Hi Lindiloo and Monica..Oh how I can really relate to feeling better on days I don't visit the forums. On days when I haven't a minute to spare I often feel SO much better..there are other days when I will log on a couple of times..('cos I hardly watch TV these days or I'm putting off some ironing!) I am trying to stop visiting quite so frequently. In the past I have felt a bit of a lone voice at times, especially during the yearly October debate. Especially when a few years ago it seemed the vast majority of posters who expressed a view were very pro-tickled pink and at the time I was coming to terms with my prognosis and I got very upset, too upset really, at some comments. So I can relate, (I think) to how you might feel, or perhaps have felt Lindiloo although I know we hold very different views.
I was quite shocked at the very different response this year.
I think a break from the forums and more time in the 'real' world with family and friends is a good thing, for me it puts things into perspective. All these comments will go down the page and into the archives and I won't get that hour I spent here somedays back. On that note I WILL try to practice more of what I am preaching! 🙂 Goodnight all, from whatever side of the Tickled Pink fence/debate you are standing. (I really do have a mountain of ironing..but tomorrow I think.) xx
Just wanted to say that I find it saddening that there is what feels like 'backbiting' sometimes on here. Like Lindiloo, I have enjoyed a couple of days away from the forum as it was getting me down.
There are few postings that I agree with completely or absolutely, but that doesn't mean its OK to be brutally honest at the expense of courtesy and respect.
I think maybe we need to stop and take a breath, and perhaps think about what the effect of our response will be on others.
This is making me sound preachy and holier than now, which I honestly am not, I am just concerned that people feel bullied. We are all dealing with bc and all the emotions that go with that, including anger, grief and vulnerability. We need to be caring of and careful for each other.
sorry if I sound like Mary Poppins, but there are worse things...
I decided to have a break from the forums over the weekend as sometimes to be honest i find these forums are not good for my mental wellbeing. I did write out a long post late last night but it didnt show and was lost somehow.
Anyway, Thank you Kms for allowing us to see your emails from BCC, i think this has gone some way to clarifing the issue , i am pleased that BCC has acknowledged that there have been hurtfull comments on these forums in the past when others have expressed a different view and it would seem that they felt that you needed to be protected from that.
I agree with your comments 100% that admin should not withhold posts incase of hurtfull feedback , i feel any poster who writes such comments should be dealt with firmly and their future posts should be moderated , what good are the terms and conditions of this site if they are not enforced.
I believe some people have felt bullied at times on this forum and i find that tottaly unaceptable not everyone can stand up for theirselves and it is up to the mods of this forum to take any action required to stop this from happening.
Holeybones, Can i just pick up on something you said in your post please, i dont think that those without secondries are begining to get a "reality check" here about there being no all clear from BC, i think the majority of BC patients already know this ,just as the majority of BC patients know that positivity wont save them, However,i think it is important for people to know also that there have been and will be breast cancer patients who have been all clear and have gone on to die of other causes, otherwise it can inadvertantly cause much anxiety for some. I dont think we need to frighten people more than they already are. Just my view, but it is the way some of the comments come accross on here sometimes.
BCC , thank you for clearing up this issue and thank you for reviewing the current situation.
This is a support forum , so lets use this site for what it was intended , we are all here after all liveing our lives with BC all trying to get by the best way we can , as another users comments said earlier lets keep our anger for this desease , we are all walking this road together.
Best wishes to everyone.
Your comments have been read and taken on board. I would like to assure you that posts will not be stopped for the reasons you have mentioned and a feedback and learning session is being organised for all moderators.
Thank you to those people who have commented on the issue of stopping posts going live.I have been away for a couple of days so have only just read the posts.I'm afraid i still dont feel that it was a totally satisfactory answer that Bertie gave.
When admin finally decided that my post could go live the email said
'.... my manager has had a look at your post and at the time you originally posted it we did not set it live in order to try to protect you from what could have turned quite hurtful, as we have found from past experience....'
The thing i dont understand is that MY email was not offensive,hurtful etc etc.Surely MY email should have gone live and if there were any particularly hurtful comments back it is THOSE comments that should be 'moderated' if necessary.I have not been using this site long but from reading a couple of comments on this thread and my email from admin it does sound as if some users have felt bullied and hurt in the past.That,i find,unacceptable.We should all have a voice but there has to be a line drawn if comments become offensive etc.
I do not think that admin should stop posts INCASE hurtful feedback is recieved.IF hurtful feedback IS recieved they should contact those emailers and sort the issue out
I'd be grateful if someone from admin could perhaps comment and assure us that the situation of stopping posts for the above reason will not happen again.
All the best.
Hi Holeybones, yes I did get your message. I replied through the PM service here the very same day. I will re-send it now and email it as well. Would you mind getting back to me if you don't receive it?
I don't think there is anything wrong with women without secondaries "trying to hold on to every positive scrap of information, and every positive mind-game" as you put it Buckwheat. I had 5 years between my primary and secondary diagnoses and tried very hard to live my life without constantly worrying that the bc would return. Indeed I am pleased that I did do that. I try hard now with a secondary dx to live my life as fully as I am able and focus on the good things in it as much as I can rather than the bad. What I don't do is pretend that it won't kill me and that it isn't killing others - and that is what the overall tone of Pink October implies I believe.
There is almost a denial of the fact that bc still kills - and not just a few women but large large numbers. I don't think Joe Public is aware of that at all and I think sometimes some of the bc charities are close (intentionally or not) to adopting the view that widely publicising how many people still die of bc scares those with a primary dx too much and therefore they don't publicise that. Perhaps it is also linked in some way to being part of a "success" story - people with secondaries are considered the "failures" and stories of people "bravely overcoming" cancer seem to be what is considered most important.
I don't want to scare people unnecessarily but I get very very upset about the situation that so many women have to face day in, day out when they have secondaries and the huge impact it has on their lives and the lives of their family and friends - how can anyone begin to understand that and to offer support if Pink October trivialises in the way it does, what having a dx of bc can mean?
Getting the right message across is just as important as raising funds for research and treatment etc.
Your situation moves me to tears. I don't think you need to apologise to anyone for your opinions or how you express them. Every day I try to be positive, and it's much easier for me because I don't have secondaries or children to worry about. I so very much want to believe I will be 'all clear' when I finish tamoxifen in a couple of years that it's a phrase I cling to. But at the same time, I know the longer I live, the more time there is for secondaries to appear. That is the cruel irony of the improved treatments of the last few decades - they are succeeding in prolonging life for many women but not succeeding in preventing secondaries. An oncologist told me she now considers bc to be a chronic condition rather than a sure killer. But being chronic scares me so much I have to try not to think about it. I don't know how you cope - I think I would be a total wreck in your predicament.
Women without secondaries might not be ignorant but, like myself, might just be trying to hold on to every positive scrap of information, and every positive mind-game, because to be in constant anxiety about the potential negatives is just too debilitating.
I so admire your honesty and I hope you will keep expressing what you feel.
It seems quite a few of us are offended by the BCC arrangements with ASDA, so as it is all supposed to be for our benefit, is it not time that BCC collected view from anyone wishing to comment, in good time before October 2010?
I don't think it would be appropriate to display much more on open forums and would suggest that BCC prepare a questionnaire for people to complete and then there would be readily accessible data about the general consensus and suggestions for change.
So far, those with secondaries seem very upset with ASDA. Those without, are beginning to have a wider picture of the disease and to get a reality check about "all clear" that wasn't given to them previously. It isn't good news but surely better to be warned? How many will say they would have behaved differently / made different lifestyle choices/ financial arrangements if better informed?
I think that BCC is a lot more tolerant of open debate now than it used to be. It used to be the worst crime in the world to say anything that might upset people even if true! That is what drove me away from this site for so long.
Belinda, did you get my message? I haven't heard from you, so maybe it failed to get through?
I am sorry if I offended anyone. I am upset, angry, passionate and struggling!!
I too have lost a lot of people. Tragically my Mum at 31 from breast cancer. I was 12 and watched her change from a vibrant young mum. In a matter of months she grew tumours over her eyes, in her brain, spine and liver.She was wheelchair bound and died in pain.Our family broke down and this disease has haunted me all my life, right up to the time where i was misdiagnosed!!
When I was diagnosed at 33 you can imagine what i thought.I have a young daughter. I opted for a prophylactic double tram flap, which has left me scarred emotionally nd physically. My daughter is now 12 and i have secondaries. I am in a lot of pain and am having investigations because i think it has spread further.
I object wholeheartedly to KP, mainly because of her insensitive comments, which to me felt like a knife wound. I have NO other opinion about her and have NEVER used any derogatory terms.My friends and family are totally aghast that she was chosen in the first place, as are the great number of people that have joined the Facebook website
I have every right to object to 'tickled'like Belinda. It offends me, upsets me and trivialises something that has cursed my family. I live in fear for my daughter. She is now 12. Of course I want all the resaerch and investigations that are humanly possible, but NOT at any price.
This disease has already been relegated to the best cancer to have and its'nothing' nowadays is it!! Well it is when your dying and children are left motherless AGAIN. "Never mind my darling daughter, just buy some 'tickle me'tacky knickers and it will all be ok".
"Dont do another fundraiser husband, just go and buy some fluffy bunny ears and 'I have been tickled' t shirt, that will solve all our problems".
I have said I am sorry for the tone of my post and I am but not for what is said. I should not come on this site when I am so scared, frightened, hurt and upset BUT hey, isnt what it is there for????
I also do not want anyone to be censored and value debate. I was just upset.
My concern is the fact that BC charities have a massive role in raising awareness of breast cancer and its impact on women. The fact that huge amounts of money can be raised is obviously a good thing but, for me at least, not if it is at the cost of presenting BC as something that is no longer a killer. That is the image I think Pink October produces and that is why the way the money is raised is as important (if not more important) than the money itself.
Unfortunately the true nature of BC is that it is the cause of death for a huge number of women each year. For even more (and the figures of people with secondary bc cannot even be agreed) trying to live as "normal" a life as possible for as long as they can whilst dealing with secondary bc and the effects of continuing treatment, is not helped in any way by the Pink October image of BC.
There are too many people out there who believe that BC no longer kills (or kills only those who are diagnosed too late etc). When people in the public eye do die of it (like Wendy Richard) it is often not attributed to bc but to wherever the secondary cancer has developed - so Wendy Richard "didn't die of bc but of kidney cancer" (think it was her kidneys it had spread to but you get the idea). I seem to have spent a lot of the last 2 1/2 years since developing secondaries in my liver, explaining that to others as well as explaining that yes, I did take tamoxifen (and then arimidex and then megace and now exemestane). Yes I did have a mastectomy and chemo. Yes I did go for my checkups etc etc. Many many people just do not get it - and that makes it so much harder for me (and I suspect a lot of people with secondary bc) because lack of understanding really means they cannot offer the support that I (and my family) need.
Pink October and in particular Asda's "Tickled Pink" campaign, not only do nothing about raising awareness of the true nature of BC but actually in my view help promote the wrong image of BC. As someone said earlier in this thread, I think Debs and Cathy did more for that in those few moments on tv.
As Nicky says, please can we stick to the issues. I feel the issue here is that there is a very real difficulty in how to maximise the amount of money that can be raised whilst still promoting the real image of what having BC can mean.
For me Asda choosing Jordan for their campaign was only one of the factors of my disliking the Tickled Pink Campaign. I've disliked the campaign name for many years. I was diagnosed with secondaries in 2003 but I'm dying quite slowly compared to the majority with mets/secondaries. I've lost too many friends to be 'tickled' by cancer..but all of us here probably have be it our family, our friends or our work colleagues.
Surely there are many ways to raise much needed cash without resorting to the awful and insensitive 'Tickled' word. I would feel the same dislike for the word if it was 'Tickled' any other cancer.
Pink as such doesn't bother me. Would all cash seriously stop if we just dropped the darn 'Tickled' word?
Jordan is a soft porn star that's a fact. She was, in my opinion, the wrong choice for the campaign. Some of the original's posts comments were a little too personal (in my humble opinion) to start with but we are only human..we post when we are upset, when we are angry.
This is an open forum..yes very true.
Like all of us I have many more important things going on in my life than being overly concerned Jordan has been dropped as the face of the Tickled Pink campaign. And I would think Jordan has too. I'm not even sure why I'm posting this at all, I don't need any flak in my life right now just as none of us does but I think I understand Juliet's anger/passion/feelings, where she's coming from as a Mum and I just wanted to send her my love and my very best wishes. Belinda.x
As stated in previous posts I can't see what the problem is with the Tickled Pink Campaign. In its time it has raised £20 million for breast cancer treatment and care. Don't knock something that works. It has benefitted me and hopefully will help future generations. No I wasn't tickled pink when I was told I had a second primary breast cancer. However I am tickled pink in the knowledge that there are funding raising campaigns on going in order to tackle this awful disease and that we are not left to fight it with inferior treatments and surgery.
What has annoyed me with the the majority of posts is the fact that this thread started because of an insensitive comment made by KP. This was dealt with at the time and KP apologised. Why then on trawling through the threads since the apology do I find reference to her being a bimbo, barbie, a porn star. There are even comments about the fact she has withdrawn her monetary support - what can be expected when she has been referred to as a mere porn star or bimbo. Remember this is an open forum. Surely this response is as insensitive and immature as the original comment made on her reality tv programme. In my opinion and that of my friends and family the anti Tickled Pink and KP feeling has turned into a witch hunt.
Please can we stick to the issues rather than start to snipe at each other.? None of us can really understand each others experiences, but the issue of freedom to express our own views is fundamental to the forums. This thread has not been about attacking KP, but highlighting the real difficulties in raising awareness and money in an honest and respectful way.
Long may debate continue.
Totally agree with you, Cathy. I don't agree with Lindiloo on some points but do think her views need to be heard (even if the capital letters on the last post seem a bit offensive).
If this is an open forum then the moderators have no right to intervene just because a view seems to be in the minority. Lindiloo and the others have raised some very valid points which they have clearly thought about carefully before posting and have managed to put them across very eloquently. If I don't agree with them, that is my perogative to do so, but in no way would I want the moderators to stop them posting just to save me from being hurt. Despite having cancer, I am a grown up and we all need to see and read about others viewpoints, no matter how much we disagree with them,not just on this forum but in general, otherwise we will become an Orwelian state and no-one surely wants that?
It may be of interest for you to know that i have recieved many emails supporting my view from current AND former forum members who no longer use this site due to being shot down for dareing to express a different view.
IF you have read ALL my posts you will be awear that i have lost very close friends and family to cancer so please DO NOT patronise me, i have watched them die of this cruel desease i knows how it feels first hand, i have lived with it.
I am a carer,and I am at this moment careing for 2 terminaly ill patients both of whom share my views and applaud the people who give their precious time and money to fundraise for us.
You seem to have the view that primary cancer is less important and deserves less respect, i may very well die of this desease but i will STILL NOT throw back into the faces of the people that are out their doing their best at supporting this cancer.
This forum has approx 20-30 users according to log ins that doesnt represent a huge amount of views and possibly BCC see the hurtfull comments to the minority here who over the last 3 yrs i have been on this site have been knocked back, shot down, been treated harshly
for dareing to express an opinion.
I have remained polite and respectfull as have others who have commented on this thread ,i find your post both offensive and rude.
I shall remain on this site if only to stand up for the poor souls who cant have their say.
Thank you belinda for your comment i apprieciate it.
I've been very critical of BCC at times but Bertie has explained the situation, what happened and I for one fully accept his explanation without question.
Lindiloo I hope you will continue to post here.
To be honest there have not been many other points of view. Maybe 3 or 4that support yours.
It would be interesting to see how many of these people are at the Primary stage?? Secondary breast cancer, terminal cancer, the sort that people die of is still Breast Cancer too.
The consensus seems to be supportive of the ludicrous irony in having KP as a rep of a BCC charity.The crass and cruel nature of her thoughtless comments. Her petty and pathetic action in pulling her support. Also the irony of the fluffiness of 'tickled pink'.
Most of the posts accept pink October and the fundraising and awareness it brings.
Sadly your viewpoint would seem to be the minority on this site and maybe BCC recognises that your posts could be seen as hurtful to the majority of people on here.
Any lack of trust or respect that has been lost, is for Asda in choosing KP and people for objecting to her loss.
My respect for BCC has grown significantly since this issue, as i know it has for a lot of other people too.
Guess what , that is my opinion and it as valid as anyone elses!!
Hi Everyone, and thank you especialy to Cathy59 and some of the other posters for your feedback on this censorship issue.
Thank you also to Bertie for his reply ,although with respect, i still feel the issue in question has not been answered adaquately. .
Firstly you point out that there were various view points on the origional thread " correct me if im wrong but i cant find them "
I can find only 1 post that expressed a different view on the origional topic ,which i find very strange.
I understand that all new users posts are moderated for the first few times and rightly so, however from the comments expressed in this thread there were at least 2 user posts that didnt go live , and many more posters have since come forward expressing a different view on the KP/Tickled Pink issue so thank you to them for posting their comments.
Regarding the email from Admin to Kms whilst you admit that her post was "usefull" you felt that her post may be an "issue to have a different opinion from the majority of users" . Can you explain this comment please? who were BCC trying to protect here Kms or the anti Kp Campaign?? The email then went on to suggest that Kms made posts on other Topics instead which i find outragious!!! she deserved to have a voice on any topic she so choosed.
I feel very disheartend and frankly quite upset that BCC ultimeately decides whos and which posts will be allowed there was no terms and conditions broken here , and this is certainly not the actions of someone who is fully committed to supporting free and open debate.
I dont know how we move forward with this as i feel a certain degree of trust and respect has been lost here on the forums over this and im not sure at this point if i even want to remain a member of this site anymore.
Thanks to all who commented on this thread it has proved to be very interesting.
All the very best to you all
Totally agree with Cathy59 - if we cant say it here where can we say it. I think this whole episode has helped a lot of people vent frustration and feelings that they may not want to do elsewhere.
Once we start to say "sorry if I offend" then we eventually have a valuable site no longer in use.
We have let Geert Wilder into this country to show his provocative film and all we want to do is release emotions at the one place we feel we can.
Lets just get it into perspective and keep this site for exactly what we need - I know that it has been a place of information, advice and rare kindness from total strangers.
I thank everyone for contributing and supporting me and am not offended with anything that is written as I take it all as it is intended and offered.
Cathy - I agree with you 100%. I often have strong views and express them (albeit hopefully without offence) but if someone has 'fire in their belly' or feels passionate about a subject - and boy has this subject created plenty - then bring it on, even if it is a different opinion to mine. I don't care if people hold a different view and I hate the idea that someone's thoughts would be witheld so that they cannot express their thoughts along with everyone else.
Lots of love to all. Cathy x
I still think the choice by BCC and BCCampaign of KP was ill conceived, altho i do understand from ASDA's point of view, why she might be appropriate.
What I really don't understand is why on earth did BCC chose Jeffrey Archer - a convicted felon - to act as an auctioneer at the fashion show.
Sorry but some of the decision making is completely lost on me.
Esmeralda, Claire, yes me too..diagnosed with secondaries from the beginning in 2003. Hope you are responding well to any treatment. x
I am sorry to digress from the Jordan issue, but I am very concerned about the fact that the moderators wouldn't post KMS's previous comments. Having a thread that is "highly charged" is a good thing, isn't it, to encourage people to speak out? No matter how liberal or mild our comments may be, there will someone who will disagree with them - so what? Unless the comment is downright offensive or threatening, do we need to be policed and censored in order to keep the peace on the forum? I have been a member of the forums for some time and there have been comments on here that have made my blood boil but despite this I would never in a million years wish for those comments to be gagged or edited so they were less provoking. We are all adults, we all have different backgrounds, education, opinions, beliefs etc so of course there will be conflict, but that is part of the appeal of the forums as it makes me sit back and think about the other person's point of view. Finally, it seems that the habit of apologising in advance for one's posting in case it may upset someone is becoming more common. This is totally unecessary.
After being diagnosed immediately with secondary breast cancer, then being given loads of "helpful" leaflets by the BCN about dealing with primary breast cancer and now hearing the "it's the best to get" comments, I've sort of got used to the idea that many people who don't have this retched disease, or who haven't lost someone to it, like to try and see it through rose-tinted spectacles.
I don't feel "tickled" to have this disease but I gladly wear a pink ribbon to raise awareness. In my opinion the more BC is openly discussed the more information will work its way through those rose-tinted spectacles, it just takes time. If a pink ribbon causes one more person to become aware of BC then so be it.
My only concern about any Pink campaign is that the balance seems to tilt in favour of the lightheartedness side in order to raise money. I would like to see it better balanced with more information in the public domain about the reality of this disease.
Katie Price, I think, has done herself more harm with her original comments, along with her latest regarding her promised donation, than this whole debate will have done to deter people from supporting BC charities.
Just my thoughts and I hope I haven't offended anyone with them.
I think i must be the user you are referring to because my post didnt go live and admin were in private contact with me.
At that stage i was a new user and totally understand that you needed to read my first few posts before setting them live to,as you say,'prevent misuse of the forums'.
What i dont understand is,having read my post and seen that it didnt breach the terms and conditions and wasnt a misuse of the forum,why did it not then go live.Why did i recieve an email from admin saying
'Regarding your first post to the forums, although your post is useful, due to the highly charged feelings running in this thread at the moment, on this occasion we feel it may be an issue to have an opinion different from the majority of users and we'd rather you made posts on other topics at the moment, therefore we won't be setting this first post live. Please do feel free to join in other discussions throughout the forums.
I trust you understand our reasons for this.'
Why did i have to email admin and 'plead' the case for my post to go live.That didnt sound to me that admin were,as you say 'fully committed to supporting free and open debate,and we're happy to see lively and varied discussions.'
I'm sorry to labour the point but i really feel that its an importnat issue.
Yes I remember going through pretty much the same process as a newbie years ago..thanks Bertie for clarifying this.
Dear Forum Users,
During the Tickled Pink/Katie Price discussion there were many posts, with various view points. All posts were set live, but there was a delay with one, during which time we were in private contact with the user in question.
At no time do we censure content, unless it contravenes our terms and conditions, as is clearly stated here http://www.breastcancercare.org.uk/forum/terms-and-conditions-t20491.html
All new users are required to post a minimum of three times before they can be transferred to an un-moderated status. This is to prevent misuse of the forums such as companies e-marketing within the forum community.
We are fully committed to supporting free and open debate, and we’re happy to see lively and varied discussions taking place on many of the current threads.
With best wishes
Head of New Media
I think its important to be able to air everyone's views and I have difficulty with the notion of one of us having views that are more or less valid than other people's. Everyone on here has bc in their life and is dealing with it and that means we have a valid viewpoint, as far as I'm concerned.
Its important to me that we can all voice our comments freely - I thought thats what this forum was for, so that we can tell it how we see it.
I'm never going to be a fan of KP, but I do value what all the fundraising for bcc has brought us, including this forum.
My main point is that this illness is bad enough without any of us feeling that we can't speak freely on this forum.
How naïve I am. I thought this BCC site only censured 'live' comments if they were offensive.
I thought that this site was for us to air our views as long as they are not offensive.
Why are they not commenting on the comments about them on this thread?
Everyones point of view should be allowed , but this was not the case in the original thread , can i ask how some of you ladies would feel if your posts had not been allowed to air???? is this fair?? this is supposed to be an open forum . How many more posts were held back?? how can we have fair and balanced discussions if not all views are put forward ??
BCC/Mods/Bertie, I would be greatfull if you could please give us an answer as to why you thought it was nessessary to withhold posts of a different view on this topic.
I realy think this is an important issue and deserves a reply.
I could be that woman but our nearest asda is past the hospital in Truro.
My aim is to still be here in February when my youngest daughter and her husband give birth to my first grandson. Her daddy died when she was 4 so she already knows the pain of losing a parent to cancer. How cruel to lose your mum while pregnant with your first child.
I thought if you made a donation you could not ask for it back?
If I could get out of bed I would have a tea party and donate the money to the charity I will when I improve I promise.
For a moment I thought it was me you were disagreeing with. I dont think it is though??? Think we might have posted at the same time!
My comments were for KMS, Juliett66 your comments have come inbetween, you must be faster typist than me!
I have to say I disagree with you on a few points.
1. I do think that it would have been a great PR stunt for KP to have given the money that she said she would (and more), by way of an apology to the ladies she offended, in order to raise her much failing profile. She is desperate to get public sympathy in the light of her achrimonious divorce, hence the Piers Morgan interview etc and this would have shown her to be caring and compassionate, instead she is now viewed as spoilt child who spat her dummy out. The negative comments against will have been nothing that she hasn't read before in the tabloids, in fact they would have mild in comparison. As for the money being a huge amount to her - she is a multi-millionairess, this is probably about the cost of one of her horses.
2. I don't know about you, but what makes me reach for the phone on Children in Need night is the films of starving children in Africa, not seeing BBC broadcasters doing a drag double-act (much as I like that sort of thing), so I think getting Debs and Cathy on prime time tv will have done more for the cause than KPs tits anyway, so I really don't believe we have lost anything by complaining about the Ticked Pink campaign. I do, however, recognise the need to have a fun element to fundraising, else people won't be so keen to part with their money or time, that's just human nature so I wouldn't like that side of things to change, it just needs to be highlighted a bit more what the real issue behind the fluffiness is - i.e. people like myself with young children, trying to continue a normal life with secondary breast cancer, with all the horrible treatments and the inevitable untimely end to my life. We don't all survive this disease and if you are too light-hearted about BC I think people will forget this.
I agree the Pink brand should be kept because it is so well known, but the tickled should be replaced with something more meaningful, but i haven't any ideas what that word should be.
Can I just reply to the post about not being too sensitive, I have to say my friends wouldn't joke about the size of their boobs etc in front of me (I have none) just as a mark of respect because they care about my feelings, if the ball was on the other foot, I wouldn't do it to them either, i wouldn't consider myself a good friend if I did.
You are entitled to your viewpoint and we are entitled to ours. we all have reasons.
Picture the scene:- you know you have months to live, you are in unbearable pain, you have lost your hair, bloated from drugs and have weeping open breast secondaries that have burst through the skin.You are drugged up to the eyes balls and are living on liquid drinks.
You should be in the hospice, but you are trying to be normal for your children. Someone wheels you into a shopping centre.
A group of young, well meaning women, with bra's outside their t shirts and pink bunny ears shake a poster at you.They are dressed all in pink and are screaming cheerily.
'C'mon, be tickled pink, c'mon its for us women'!!
How do you answer? Do you just give some money and move quickly past?
Yes of course you do. You would not want to scare or frighten people. Let them be pink and fluffy but wouldn't some realism help?
That woman is not me, but it could be in days , weeks or months.
For goodness sake cant you let us have our point of view aswell.
Most people who have commented have little objection to pink the colour and any awareness it brings.
But KP and tacky rubbish???? How many times??????????????????
I have re-read all the posts in this thread and the other threads concerning the Asda/KP etc etc business.
It seems that there are three general issues being highlighted
1.the use of KP as a representative for a breast cancer campaign
2.the specific name 'tickled pink'
3.the 'pink'issue in general
As for KP,well,that issue is really sorted out now.She has been removed from the campaign and taken her money with her.As a few other people have already said, we cant be suprised that she withdrew her money.I dont think you can expect someone to read the numerous negative comments about who she is,what she does,the inappropriateness of using her in the campaign ,and still expect her to be willing to give the money.I personally dont think this reflects her commitment to the charity at all,i actually dont blame her!I also dont see why some people are critisizing the amount of money she was going to donate.Just because she earns a lot doesn't mean she HAS to give loads.She donates to other charities aswell.I think £16,000-£30,000 IS a lot of money.This could have paid for a macmillan nurse for a year,or a research nurse for a year.I'm not sure how much Herceptin treatment is but i thinks its around £30,000 so i'm afraid i DO think its a great loss.
I still agree that she was not the best choice of representative but she does appeal to a certain section of the public.Her comments during filming were totally inappropriate but i'm afraid i think the susbsequesnt uproar was out of proportion to the incident itself.I am WELL aware that practically no-one will agree with me but i'm just expressing my opinion.The one good thing i think came out of it all is the fact that we can now have more input into the 'tickled pink' campaign.
As for the name 'tickled pink'.Well as i said in my other post.I dont have a problem with it at all.I think we are underestimating the intelligence of the general public if we assume that just because the campaign is called 'tickled pink' and sells pink fluffy products then people must think the disease itself is 'pink and fluffy'.I think the majority of the general public will have been affected in some way (friends ,relative,colleagues) by some form of cancer during their lives so i doubt there will be many people who think that breast cancer or any other form of cancer is trivial.Having said that,I am not aware of exactly what sort of breast cancer information comes with Asdas pink products, but maybe this does need to be more hard hitting and maybe this could be in the form of real experiences and pictures of those with breast cancer.I for one have no problem with having a photoshoot of my one boob and bald head if this raises awareness.I know a few other women said,on the other thread,that they would be happy to do that.Perhaps it is also time that Male breast cancer was highlighted.Perhaps they could include some 'blue' products for men.
As for the 'pink' issue in general,there were comments in the previous thread about people wishing to change the colour.I personally think this would be incredibly damaging to breast cancer fundraising if this was changed.As others have said this is widely recognised as the colour of breast cancer fundraising and,i think,would cause great confusion and probable loss of donations if this were changed.Again,i personally dont link the colour pink with meaning that the disease itself is 'pink and cheery' and i would have thought most of the public dont either.
Well,just my thoughts and opinions.I know not everyone thinks this way but i wanted to put my points forward.
Just a quickie. I think, picking up on one of the points in Hilsey's post, I think that people are fine with humour being used - just not humour associated with BREASTS!! Yes, I for one absolutely detest the t-shirts with pink bras painted on them (and have said before, how would we create a lighthearted response to, say, testicular cancer - a humerous pair of testicles painted on shorts ... don't think so!! Also, Comic Relief and Children in Need do use humour and this is acceptable. It's acceptable because they're not cracking jokes or being lighthearted around issues about abused or underpriviledged children or people starving in the world, that would be totally unacceptable but, as I've said before, it seems that because breasts have a 'comedy' element, we should extend this to breast cancer fund raising and just laugh along .... not so funny for those who no longer have breasts or face losing them or losing their lives. Other than that, yes, bring on the humour, god knows we could use some ... and funds!
I have just read through this blog and while I can understand that we don’t want BC to be trivialised we also have to recognise that in order to raise funds and public awareness there has to be an element of public appeal. I totally agree that KP was a poor choice to front ASDA’s tickled pink campaign – her remarks were unforgivable and showed her true interests in the campaign – namely forwarding the career of KP!
As for the campaign name ‘Tickled Pink’, well it does get recognised. Having asked around my friends and work colleagues it is a sad fact but they are more likely to be drawn towards something with a light hearted name than something more heavyweight which would more likely cause them to shy away (head in the sand syndrome). ? What I have found that most people do object to though is the amount of money ASDA takes for the items sold in relation to the money that goes to BC charity. Many are not aware of this as they don’t actually take the time to read the info and just assume that a larger proportion is going to support BC charity. We use Comic Relief to raise funds for those in need and I haven’t heard any complaints about that. Should we be upset about the decorated bras adorned for the Walk the Walk events around the world?
Concerning the use of ‘pink’ in general, well when I was last undergoing treatment I organised a Pink disco, created and sold a Pink cocktail, had a Pink carwash, a Pink auction and a Pink funday. The fact that it was all advertised as ‘Pink’ meant that everyone immediately knew what the cause was and I am sure that it increased the level of support that the events received as many of those attending had experienced BC either personally or through friends and family. These events raised a considerable amount of money for Breast Cancer Care.
Do while I agree that BC is not a trivial matter and, no I don’t feel particularly ‘Tickled’ about the impact that it is having on my life for a second time, from a purely commercial/fundraising point of view I can appreciate why the campaigns have taken the route that they have. So many families have been affected by BC now and are aware of the impact that it has on both those going through BC and those around them that I am sure they don't think of it as a trivial matter at all.
A couple of years ago an oncology professor told me that if he had to pick a BC charity it would be Breakthrough, but he wouldn't give me the reasons for choosing that one; I suppose it's personal choice. I've often wondered why we have to have so many, but this one seems to be the one BC nurses give you the info sheets for - they do at my clinic anyway and I was given a couple by my oncologist. However, for general cancer stuff I used Cancer Research (good for the side effects related to secondaries) and I also found Cancer Backup invaluable for the info on chemo drugs. They have now become part of Macmillan. My late dad always donated regularly to both of those and so do I.
With all of the pink campaigns, personally I think this is something we have imported from America with all the ribbons (didn't the ribbon thing start with AIDS back in the 80s?). I'd like to see something a bit more original that doesn't make BC appear so trivial in the media. Sorry to all the hardworking fundraisers at my local ASDA, but Tickled Pink? I don't think so, ask anyone with BC if they are feeling that way. I hated pink before I was diagnosed and even more so now.
I agree with Daphne's comments. If there was one breast cancer charity (just had to go and google Tesco's charity of choice - Against Breast Cancer) surely money raised would be better spent. I am sure much of the effort and resources are replicated when split several different ways.
Apologies for deviating somewhat from the thread, but it's never been satisfactorily answered why we have UK Breast Cancer Charities (notably Breast Cancer Care and Breakthrough Breast Cancer) competing against each other for funding throughout the year, particularly in October.
If we had just one major Breast Cancer Charity with several departments providing emotional support, information and research, we might see a more considered, thoughtful and tasteful approach to fundraising that would be less likely to offend people. And better value for the money raised.
I have read all the comments and i respect other peoples points of view. My discomfort with the Tickled pink campaign is that i feel it trivialises breast cancer. You may call me naive or ill informed but a year ago when i discovered a lump, i thought because i went to the doctors promptly, it would be a simple matter of a lumpectomy. How wrong i was, mastectomy, chemo, rads and living with the fact that 19/24 lymph nodes were infected. (It had been growing insidiously for a while) I do not think i am the only person on here who believed that. We are all led to believe that.
Yes, breast cancer is no longer spoke of in hushed tones as it was when my mother had it in 1987 but how many of you have had comments along the line 'its the best cancer to get isnt it?' said to you.
Just to put Katie Price's donation of £16000 into context- that is n't even £1 for each woman who is diagnosed each year with breast cancer. My car which is 3 years old that I have to have to be able to do my job (and that I'm still paying for) cost me £13000. I'm not impressed by Katie Price's donation or her attitude to give her money to another charity- presumably one that will allow her to promote herself and fawn all over her in the process. She appears more interested in salving her own ego than in genuinely helping other people. Like any other porn star, she has got where she is by one means- selling herself and everything associated with her, including her children. I looked at the Asda site today. Commonly £1-2 from their TP sales goes to BC Care with the remaining £4-6 pounds going straight to Asda as profit. If I want to give £6 (or whatever) to any cancer charity, I will give the whole amount to the charity rather than allow someone in the middle to take thier cut. I'm not "politically correct" but I do object to someone trivialisiing a life threatening disease and I do object to any type of cancer being fronted by a porn star. In my view being politically correct is allowing people like KP to call themselves "glamour models" when they really make thier living through what used to be known as soft porn.I wrote to Asda to ask them why they call their mastectomy bras "post surgery" bras, a name that causes confusion, evidenced by a work colleague who thought they were for people who had had a cosmetic "boob" job. Is this confusion because of the Katie Price link? Who knows. Again, I feel thier choice of name for this bra triviliases BC surgery and Asda need to review their approcah. I'm not ashamed or embarressed by my surgery so why should it be dressed up as somehting else?