If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Huffington Post)   Porn website offers to donate 1 cent for every 30 views of videos in "Big Tits" and "Small Tits" categories. Asinine: Susan G. Komen Foundation will not accept the donations (link SFW)   (huffingtonpost.com) divider line 155
    More: Asinine, Susan G. Komen, Breast Cancer Awareness Month, porn sites, breast cancer screening, raising awareness, Bree Olson, Marie Claire, percent higher  
•       •       •

9902 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Oct 2012 at 1:54 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



155 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-06 04:27:13 PM

dexaline: mentula: good, they shouldn't accept money generated by a cheap patronizing stunt

Right. Because cancer cares a lot about the moral high ground.


Like many things, the deal started out fine.
Then money and politics kidnapped it, enslaved it, and now you have it.

The list of examples is rather long.
 
2012-10-06 04:29:31 PM

Cpl.D: This is because the Susan G Komer's foundation's focus is not breast cancer research. It is politics. Breast cancer research is merely the vehicle they use to bring politics into play. This is what makes them particularly despicable in my opinion.


So they basically they occupy the same circle of hell as PETA, MADD, and Jesse Jackson.
 
2012-10-06 04:30:00 PM
Yup, I am not a fan of this particular charity, and there are plenty of others that actually spend a much higher percentage of their money to actually research cures rather than paying themselves, paying to protect themselves and paying to promote themselves.

And yes, there are plenty of other forms of cancer that require more research. Why not lung cancer, which is the #1 mortal cancer in Canada? How about Colorectal cancer, which is not gender specific at all, and kills almost as many. I mean, prostate and breast cancer deaths together equal about the same number as colorectal cancer. It's just that it's now cool to wear pink (even as a guy) to show you care. Why don't we care about men's prostates? Or everybody's colon?

IMO that's the big success of Susan G. Komen - lots of awareness. Sadly, not lots of money.

And yes, while we are at the awareness part, how about a campaign about when to get yer butt to the doctor for a checkup?
 
2012-10-06 04:33:44 PM
I agree that Breast Cancer Awareness Month has gotten totally out of control. My mom and my grandma are both breast cancer survivors, and they asked me to wear pink every day this month with them. I think it's kind of silly and it accomplishes nothing, but hey, they're the ones who puked through chemo and got their funbag(s) chopped off. I'll do what they ask me to do.

I don't give money to Komen, but I do volunteer my time and make occasional donations to a local hospital with a very good breast health program.

/glad my mommy and grandma are all better now
//but seriously, they both need to stop buying pink shiat
 
2012-10-06 04:41:01 PM

xen0blue: bulldg4life: xen0blue: he said it was entirely a non-political event until the media decided to interpret it as such

They brought in a far right-wing conservative that failed in a bid to become Georgia's governor. The person had already made an effort to defund PP through the political process and was a very outspoken critic of abortion.

The idea of creating ridiculous rules about organizations under investigation (PP being the victim of a congressional witch hunt) was purely political. And, during this time, they continued to support PSU despite the federal investigations. It was 100% political. It was an "abortion is evil" crusade led by Karen Handel.

Of course, if Susan G. Komen hired a devout anti-abortion activist as their senior vice-president of public policy and didn't expect her to make up a bullshiat reason to stop funding Planned Parenthood, then maybe they are stupider than I thought.

Yes, they did hire a conservative for president but she had nothing to do with defunding planned parenthood. There was a rule they put on the books to temporarily defund any organization under investigation by the government, and PP just happened to be one of them. The president was an oh-so-convenient scapegoat.

But you obviously know more than someone who worked there.


Yeah, a "general rule" that somehow applied to just one organization that was under a right wing instigated witch hunt.
 
2012-10-06 04:41:59 PM
I just want NFL players to stop dragging out the pink thing. Must one game guys... just one please.
 
2012-10-06 04:48:58 PM

Howie Spankowitz: Fear_and_Loathing: Howie Spankowitz: I tell charities all the time that there is such a thing as "bad" money.

I worked for non-profits for 30 years.  Unfortunately, most don't understand the concept of bad money and also mistakenly believe there is free money.
 
I have lots of stories, but none of them are "CSB".  Sadly.

Exactly. Especially when you decide to accept corporate money. Corporations don't do philanthropy. They'll use the language of philanthropy, but what they do is marketing, and if you accept their money, you better know how to negotiate a gift agreement and understand the value of your charity's brand or the relationship will be imbalanced and...well, let's just say I could tell you some horror stories.


My non-profit only takes individual donations (and some trusts if set up by individuals/couples) for that reason.

We still got screwed bc another group working with us on legislation belatedly disclosed they had taken money from the industry the legislation was about. We independently decided to take the moderate road with legislation (as opposed to the two other camps of "wild wild west no regulation" and "ban it all"), but that automatically made us look suspect too, when in reality, we picked the middle ground because it was the most realistic.

Stupid, sucks for the budget sometimes, but at least it keeps us more honest. I guess. I don't doubt that the large donors get their voice heard a little more than others, but there's no one huge company/party/donor that could pull money from us and really affect us.

/shrug
 
2012-10-06 04:51:47 PM

Howie Spankowitz: Charities aren't obligated


Didn't we already establish that Komen isn't a charity and very probably never has been? Yes? Good. Then this doesn't apply to them.

Howie Spankowitz: CSB time: When I was with the United Way, a wealthy gentleman offered us the largest individual gift we'd ever had, with one major restriction: we had to ensure that not a single dime was used to provide any services to illegal immigrants. We could have rationalized a way to fund things that were less likely to serve illegal immigrants, but it would have set a horrible precedent.


Not seeing the relation. Pornhub.com isn't insisting that a portion of the donation not be spent on small boobed women. Indeed they've very much suggested otherwise.

As for Komen, apparently their mission of late is to find the pinkest way to self destruct, and that seems to be working out nicely for them in this latest move.
 
2012-10-06 05:04:17 PM

E_Henry_Thripshaws_Disease: Yes, 34D is considered tiny these days. You're right.

will you have be my babies mommy?


FTFY

/ and why do we all hate komen?
// honest question
 
2012-10-06 05:04:26 PM

snocone: Money is fungible, you santctimonious asshats.

Unlike boobies.


Money is fungible, boobies are fun-to-jiggle.
 
2012-10-06 05:06:32 PM

thisiszombocom: / and why do we all hate komen?
// honest question


Old news honest answer.
 
2012-10-06 05:18:21 PM

germ78: You know, there are many other breast cancer awareness charities than SGK:FTC...

/wish they would cure cancer already, so cancer cure charities could go the way of the dinosaur


dingdingdingdingding! there's something few bring up and little is written on. how many cancer charities there are, how long they have been in existence, and how many billions of dollars have been churned.
 
2012-10-06 05:27:49 PM
Dear Susan G Komen asshats, IT'S NOT ABOUT YOU, IT NEVER WAS! GET THE fark OVER YOURSELVES AND WORK TO ERADICATE CANCER OR GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY AND LET SOMEBODY ELSE DO IT!
Thank you,
Everyone
 
2012-10-06 05:28:01 PM

jehovahs witness protection: Oh, and I am feeling better this week.


I'm glad to hear that. :-)
 
2012-10-06 05:31:58 PM

jehovahs witness protection: JesusJuice: Honest Bender: How about we just donate to regular cancer research? I think we can stop the multimillion dollar, paint everything pink, breast cancer "awareness" campaigns. We're all aware of it by now. Breast cancer is a thing. Can we stop treating it like it's the special snowflake of cancer?

A man is more likely to die from prostate cancer than a woman is from breast cancer, yet we have an entire month where I have to painstakingly avoid buying pink shiat because "OMG SAVE TEH TITTEHS".

Unfortunately you are 100% correct. My last two treatments made me feel so bad, I didn't even open the laptop for several days.
.


You open the laptop with your dick? You are THE man...

Seriously, glad you're feeling better. We may never agree on politics, but nobody deserves teh cancer.
 
2012-10-06 05:38:26 PM
Komen used to be good about this stuff- strip club fundraisers, etc. But they sacrificed themselves on the altar of Republican Jesustm a while ago.

Also, the pink ribbon stuff was originally the Breast Cancer Research Foundation's deal, but Komen swooped in and declared it was THEIRS, ALL THEIRS, and even tried suing the BCRF for using the thing the BCRF invented.

Day can't come soon enough for Komen to go under and BCRF or another decent charity get their assets.
 
2012-10-06 05:47:46 PM

FirstNationalBastard: Let's put it this way.... this is how bad the Komen stuff has become


I actually like the fact that men are promoting breast cancer awareness.
 
2012-10-06 05:49:39 PM
I'm fine with the Susan B. Komen Foundation not taking in money. I'd rather the money go toward a cure for cancer instead.
 
2012-10-06 05:50:17 PM

FunkOut: get your ass to the doctor pronto


Or more accurately get your doctor in your ass.
 
2012-10-06 05:55:07 PM

FunkOut: They nee to publicise "signs you might have bowel/ovary/prostate cancer, get your ass to the doctor pronto" more.


Or more accurately get your doctor in your ass.
 
2012-10-06 06:00:52 PM

MoronLessOff: Jon iz teh kewl: what the hell does pink lemonade have to do with breasts

[t0.gstatic.com image 160x174]
Melonade.


Actually Susan G. does sound like something teh cheat and Strongbad cooked up while dumping glow sticks in Homestarrunner's Mountain Dew.
 
2012-10-06 06:04:23 PM

PallMall: Susan G Komen Quick Stats (2010 IRS Form 990 - Filed 2011)

Gross Receipts: $258,876,878
Governing Members: 9
Independent Voting Members: 7
Employees: 280
Volunteers: 11,823

Revenue
Contributions and Grants: $174,658,160
Program Service Revenue: $34,417,471
Other Revenue: ($6,491,760)

Expenses
Public Awareness of a pink ribbon: $71,129,117
Grants to other "charitable organizations" (aka, other chapters, buddies, etc): $75,926,099
Health Treatment Grants: $9,142,812
Salaries, compensation, employee benefits: $22,675,770 (280 employees)

Did you lobby: YES

So, out of $250 mil, they paid out $9 million to actually treat breast cancer... which was actually to another organization who did the work.

They've got enough money, I'm not supporting them for shiat.


Not that I doubt you, but is this something you can LINK?
 
2012-10-06 06:05:41 PM

robohobo: Even worse if you're the oh, so evil white male.


So how bad am I if I am a Chaotic Neutral white male?
 
2012-10-06 06:10:42 PM

FunkOut: Of course, there's no such thing as medium tits, C cup and under are apparently considered a small niche market for men who are gay and/or secretly pedos. Or maybe it's D cup and under now that's considered small, I'm not up on the latest trends of breast size criticisms.


Now, now dear. Have your ever heard of the movie Resident Evil, perhaps the 5th element. A girl can get by with nice firm B cup.

/No names in the boobies threads
 
Zon
2012-10-06 06:10:43 PM

PallMall: Susan G Komen Quick Stats (2010 IRS Form 990 - Filed 2011)

Gross Receipts: $258,876,878
Governing Members: 9
Independent Voting Members: 7
Employees: 280
Volunteers: 11,823

Revenue
Contributions and Grants: $174,658,160
Program Service Revenue: $34,417,471
Other Revenue: ($6,491,760)

Expenses
Public Awareness of a pink ribbon: $71,129,117
Grants to other "charitable organizations" (aka, other chapters, buddies, etc): $75,926,099
Health Treatment Grants: $9,142,812
Salaries, compensation, employee benefits: $22,675,770 (280 employees)

Did you lobby: YES

So, out of $250 mil, they paid out $9 million to actually treat breast cancer... which was actually to another organization who did the work.

They've got enough money, I'm not supporting them for shiat.


Well, to be fair, it's likely actually about $22 out of $260 million, on modest assumptions and fuzzy math*. Still, that's pretty terrible, at ~8.4% efficiency.

*The math gets wonky because the indirect treatment expenditures through intra-organizational donations. Komen spent $9 of $180 million directly (5%), but some portion of $76m (which is 42% of the $180m) indirectly on treatment [or other legitimate aim, such as research]. We might assume those organizations are equally (in)efficient, but on that assumption there are substantial doubly-indirect treatment expenditures, and so on. Doing an infinite sum would be silly, given the assumptions and vagueness involved (let alone the possibility of intra-organizational donation loops). So, just the first few iterations:

$9m directly
$3.8m indirectly (5% of $76m)
$1.6m doubly-indirectly (42% of $76m is $32m, and 5% of that is $1.6m)
$.65m triply-indirectly (42% of $32m is $13m, and 5% of that is $.65m)

Since these are rough anyway, let's just call it $15m out of that $180m. That's 8.33% efficiency. They still have $80m unspent (well, presumably that's why their expenditures are $80m less than their revenue), and if applied at the same ratio would yield an additional $6.666m in treatment. That is, it will be about $21.7m out of the $260m.
 
2012-10-06 06:14:34 PM

Zon: Well, to be fair, it's likely actually about $22 out of $260 million, on modest assumptions and fuzzy math*. Still, that's pretty terrible, at ~8.4% efficiency.

*The math gets wonky because the indirect treatment expenditures through intra-organizational donations. Komen spent $9 of $180 million directly (5%), but some portion of $76m (which is 42% of the $180m) indirectly on treatment [or other legitimate aim, such as research]. We might assume those organizations are equally (in)efficient, but on that assumption there are substantial doubly-indirect treatment expenditures, and so on. Doing an infinite sum would be silly, given the assumptions and vagueness involved (let alone the possibility of intra-organizational donation loops). So, just the first few iterations:

$9m directly
$3.8m indirectly (5% of $76m)
$1.6m doubly-indirectly (42% of $76m is $32m, and 5% of that is $1.6m)
$.65m triply-indirectly (42% of $32m is $13m, and 5% of that is $.65m)

Since these are rough anyway, let's just call it $15m out of that $180m. That's 8.33% efficiency. They still have $80m unspent (well, presumably that's why their expenditures are $80m less than their revenue), and if applied at the same ratio would yield ...


ytrewq.com
 
Zon
2012-10-06 06:17:56 PM

Zon: PallMall: Susan G Komen Quick Stats (2010 IRS Form 990 - Filed 2011)
...
...


I should also note, it is somewhat doubtful that the organizations Komen donates to are equally bad. I don't care enough to research further (since I won't donate to them anyway), but some of those charitable organizations you characterize as "other chapters, buddies, etc" might be legitimate, for all I know. In particular, do you know if any of them conduct medical research themselves?
 
2012-10-06 06:23:53 PM

Zon: Zon: PallMall: Susan G Komen Quick Stats (2010 IRS Form 990 - Filed 2011)
...
...

I should also note, it is somewhat doubtful that the organizations Komen donates to are equally bad. I don't care enough to research further (since I won't donate to them anyway), but some of those charitable organizations you characterize as "other chapters, buddies, etc" might be legitimate, for all I know. In particular, do you know if any of them conduct medical research themselves?


Unfortunately, "Charities" like the Komen Foundation aren't required to report every details of their business. The 990 is the only info you can really get without digging to hard.

You're obviously some sort of shill for them, because you'll spend so much time going through details, then defend them from multiple angles.

Just like most other large charities.. the original focus is lost once the money starts coming in.

Now, fark off.
 
2012-10-06 06:41:30 PM

NewportBarGuy: Pornhub.com to donate 1 cent for every 30 views of videos in "Big Tits" and "Small Tits" caregories.

That could be several billion dollars!


Not quite, but several thousand is a distinct possibility. Too bad Komen is apparently too good for boobie money.
 
2012-10-06 06:51:15 PM
Fortunately, the iron_city_ap foundation for breast viewing is gladly accepting any/all donations.
 
2012-10-06 06:53:42 PM
I think we're all aware of breast cancer at this point. Now, we should actually do something about it.
 
Zon
2012-10-06 07:13:40 PM

PallMall: Zon: Zon: PallMall: Susan G Komen Quick Stats (2010 IRS Form 990 - Filed 2011)
...
...

I should also note, it is somewhat doubtful that the organizations Komen donates to are equally bad. I don't care enough to research further (since I won't donate to them anyway), but some of those charitable organizations you characterize as "other chapters, buddies, etc" might be legitimate, for all I know. In particular, do you know if any of them conduct medical research themselves?

Unfortunately, "Charities" like the Komen Foundation aren't required to report every details of their business. The 990 is the only info you can really get without digging to hard.

You're obviously some sort of shill for them, because you'll spend so much time going through details, then defend them from multiple angles.

Just like most other large charities.. the original focus is lost once the money starts coming in.

Now, fark off.


LOLWUT?

My "defense" of them was merely pointing out that they aren't quite as terrible as you said they were (at 8.4% rather than 3.5% efficiency), and indicating some relevant uncertainties. I don't understand how you extrapolate that I'm some kind of shill out of that, especially when I explicitly said 1) that the 8.4% efficiency is still terrible, and 2) that I won't donate to them.

I guess we just differ in that I prefer my opinions to be based on reality.
 
2012-10-06 07:23:55 PM

Zon: LOLWUT?

My "defense" of them was merely pointing out that they aren't quite as terrible as you said they were (at 8.4% rather than 3.5% efficiency), and indicating some relevant uncertainties. I don't understand how you extrapolate that I'm some kind of shill out of that, especially when I explicitly said 1) that the 8.4% efficiency is still terrible, and 2) that I won't donate to them.

I guess we just differ in that I prefer my opinions to be based on reality.


So Jeff Dahmer isn't quite as terrible as I saw because he only killed 17 before he got caught instead of 20.

Bad is bad... Komen is a shiat company extorting the public will to aid those in need.

Don't be a knave.
 
Zon
2012-10-06 07:56:45 PM

PallMall: Zon: LOLWUT?

My "defense" of them was merely pointing out that they aren't quite as terrible as you said they were (at 8.4% rather than 3.5% efficiency), and indicating some relevant uncertainties. I don't understand how you extrapolate that I'm some kind of shill out of that, especially when I explicitly said 1) that the 8.4% efficiency is still terrible, and 2) that I won't donate to them.

I guess we just differ in that I prefer my opinions to be based on reality.

So Jeff Dahmer isn't quite as terrible as I saw because he only killed 17 before he got caught instead of 20.

Bad is bad... Komen is a shiat company extorting the public will to aid those in need.

Don't be a knave.


Well, no. It is true that 17 murders is not quite as terrible as 20 murders (taking a simplistic model of life valuation, which makes sense since this is hypothetical). But, so far as evaluating serial murderers is concerned, the number has more to do with how long they manage to get away with it than how terrible they are. The primary thing that makes them terrible is their desire and willingness to kill people, and that can be equal despite different numbers of murders.

But, when it comes to evaluating charitable organizations, the primary consideration is their efficiency. So, differences in that number do matter. 3.5% and 8.4% are both terrible, but that is a substantial difference.

I don't see why you're having some much trouble with this. If you want to convince people not to donate to Komen, you might as well use numbers that reflect reality.

/BTW, I assume that even you would admit that what Komen does is not nearly as bad as what Dahmer did, so you had better well abandon your "bad is bad" criteria. Your binary thinking is plainly absurd.
 
2012-10-06 08:23:11 PM
I bet you if you stopped eating a bunch of junky ass American growth hormone cows and genetically modified corn you probably wouldn't get breast cancer. Pink frosted cupcakes and cookies, the irony!
 
2012-10-06 08:34:01 PM
If Pornhub's service runs counter the organization's ideals and philosophy why should they accept the money? Would the NAACP accept donations from the KKK? Who knows, but I don't think too many people would blame them for turning it down.
 
2012-10-06 09:15:48 PM
Shouldn't we all be looking at pictures of Boobies so that we can zoom in on them and look for lumps?
 
2012-10-06 09:22:57 PM

Vodka Zombie: Of course they won't. Haven't we learned that Komen is kind of the Phelps Family of breast cancer? They just exist to sue people and be political trolls.


This. Susan G. Komen isn't about breast cancer - that's almost secondary these days. It's about marketing. "Pinkwashing", as term, was invented solely to describe them.

Only 21% of their total budget goes towards supporting breast cancer research.

If you want to support breast cancer research, there are smaller charities that are actually focused on breast cancer research, not allowing other companies to exploit the disease to turn a profit. Don't buy a product that promises to donate "a portion of their proceeds" - hell, for American Express, that "portion" was exactly one penny per transaction, no matter the size of the transaction. Komen gets a bit of cash from the company in exchange for the rights to use them to market products, the company gets more money from well-meaning consumers, and the folks who are actually suffering suffer a bit more because four-fifths of what could be a donation gets turned instead into the pocket-lining of both Komen and companies.
 
2012-10-06 09:59:56 PM

Elzar: Donating to breast cancer research is admirable, but methinks this is just a publicity stunt for pornhub. I'll wait for them to donate to animal shelters for all the kittens that go missing everyday.

/ also tubegalore/tubestack are much better porn aggregators


Ok, let's assume for the sake of argument that the guy running the site has zero interest in helping anyone, and is doing this purely because he thinks he'll get more traffic by that method than spending a comparable portion of his profits on advertising. So... it's purely an ad/PR campaign - 100% selfish motives.

Who cares? It's legitimately earned money, and helps people all the same, regardless of where it came from. See also: Billionaires donating for a tax writeoff - equally selfish, but why would you reject it?
 
2012-10-06 10:27:36 PM
This is a test of the Cameron Diaz cleavage broadcasting network.

This is only a test.

img528.imageshack.us 

We now return you to your regularly scheduled programming.
 
2012-10-06 11:47:49 PM
tits are connected to farking PEOPLE. superficial bullshiat like "save the ta-tas" is what leads to misogynistic shiat like this, where we grieve so much for lost ~titties~ and the grief that causes us as men or what the fark ever.

good on komen imo
 
2012-10-07 01:01:27 AM

xen0blue: bulldg4life: xen0blue: he said it was entirely a non-political event until the media decided to interpret it as such

They brought in a far right-wing conservative that failed in a bid to become Georgia's governor. The person had already made an effort to defund PP through the political process and was a very outspoken critic of abortion.

The idea of creating ridiculous rules about organizations under investigation (PP being the victim of a congressional witch hunt) was purely political. And, during this time, they continued to support PSU despite the federal investigations. It was 100% political. It was an "abortion is evil" crusade led by Karen Handel.

Of course, if Susan G. Komen hired a devout anti-abortion activist as their senior vice-president of public policy and didn't expect her to make up a bullshiat reason to stop funding Planned Parenthood, then maybe they are stupider than I thought.

Yes, they did hire a conservative for president but she had nothing to do with defunding planned parenthood. There was a rule they put on the books to temporarily defund any organization under investigation by the government, and PP just happened to be one of them. The president was an oh-so-convenient scapegoat.

But you obviously know more than someone who worked there.


Respectfully, your friend who works there has either swallowed Komen management's BS story, or is trying to add to Komen's public spin.

a) The rule was instituted by someone with a public record of attempting to defund planned parenthood.
b) Insiders - your accountant friend aside - state that the rule was designed to single out planned parenthood.
c) PP was not - as you suggest - one of several groups effected by the rule. The rule effected a single organization; PP, just as it was designed to.

There is more than ample evidence, both direct and circumstantial, to suggest that Komen sought to cut themselves off from PP for political reasons.

http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/02/top-susan-g-komen-o f ficial-resigned-over-planned-parenthood-cave-in/252405/
http://jezebel.com/5881642/meet-the-komen-exec-behind-the-planned-par e nthood-defunding
 
2012-10-07 01:10:17 AM

FreetardoRivera: Howie Spankowitz: I can't stand Komen, but as a nonprofit professional for the past 25 years, I can tell you it's not asinine at all that they wouldn't accept this donation. Charities aren't obligated to accept money that doesn't come from sources aligned with their values or that might attach their brand to things that their other supporters might find unsavory. I tell charities all the time that there is such a thing as "bad" money.

CSB time: When I was with the United Way, a wealthy gentleman offered us the largest individual gift we'd ever had, with one major restriction: we had to ensure that not a single dime was used to provide any services to illegal immigrants. We could have rationalized a way to fund things that were less likely to serve illegal immigrants, but it would have set a horrible precedent. Wee turned it down. "Bad" money.

/end CSB

One of these things is not like the others,

One of these things just doesn't belong,

Can you tell which thing is not like the others

By the time I finish my song?


Oh! Oh! Oh! Mr. Kotter!!!
 
2012-10-07 01:27:52 AM

PallMall: Susan G Komen Quick Stats (2010 IRS Form 990 - Filed 2011)

Gross Receipts: $258,876,878
Governing Members: 9
Independent Voting Members: 7
Employees: 280
Volunteers: 11,823

Revenue
Contributions and Grants: $174,658,160
Program Service Revenue: $34,417,471
Other Revenue: ($6,491,760)

Expenses
Public Awareness of a pink ribbon: $71,129,117
Grants to other "charitable organizations" (aka, other chapters, buddies, etc): $75,926,099
Health Treatment Grants: $9,142,812
Salaries, compensation, employee benefits: $22,675,770 (280 employees)

Did you lobby: YES

So, out of $250 mil, they paid out $9 million to actually treat breast cancer... which was actually to another organization who did the work.

They've got enough money, I'm not supporting them for shiat.


Wow. Just wow.
 
2012-10-07 01:43:33 AM
There are other charities in that category. F*ck the Komen Foundation.
 
2012-10-07 01:43:56 AM

Willas Tyrell:
(snip)
Respectfully,
(snip) ...


You're new here, aren't you? lol
 
2012-10-07 03:52:19 AM
Who the fark gives money to Susan G Komen anymore anyway?
 
2012-10-07 06:55:29 AM

save russian jews: tits are connected to farking PEOPLE. superficial bullshiat like "save the ta-tas" is what leads to misogynistic shiat like this, where we grieve so much for lost ~titties~ and the grief that causes us as men or what the fark ever.


Sounds like you're just bitter that men aren't as attracted to you as they are to other women. You should try and accept your short-comings and stop projecting your insecurities on others.
 
2012-10-07 07:27:13 AM
I've worked for a couple of places that did sales donation stuff for Komen. M&M Mars, for instance, had a partnership for a while.

In all that time, I could never figure out exactly what that meant to donate to them. Like, where does that money really go? If you were to believe the talk on it, throwing another million at research will make the scientists work faster to cure the disease. Which, clearly is nonsense. (Although, I think that's what people really think)

And after reading this this thread, I see there are even stronger opinions than mine. My eyes have been opened a bit.

//And they are looking at boobs.
//Especially my wife's. They're spectacular.
 
2012-10-07 10:38:03 AM

NewportBarGuy: Pornhub.com to donate 1 cent for every 30 views of videos in "Big Tits" and "Small Tits" caregories.

That could be several billion dollars!


If the $$$ gets big enough,they'll cave.
 
Displayed 50 of 155 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report