!

The only possible legitimate reason for refusing is if there is a potential concern that their other sources might not be willing to donate due to the association, resulting in less total funds overall.

That doesn't seem to be the case here.

Am I the only one who thinks this whole sexualization of breast cancer thing needs to stop? Most people who get breast cancer are middle-aged to elderly women whose breasts are not particularly exciting. My mother had breast cancer and she hated seeing those "I <3 Boobies" things because it made her feel like her cancer didn't matter because she didn't have nice tits for people to want to save. And I can totally understand feeling like that. I think turning breast cancer into a sexual issue, even jokingly, sends a really shitty message that somehow we should care about women's health not because breast cancer kills people but because boobs are super neat, and that breast cancer is bad because it steals tits away from those who love to see them and not because it destroys the lives of women. It's better than nothing, but seriously, we can do a lot better.

I know that a porn site doing a "the more you look at boobs, the more we donate" thing is supposed to be humorous, but it really seems disrespectful and tacky to make it about tits instead of women, especially considering that, as I said before, most of the breasts that are destroyed by cancer are less than sightly.

First off what do they mean by breast cancer awareness? Everyone knows about breast cancer so it seems pointless to tell people about it, or is this a 'get a breast examination if you're a woman of a certain age' kind of thing?

Ok anyway pornhub's plan reminds me of Eric Cartman calling breast cancer 'titty cancer' to mock Wendy.

So I'm kind of torn. On the one hand I don't think there's anything inherently immoral in porn so I might've accepted the money (it's not like sex can lead to breast cancer), on the other hand I can see why it could make the effort look like a joke.

Seems like a pretty awesome fundraising idea to me. If you like boobs, raise money to keep more of them healthy. :D

chozo_hybrid:

Yopaz:

chozo_hybrid:
I think what the adult site was trying to do was a nice thing, helping fund something like that when they didn't have to is a great thing. It's a shame that they won't accept the money, perhaps they could send it to another charity or something that can help toward the same cause.

It's more money than $0 which can't go toward anything.

It might be more money than $0, but considering that they do events in Texas and have the support of conservatives bringing in millions they do have a lot to lose when they accept the donation from a source those would consider wrong and immoral. One of the controversies in the past have been over them getting involved with stem cell research and it hurt their reputation quite a bit. Losing the support of the big donations just for taking a small one might seem wise to you, but I don't see it that way. In fact their refusal might actually help their reputation because it shows that they are willing to take a stand for what they believe.

I get that, I do. I don't live in the US but I have seen enough and read enough to know that it can be how things sadly work. I responded to DrNeroCF on the grounds of that comment just being snide and absolutely pointless.

Like I said, it's a shame they won't accept but, but perhaps someone else may. Either way, I was mostly just saying good on them for trying to do a nice thing.

I wasn't looking to get into a debate over the morality/ethics on it, because that's something that is different for everybody. What is sad, is that people would look down on a charitable organization for accepting legally given money and thus would remove their support when if everyone just helped it would make things (hopefully) better for those affected by cancer is all.

It's pretty hard to read a page full of '$25,000 will save lives and do science!' and not leave a snide remark.

I'd love to know what's pointless about that comment? Companies spend millions on PR to sway the public's perception. Turning down 25k to avoid association with a porn site is a no brainer. You can love porn and think it's as wonderful as anything, but breast cancer charities sure do a lot to control the image of breast cancer awareness campaign. It's pretty much its own franchise at this point.

"Either way, I was mostly just saying good on them for trying to do a nice thing."

You believe that the donations was more about charity than publicity? Snideness... rising... must... resist...

Jiveturkey124:
Typical America, choosing politics over science, AGAIN!

This isn't the government deciding this, this is just one American organization. It would be like us blaming all of the UK for the BP oil spill.

tippy2k2:
I don't know if this is going to be the accepted view or I'm going to get ripped for this but here it goes anyway...

The Susan G Komen Foundation should accept the funds and it is absolutely ridiculous that they are rejecting the funds because it's from a porn site. Beggars can't be choosers and there is absolutely no way that I'm going to donate to a charity that rejects funding from a group because they don't like it for some reason.

I know this doesn't apply to porn but hypothetically what if it was from an organization that sells something that causes the disease they're fighting?

Like a lung cancer charity refusing a donation from a tobacco company.

DrNeroCF:

It's pretty hard to read a page full of '$25,000 will save lives and do science!' and not leave a snide remark.

I'd love to know what's pointless about that comment? Companies spend millions on PR to sway the public's perception. Turning down 25k to avoid association with a porn site is a no brainer. You can love porn and think it's as wonderful as anything, but breast cancer charities sure do a lot to control the image of breast cancer awareness campaign. It's pretty much it's own franchise at this point.

"Either way, I was mostly just saying good on them for trying to do a nice thing."

You believe that the donations was more about charity than publicity? Snideness... rising... must... resist...

Then why didn't you just say that? Also realize that I do understand how this sort of thing works, true it could have been about publicity. In fact it most likely was, but that doesn't negate the fact that they were attempting to do something nice, in a world where we always hear about nasty things going on all the time, it was pleasant to see someone attempting to do something positive is all.

I like to try see the good in things like this, it may be naive, but I think it's better then being a complete cynic.

Were they wrong for refusing money from a company which ran the slogan "Save the Boobs" as opposed to, say, "Save women's lives"? I honestly have no opinion on the matter. On the one hand I respect their ethics in refusing money which was raised by objectifying women. On the other hand money is money. Once more a resounding "meh" from me.

peruvianskys:
Am I the only one who thinks this whole sexualization of breast cancer thing needs to stop? Most people who get breast cancer are middle-aged to elderly women whose breasts are not particularly exciting. My mother had breast cancer and she hated seeing those "I <3 Boobies" things because it made her feel like her cancer didn't matter because she didn't have nice tits for people to want to save. And I can totally understand feeling like that. I think turning breast cancer into a sexual issue, even jokingly, sends a really shitty message that somehow we should care about women's health not because breast cancer kills people but because boobs are super neat, and that breast cancer is bad because it steals tits away from those who love to see them and not because it destroys the lives of women. It's better than nothing, but seriously, we can do a lot better.

I know that a porn site doing a "the more you look at boobs, the more we donate" thing is supposed to be humorous, but it really seems disrespectful and tacky to make it about tits instead of women, especially considering that, as I said before, most of the breasts that are destroyed by cancer are less than sightly.

Focusing it on boobs makes a very good case for people to donate to it rather than some other research though. If all everyone cared about was the human life rather than what disease it was wouldn't stuff like heart disease and AIDS get priority?

chozo_hybrid:

Then why didn't you just say that? Also realize that I do understand how this sort of thing works, true it could have been about publicity. In fact it most likely was, but that doesn't negate the fact that they were attempting to do something nice, in a world where we always hear about nasty things going on all the time, it was pleasant to see someone attempting to do something positive is all.

I like to try see the good in things like this, it may be naive, but I think it's better then being a complete cynic.

Yopaz definitely said it better than I could, but I apologize for not adding much to the conversation. Really I just wanted more discussion on the worth of that sum of money, given the context.

Call me cynical, I don't see 25k as a large loss for PornHub, and I don't see 25k as a large gain for Susan G. Komen Foundation, so I don't see a tiny donation with far larger gain as an altruistic act of generosity. I think that most of the posts here are knee-jerk defenses of porn, for the sole reason that it's porn (I'm not trying to bash porn there, just knee-jerk reactions), or a chance to bash America completely illogically, which don't deserve much more than, yeah, a snide post.

Just saying, logically, they SHOULD reject the donation. Anyone's arguing otherwise is choosing emotion over logic.

DrNeroCF:

chozo_hybrid:

Then why didn't you just say that? Also realize that I do understand how this sort of thing works, true it could have been about publicity. In fact it most likely was, but that doesn't negate the fact that they were attempting to do something nice, in a world where we always hear about nasty things going on all the time, it was pleasant to see someone attempting to do something positive is all.

I like to try see the good in things like this, it may be naive, but I think it's better then being a complete cynic.

Yopaz definitely said it better than I could, but I apologize for not adding much to the conversation. Really I just wanted more discussion on the worth of that sum of money, given the context.

Call me cynical, I don't see 25k as a large loss for PornHub, and I don't see 25k as a large gain for Susan G. Komen Foundation, so I don't see a tiny donation with far larger gain as an altruistic act of generosity. I think that most of the posts here are knee-jerk defenses of porn, for the sole reason that it's porn (I'm not trying to bash porn there, just knee-jerk reactions), which don't deserve much more than, yeah, a snide post.

Just saying, logically, they SHOULD reject the donation. Anyone's arguing otherwise is choosing emotion over logic.

No need to apologize, but I respect that. Don't see that online much, if at all.

I didn't think of the knee jerk reaction thing, that's kinda funny. Fair enough, I completely understand where you're coming from, and agree that the damage from taking it would be far more than what they give. It's just a shame people would look at it that way at all, but that's business isn't it.

Because we all know porn is bad and objectifies women and everything.
That's why i prefer my women to just whore themselves on the street corner instead of in front of a camera.

DrNeroCF:
Just saying, logically, they SHOULD reject the donation. Anyone's arguing otherwise is choosing emotion over logic.

Exactly.
99% of the public work on emotion, not logic, therefore NOT accepting the money was a humungous fuck up on their part because now they're getting even more bad press and lose a hell of a lot more in donation money than they would have had they just accepted the money and asked pornhub to put a little 'get your family/friends to have a breast exam' text bubble next to the videos.

This is before we even get into the money they're not accepting, which should equal more than $25k by the 31st as word spreads.

This is one of the stupidest things I've heard in recent mammary.

webepoop:
This is one of the stupidest things I've heard in recent mammary.

You need to be punished.
I felt a large portion of my brain cells spasm as I read that, and I think I have gone partially blind in one of my eyes.
You're a public hazard and should be contained.

Idiotic is what it is. Fun fact: WWE is apparently good enough for them. Have you seen how they treat their women's division?

On another note, why is it always breast cancer that gets brought up? Prostrate cancer and leukemia are tied for second far, far behind it, but why not just, you know, go for CANCER? Not as easy to market, maybe? Breast cancer is one of the simpler ones to remove already, as long as it doesn't metastasize. And that's why we have mammographies.

Also, why is Komen for the Cure so pink?

Captcha: politically correct

I can imagine porn companies have invested interests in keeping breasts free of cancer. I don't see whats the big deal.

However, it would be a PR disaster.

since we are on the subject of pornography, is it wrong to point out that the poll looks like a penis?

OT: i thinks its stupid that they won't accept the money, its not like they got the donation money from robbing banks and mugging people.

MetalMagpie:
Seems like a pretty awesome fundraising idea to me. If you like boobs, raise money to keep more of them healthy. :D

This, right here. I, for one, believe that tits are great. Who cares if it's a porn site that's giving the donation? *snicker* I certainly don't. And if the money actually gets to help someone in need, all the better.

Pornhub, you make me proud.

In today's strange news:
I suddenly have more respect for a porn streaming site than for an organization fighting breast cancer.
Who'd have thought?

Jonluw:
In today's strange news:
I suddenly have more respect for a porn streaming site than for an organization fighting breast cancer.
Who'd have thought?

.
I think some of the people here think otherwise.

Feminist pride getting in the way of saving lives.

Am I thinking about it wrong?

I hope another charity accepts the donation because seriously who cares where the money it comes from (unless its gained illegally) as long as it helps people. Its not like by accepting Pornhubs donation that people would think less of them or that it would tarnish their good name, if anything not accepting the donation has already done that. If a business wants to donate money then a charity should accept it no matter what the business does as long as that money is put to good use and can help people.

I agree that they can refuse donations and have every right to, but this is just petty. That money could be going towards saving women's lives and they're taking some ridiculous moral stand over it.

tippy2k2:

Father Time:

tippy2k2:
snip

I know this doesn't apply to porn but hypothetically what if it was from an organization that sells something that causes the disease they're fighting?

Like a lung cancer charity refusing a donation from a tobacco company.

I'd be more forgiving of a lung cancer charity refusing donations from a tobacco company but I'd still personally think it's foolish. Hell, if the KKK was offering funds to the "Young Black Scholars" (I have no clue if it's a legit group, I just Googled for a African American Scholarship organization but you get my point I'm sure :), I'd say go for it.

As long as the funds are not coming from an illegal source, I think it's silly to say No Thanks

.
Your other, much more substantial donors might take issue with the people you accept money from.

excalipoor:
Idiotic is what it is. Fun fact: WWE is apparently good enough for them. Have you seen how they treat their women's division?

On another note, why is it always breast cancer that gets brought up? Prostrate cancer and leukemia are tied for second far, far behind it, but why not just, you know, go for CANCER? Not as easy to market, maybe? Breast cancer is one of the simpler ones to remove already, as long as it doesn't metastasize. And that's why we have mammographies.

Also, why is Komen for the Cure so pink?

Captcha: politically correct

The interesting thing with prostate cancer is that statistically it is very similar to breast cancer (I can understand individual cancers being separated, given the wildly different rates, progressions and prognoses of them), yet it receives dramatically less funding, both charity funding and government funding. Apparently even Congress would rather save teh bewbs.

It's silly, it shouldn't matter where donations come from, within reason of course.

Blue Jay:
It's silly, it shouldn't matter where donations come from, within reason of course.

.
I think that what's reasonable and what isn't is subject to change depending on the person or group responsible.

I did not realize donating for breast cancer and being accepting of pornography were incompatible causes.

My wrists still hurt from all the fundraising I did yesterday and now they wont even accept the money?

All joking aside: I think they should just accept the money, it doesn't matter who raised it, be it comic book nerds (see spoiler image) or.. let's call them "porn-watchers".

yeah, um, that's stupid on the foundations part, though for some reason i find it oddly fitting for a porn anything to raise money for breast cancer