(Source: kitty-en-classe, via getouttaqueer)
(Source: kitty-en-classe, via getouttaqueer)
(Source: duffff, via berningers)
(via quote-book)
(Source: chippedcupofchai, via avatar-winchester)
Brought out into the open: Angelina Jolie, Breast Cancer, and Health Care for All
The discussion about breast cancer and its causes—and the health care industry’s failures—needs to be brought out of the shadows, writes .
ANGELINA JOLIE’S recent announcement, via an op-ed article in the New York Times, that she underwent a preventative double mastectomy has received no shortage of commentary. Unfortunately, some, including on the left, found this an appropriate opportunity to make derisive sexist jokes at her expense.
Most people, however, applauded Jolie’s bravery in making public what must have been an agonizing decision. For the millions of women and their families, my own included, who have dealt with breast cancer and mastectomy, Jolie helped to bring the experience out in the open and challenged the notion that losing your breasts somehow makes you less of a woman.
Jolie’s piece also created an opportunity for a much-needed public discussion about the tragic lack of access to life-saving medical testing and treatment for too many. The test for BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutations—the presence of which have been shown to greatly increase the risk of breast cancer—costs upwards of $3,000.
What Jolie did not mention was why it costs so much. The company that administers the tests, Myriad Genetics, holds a patent on BRCA1/BRCA2, which gives them exclusive rights to conduct the test, even though other institutions are able to offer superior tests at a fraction of the price. In a grotesque illustration of upside-down priorities, Myriad Genetics’ share price rose 4 percent after Angelina Jolie announced her mastectomy surgery.
As Ellen Matloff, director of genetic counseling at the Yale Cancer Center and a plaintiff in a lawsuit against Myriad Genetics, put it: “You shouldn’t be able to patent a gene…This is patenting genes that we’re all born with. The technology for testing those genes, which is sequencing, was already available.”
Matloff has been joined by a coalition of women’s health groups, patients, researchers, genetic counselors and scientific organizations representing more than 150,000 geneticists, pathologists and laboratory professionals in challenging Myriad Genetics and the legality of gene patents in general.
The case is currently before the U.S. Supreme Court, and a decision is expected this summer. While it may not have been her intention, Jolie’s New York Times article came out at a perfect time to raise awareness about this lawsuit and mobilize popular pressure on the Supreme Court to rule on the side of public health, not corporate profit.
(Source: socialismartnature)
(via arichandrasana)
(Source: danielodowd, via idfca)
coco chanel was a nazi
i say this with no hyperbole whatsoever
she literally worked for the nazis and benefitted from jewish shareholders in chanel being sent off to concentration camps when their share came into her possession
parisian consumers actually refused to buy a lot from her own ranges after 1940 because she was an infamous collaborator but british and american consumers kept on buying them and continue to glorify her
that’s nice
(Source: kategrice, via loveyourchaos)
(Source: criminallyinnocent, via witchhatblessings)
(Source: rawrmarks, via kailanibrionna)





