Never mind the elephants, there are girls to empower!

A correspondent tells me many years ago he began donating to Friends of Conservation, a charity concerned with saving endangered wildlife in Africa, particularly elephants and rhinoceroses. Earlier this week he received this letter from them, the fourth paragraph of which I reproduce below:

We are setting up an empowerment initiative in schools, primarily to help girls boost their confidence and increase self-esteem. As well as self-defence classes for girls and boys, there’ll be sessions in safe spaces where girls can discuss issues and become more aware of their rights; and classes where boys can will be encouraged to have greater respect for girls. We hope to help foster a learning environment where girls and boys are treated equally and have the same opportunities.

Spending charitable donations on woke feminist causes saves how many elephants and rhinos, I wonder? Needless to say, this has cost them at least one donor. At this point, I think it’s safe to assume every charity has been thoroughly corrupted in this manner. Can anyone point with confidence to one that hasn’t?

Liked it? Take a second to support Tim Newman on Patreon!
Share

31 thoughts on “Never mind the elephants, there are girls to empower!

  1. I used to think the Lifeboat charity would — being far more concerned with deep waters and hauling desperate people out of danger — be exempt from any such criticism, but the Whitby ‘naked girl mug’ incident suggests it is becoming just like all the others.

    Frankly, if I was lost in a storm at sea I’d be clinging to anything that might float, and a naughty mug might be just the thing until help arrives.

  2. MSF always used to be pretty well focussed: I don’t know to what extent that’s still true.

  3. Once they get above a certain size, the rot sets in. Find a small, local, single issue charity. Donate, where possible, items (food, etc) or time rather than cold hard cash. It’s easier to avoid them squandering it.

  4. Find a small, local, single issue charity.

    The Paris-Based Oilfield Expats Benevolent Trust?

    Donate, where possible, items (food, etc) or time rather than cold hard cash.

    Bottles of gin, please.

  5. When you’re investing, it’s said to be wise to not hold all your eggs in one basket and that diversification is a good thing.

    I’ve had the advice that the exact opposite is true of charity – you should choose one, specific and narrow cause and support that with one or two small charities that you can get to know very well. Before long, the big charities always end up like corporates with excessive overheads and middle class lefties hanging on with their snouts in the trough, whilst all the stuff that makes a difference on the ground is being done by the small outfits.

    That’s my 2 rupees on the matter anyway.

  6. Among charities, I trust the Salvation Army.

    They are nutters, but they are good and honest nutters dominated by a hard-working and dedicated grassroots. SJW activists focused on Identity politics hate it, which is a good sign.

  7. There are oilfields in Paris?

    You’ll find no shortage of nodding donkeys in the offices around here.

  8. Probably not the sort of charities that you had in mind, but most of the societies set up to preserve historical items (e.g. Steam engines) are pretty good at staying on topic…

  9. Give to people, not charities.
    So for example, a couple of us are clubbing together to help out a woman in Gloucester. Survived abuse, cancer, etc and needs help getting life together. Struggling to get Disability Allowance ‘cos she is too sick to go through the process. That kinda thing.

    It’s not that hard to find people who need help, and if you are struggling I can point you in the right direction…

  10. “I’ve had the advice that the exact opposite is true of charity – you should choose one, specific and narrow cause and support that with one or two small charities that you can get to know very well. ”

    Or at least, just support 2 or 3 that you like and get to know. Above all, having some inside knowledge goes a long way.

    It’s why I don’t support big charities. I can’t see what they’re all doing. Find a charity with less than 200 employees, you can

  11. The rationale is presumably that empowering girls in poor countries could lead (1) to lower birth rates; which in turn ought to lead (2) to greater wealth, as women spend more time making money rather than making children; which ought to lead (3) to fewer big game being poached.

    If any one of those three links is wrong, then the whole premise falls apart. I’d argue that the arrow of causation runs backwards in (1) and (2); and the whole thing is likely to take so long that any big game would long be extinct by the time Africa reaches developed world status.

  12. The rationale is presumably that empowering girls in poor countries could lead…

    …to self-satisfaction and increased employment among western feminists.

  13. I hope your correspondent told,them why he’s cut the cord on them. It probably won’t deter them much, but you gotta try.

  14. A more sensible use of effort than it looks.
    Obvs, live elephants are worth more than ivory.
    Widening the consnesus to favour elephant over ivory involves women having more of a say.
    So “empowering” women is good for elephants.

  15. Charity always has and always will begin at home. I am a tight cunt but am very charitable to the needy in my immediate sphere. No guessing on why and where and if there is a need, works for me.

  16. As others have said, donate to local single issue charities. And we need money, not food, as boats, especially safety boats, are expensive to buy, maintain and run even withy free labour.

  17. Save the dodgy scouse builder with blown out knees charity…..very very un P.C. please give generously.

  18. “Among charities, I trust the Salvation Army.”

    Have to chime in to agree, strongly.

    I’ve been involved in the rebuild after quite a few disaster-type happenings, and the SA has consistently been the one bright light when it comes to providing what people need instead of what charity professionals want to deliver.

    It’s been my experience that, once a charity org hires “professional” management from non-STEM humanities programs, the ideals and goals of those “professionals” subsumes the charitable ideals of the org. They’ll still save whales, but by gosh the number of female minority-species whales saved had better at least equal the number of other whales saved.

  19. These folks are worth a look: https://www.givewell.org/. They research charities looking for the best ones based on: evidence of effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, transparency, and room for more funding. They publish their research in great detail allowing donors to make informed decisions.

  20. Among charities, I trust the Salvation Army.

    Not for me.
    At the Brisbane G20 meeting, the Salvation Army fed the swampies who were there to protest.
    That did it for me. My donations don’t go to perfectly healthy political swampy protestor types.
    (UK Salvos may be different – be wise to check though)

    I understand Royal Guide Dogs for the Blind are worthwhile.

  21. It would be nice to see one of the charity rating services that scores not just on bang for buck (which is very subjective given the need to value non market highly heterogeneous outputs) but also an audit of are they on mission. So lifeboats fail, oxfam fail (leftie campaigning), cruk fail (anti obesity adds rather than errr curing cancer)

  22. I’ve started to support a little animal rescue centre down in your old neck of the woods:

    http://www.greenacresrescue.org.uk/

    They’re not even a charity, but its run by very hard working people who love animals, no diversity statements, or political nonsense. One of my dogs is a rescue from there too.

  23. FWIW I support, locally, the North London Hospice which does what it says on the tin and, nationally, the Jubilee Sailing Trust which allows disabled people to experience – as crew – sailing tall ships. Both charities are perenially short of money and neither has any time for politically inspired crapola. Crucially neither is in a position to provide a well-remunerated career for culturally marxist parasites.

  24. I’ve started to support a little animal rescue centre down in your old neck of the woods:

    Nice! My Dad told me years ago the RSPCA decided to oppose foxhunting, which pissed off a lot of locals down in Pembrokeshire. So they started their own animal charity instead.

  25. Try ZANE (Zimbabwe A National Emergency) which helps the victims of the economic disaster created by Mugabe. In the UK, The Big Issue Foundation does good practical work to help the homeless to improve their lives.

  26. … the RSPCA decided to oppose foxhunting, which pissed off a lot of locals down in Pembrokeshire. So they started their own animal charity instead.

    Heh!
    Best thing I’ve read on the net today.

  27. Sometimes the leaders of publicly-funded aid organisations are motivated people who have risen to that position through dedication, leadership, and their exceptional competence in carrying out the work that the agency was intended to perform. Far more often they are political appointees, installed to fulfil a political agenda. They might even be cadres deployed to a well-paid high-status position as reward for their support in elections or party leadership contests. Even the best-intentioned “aidists” have to play a political game, always with one ear to the ground and finger discreetly raised to find out which way the wind is blowing.

    At the same time I must concede that parts of African society are riddled with male entitlement, and females do indeed need to be taught that there’s no law that says they have to put out. Is this going to save elephants and rhino, no it is not.

Comments are closed.