Monthly Archives: April 2018

Yes, I really did read that report you wrote

logoI worked in Afghanistan back in 2007, and I stay in contact with some of my Afghan colleagues there, including a member of my communications staff from back in the day. As I’ve written about before, I’ve been mentoring her online since I left, regarding her university studies, her career pursuits and her work.

For the past few years, she’s worked for a government initiative regarding water and sanitation. Communications regarding WatSan was brand new to me, and to her, so we both had to work to get up-to-speed on best practices, particularly regarding working in low-infrastructure communities, rural communities, low-literacy communities, and with women. How have we gotten ourselves up-to-speed on this particular type of public health communications? By finding and reading online reports by various United Nations agencies and various non-governmental organizations (NGOs). It’s been extraordinarily easy to find relevant, detailed reports on how water and sanitation practices have been communicated in every scenario imaginable and very honest reports about what’s worked and what hasn’t.

We’re still not experts. But the reality in humanitarian work is that, very often, you are suddenly asked to do something that’s at least a bit outside your experience, and you may have just a few weeks, or a few days, or even a few hours, to get the knowledge you need to proceed. That so many humanitarian workers have shared their work online has been critical to me doing my job over the years, and it’s proving invaluable to my colleague in Afghanistan as well.

So, thank you, all you communications staff at various UN, USAID, DFID, and NGO-supported initiatives all over the world, for detailing what worked and what didn’t in whatever project you worked on, and sharing that online. You may think you no one is reading your reports. But we are.

Also see:

Volunteers themselves speaking out about voluntourism

There are few things more cringeworthy than watching 20 British schoolgirls trying to build a well under the scalding Nepalese heat. This is what I imagine a group of local men were thinking as they politely stood back while we puzzled our way through this contraption. The orphans peered through the windows, somewhat accustomed to this strange set-up. An unnecessary number of hours later, a ceremony took place thanking us for our hard work. We had singlehandedly brought clean water to this poor, desperate orphanage. We could fly home better people.

This scathing comment is from an editorial called DUCK expeditions are a load of quack published in the Palatinate, the official student newspaper of Durham University in the UK. The blog is an honest account of voluntourism by someone who, as a young teen, went abroad, thinking she her good heart but complete lack of expertise was what a poor community abroad needed and wanted. I applaud her for coming forward when she realized what her voluntourism experience had really been, in terms of helping and impact abroad.

In addition, via link on Reddit, I found a blog from 2015, by a young woman in Germany whose hope for a voluntourism experience to help turtles actually became torture for them:

“The ‘turtle conservation program’ was shut down after the police came (there is a law in Fiji to protect turtles as they are threatened by extinction). A girl made a… ehh… Let’s say critical Facebook post. I think ‘inhuman’ and ‘animal torture’ were some of the words she used… I’m just glad that I got my money back without any problem because I know about 7 people who had to go to court to get some of their money back because the agencies made a lot of great promises without keeping them. What they offer is not really volunteer work, here they call it voluntourism. A lot of money which doesn’t actually help anybody but just finances the international agencies. I got quite disillusioned about volunteering here. I left the volunteer house as soon as possible and went to a resort. The turtles were set free, but they are probably dead because they have been in the tank for too long and weren’t able to survive anymore. I’m so sorry for them.”

I did reach out to the author and, indeed, she exists and this was her experience. In an email to me last month, she noted:

I must say that I really regret not following through on that whole thing after I got the full amount back. I should have addressed that magazine to publish the whole story or the topic, or at least have given public critics, but I was 18, alone in Fiji and everything was very exciting… I was just too distracted with all that comes with starting university. So I am happy to hear that somebody actually does address that topic…

I appreciate these young people speaking out – it’s NOT easy. These are people who really did want to do the right thing, and while their attempt at voluntourism ended up being wasteful or even destructive, their voice now IS doing the right thing, and I applaud them.

But it’s not just people who paid to volunteer who are speaking out – it’s also people who were exploited:

The support of orphanages has created a thriving industry in which children are separated from their families and subjected to terrible abuse and neglect, as I was — being used as a commodity to generate funding… Having these adults coming in and out of our lives felt like we were continuously being abandoned.

This statement is from Sinet Chan, who grew up in a Cambodian orphanage and has pleaded with Australians not to donate to or volunteer at orphanages. Her quote is from this article about the push in Australia to make ‘orphanage tourism’ illegal.

I’m not letting up on this issue. The ability to pay and having a good heart should NOT qualify someone to hold orphans and take selfies in Africa, or wash elephants, or hand out food to refugees. If you want to help abroad, then get involved locally; you shouldn’t feel that you have the expertise to do something abroad – work with at-risk youth, help animals, help refugees, etc. – unless you have experience doing it locally, in your own country, preferably in your own community.

There is such a thing as effective short-term international volunteering. And it is NOT impossible to break into humanitarian work. And caring about people and animals abroad is a great quality to have. But taking action abroad needs to come from a place from respect and knowledge.

July 8, 2018 update: My consulting colleague and all-around amazing human Dr. Erin Barnhardt wrote about her own experience as a pay-to-volunteer-abroad experience in her 2012 PhD thesis, Engaging Global Service: Organizational Motivations for and Perceived Benefits of Hosting International Volunteers. She notes in the introduction to her research:

While my experience in Jordan was on the whole overwhelmingly positive, I was surprised and somewhat disappointed to discover that I was in fact a largely ineffective volunteer. I knew that staying for only two weeks meant that my contributions would be severely limited and that my lack of Arabic language skills would further hamper my impact, but I’d assumed that coming in with a professional expertise meant that I could make some kind of lasting contribution during my very short tenure. What I discovered though was, despite having gone through a reputable volunteer-sending organization to an organization that regularly hosted international volunteers, the infrastructure to put me to work was minimal and somewhat ad hoc. I came to the Jordanian NGO with a genuine interest in helping out, only to discover that there was in fact little for me to do.

I so appreciate Erin’s honesty – and the honesty of all people who have paid-to-volunteer abroad and are now speaking out about it.

July 16, 2018 updateWhen volun-tourism isn’t all it’s cracked up to be’ – ‘It was pretty much a zoo’: The conditions came to light by Amanda Rowland, 21, an upset and unhappy volunteer who had paid over $3000 to visit the centre in in Malaysia for a month in January. Amanda had been sold the trip as a chance to work at a temporary holding facility for orangutans rescued from illegal possession.

May 31, 2019: Chase and JP Morgan has a commercial to encourage financial planning that promotes volunteerism with wildlife: a happy couple gushes about their volunteer trip abroad scrubbing elephants’ feet and further gush how they would like to make that trip every year from now on, and their financial advisor is happy to oblige. So disappointing to see these two companies promote such a highly unethical and harmful practice!

My other blogs on this subject:

Barriers to women’s leadership we don’t talk about

Initiatives to encourage or cultivate leadership among women anywhere in the world, whether in the USA or Pakistan or anywhere in between, tend to focus on things like public speaking, how to prepare for and manage a meeting, how to build a strategy, how to manage conflict, etc. But they often avoid very complicated societal issues that often keep women out of leadership positions.

Take a friend of mine who lives in a “stan” country: she is committed to doing great work in any task she undertakes. She sometimes needs explicit examples of what is wanted in a task, but once she gets that, she can absolutely do most any task at hand, and it’s meant she’s accumulated responsibilities quickly. She enjoys working with people who are just as committed to doing quality work as she is and who also want to learn. She particularly enjoys working with international staff, because of the wealth of knowledge they have, their confidence and her perception regarding their openness.

But all of that commitment to hard work and attraction to learning and working with foreign workers often sets her up for hostilities with her co-workers, particularly other women. She struggles with the pervasive culture in her country that discourages women from leading or being ambitious. She must be very conscious of gossip, and I think she feels it is a constant balance between doing a good job but not “showing off” or trying to be “better.” because such could be seen as acting immodest or un-Islamic. There is incredible pressure in her country for women to appear gracious and modest at all times, and this can mean not being able to follow the advice she might find online about how to be a leader. She works well on a team and wants everyone to succeed and is very happy to help others, but sometimes holds back from offering ideas because she does not want to be perceived as pushy or arrogant – which she never is, but she’s afraid of the reputation nonetheless. A patriarchal society often has women among its most ardent supporters, and it’s the women she works with that are the most intolerant of a woman who seems to seek opportunities to speak in public and work with foreigners. I think she would lead more if she could see other women in her country doing so, on a day-to-day basis, and how they handle obstacles, challenges, criticisms and accusations of being too ambitious or immodest. That she has managed to be successful in her career to this point is a statement on her persistence and her care at navigating the cultural minefields of her country (and, perhaps, the literal ones as well).

If you doubt my colleague’s reasons for being timid in the workplace, then think about Malala Yousafzai: loved abroad, maligned in Pakistan. Before being shot by terrorists, Malala had been campaigning for girls’ right to education in her home village and was a vocal critic of Islamic extremists. She was praised internationally for writing about Taliban oppression in a BBC blog. After being shot and while in recovery, she has become an international icon of resistance, empowerment of women and right to education. Her continued work has prompted numerous international awards, including the Nobel Peace Prize in 2016. But in her own country, she is derided by many, including women. Many in Pakistan accuse her of being a US agent, of being un-Islamic, of being immodest, and of trying to undermine her country and its culture. She is a frequent target for scorn, ridicule and hatred by everyday Pakistanis – if you doubt it, look at any international news Facebook page features her and read the comments. In Why Pakistan Hates Malala, Michael Kugelman of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars said,

Malala is no national hero. Revered by many abroad, she is reviled by many at home, including among middle-class Pakistanis one might imagine would be her greatest fans… 

As I noted in this blog from 2015:

There’s another reason that keeps so many women in (various) countries off of social media as well: the Tall Poppy Syndrome. People talking about an accomplishment can be seen as bragging, and many feel that tall flower has to be cut down to the same size as all the others. The phrase is particularly popular in Australia, though some people say it isn’t success that offends Australians but, rather, someone that acts superior. But in many places, a woman saying anything on social media, except for praising the deity of her religion, is seen as bragging – and she becomes a target for her “tall” reputation being cut down.

It can be just as bad anywhere, of course: it’s not at all limited by religion or one particular regional culture. I have witnessed in a variety of places, with a variety of women, even in the USA. For instance, see Why Black Women Love to Hate On Black Women. Or this article from a Latino woman talking about how to stay true to herself and her Latino identity at the same time. Also, see this article about racism within the American Indian community, which isn’t about just women, but about a kind of racial competition that can happen among native Americans – the sentiments are similar.

Why do some women turn on other women at work, especially among women that are so disempowered in so many ways in their society? I’ve wondered if it isn’t rooted in that disempowerment, if a woman striking out against another woman, simply because she is a woman, is because it’s the only acceptable way in her society to exert any kind of power. because it’s the only acceptable way to show leadership: by tearing another woman down.

The price a woman pays for exerting leadership is not small: it can mean little punishments at work from co-workers, like being excluded from lunch invitations or outside-of-work social events that build comradery among co-workers. It can mean not being told about meetings and opportunities. Social identity is a person’s sense of who they are based on their group membership(s), and some psychologists believe that insecurity and a big drop in self-esteem arises when the “community” accuses a member of abandoning that group. The result can be gossip so vicious that a woman leaves a job rather than bring suspicion on her “honor,” something that can have dire consequences in her social circles and with her family.

How do we teach women to balance the demands of their culture’s view of women and the very real consequences of violating those unwritten rules with their own desires to lead and grow? Do we encourage them to try to delight in rebelling and to no longer care what their family, their tribe, may think? I think it’s reckless to encourage women to have ambition in developing countries and not also talk about what could be the consequences of such.

I’ve been trying to think of advice that would be helpful to women in environments that are restrictive regarding women’s behavior, particularly in developing countries, and it’s been difficult, because so much of the advice about helping women in the workplace are focused on women in the West, living in corporate cultures where, while there are substantial restrictions, they aren’t nearly Research hasn’t produced much. The best I can come up with is adapting some suggestions from How to Be a Workplace Ally from LeanIn.Org:

  • When you hear a woman called “bossy” or “shrill,” request a specific example of what the woman did to merit this label. Then ask, “Would you have the same reaction if a man did the same thing?” In many cases, the answer will be no. When you’re having a negative response to a woman at work, ask yourself the same question and give her the benefit of the doubt.
  • Look for opportunities to boost other women’s confidence. When you introduce female coworkers, highlight their credentials and accomplishments—for example, you might say, “Fatima was in charge of our last annual report, and it was more detailed than any report our agency has ever produced.”
  • Get together with other women, talk openly about this issue, agree to commit to being each other’s allies and agree to celebrate one another’s successes and to help each other address professional challenges.

And I’ll add three more:

  • Respect confidentiality of your women co-workers in particular. No matter how tempting, do not share information you know a woman does not want others to know, and respect anything you have been told in confidence.
  • When others gossip, do not respond at all, unless it is to say, “This makes me uncomfortable.”
  • Thank co-workers for all of their contributions, however small, to your own work. Thank them in front of an entire group, such as at a staff meeting.

What are your ideas?

Updated April 15, 2021: A comic strip demonstrates the challenges women face online. It’s developed by Kenya ICT Action Network (KICTANet). In a story of three differently aged, differently shaped and differently employed women, we see what violence can look like online, how the seemingly harmless can actually contribute to it, and what we can all do to prevent it and to create a safer space for women online.

Also see:

I’ve been trying to warn about “fake news” since 2004

Since 2004, I have been gathering and sharing both examples of and recommendations for preventing folklore, rumors and urban myths from interfering with development and aid/relief efforts and government initiatives. And for years, I felt like the lone voice in the wilderness on this subject. It was almost my master’s thesis project, but while I could find examples of widespread misunderstanding and misinformation campaigns interfering with relief and with relief and development activities, and government initiatives, including public health initiatives, I could not get enough people to go on record to talk about these circumstances and how they were addressing such. For a year, I contacted numerous organizations, particularly organizations promoting women’s health and access to abortion, trying to get them to talk about how these misinformation campaigns were affecting them, but if they replied at all to my emails or phone calls, they said they didn’t want to bring more attention to the problem, even if that attention was in an academic paper that people outside the institution may never read.

I went with another subject for my Master’s project, but I had gathered a lot of publicly-available information, so I shared it all on my web site, and I have kept it updated over the years as my time has allowed. I have always easily found many examples of myths and misinformation creating ongoing misunderstandings among communities and cultures, preventing people from seeking help, encourage people to engage in unhealthy and even dangerous practices, and cultivating mistrust of people and institutions. I easily have found examples that had lead to mobs of people attacking someone or others for no reason other than something they heard from a friend of a friend of a friend, to legislators introducing laws to address something that doesn’t exist, and influencing elections, long before such finally got noticed because of Brexit and the USA November 2016 elections.

In my original web pages, I said that this subject was rarely discussed, and for more than a decade, that was the truth: while I could find all of those examples, it was very difficult to find any online resources or published resources outside of academic papers about how to address or prevent misinformation campaigns designed to interfere with a relief or development effort, public health campaign, etc. Where was the practical info on how to deal with this? It was few and far between. For many years, mine was the only web site tracking such.

How did I get interested in this subject? I noticed stories my friends and family told often turned out not to be true, everything from spiders or snake eggs found in a jacket of a friend of a cousin that lives in another state, to why a local store closed, to something they had heard about happening on a TV talk show but hadn’t actually seen themselves. Then, while attending Western Kentucky University for my undergrad degree, I took a very popular class, Urban Folklore 371, where we discussed these stories, how they were spread, how the story changes over time and why such stories are believed. I was hooked on the psychology of rumor-spreading.

When I worked at a United Nations agency from 2001 to 2005, I made a joke to a colleague about the outrageous mythologies about the UN that so many people believed back in the USA – I’m not going to repeat them here, on this blog, but they are easy to find online. She gave me a confused look and said she didn’t know what I was talking about. So I showed her various web sites that promote this misinformation. She stood there, with her mouth open and eyes wide, staring at the outrageous graphics and text. “Is this a joke?” she asked. No, I replied, this is very real. I showed her more. “I can’t believe this!” she said. I explained that we could stand there all day with me showing her these sites, and these were just ones in the USA – I had no idea how many there were based in other countries, in other languages. And I admit I was starting to get angry, because not only did this seasoned UN staff member not know about this, no one I worked with at the UN had ever heard of these myth-spreading web sites. Conspiracy theories, pre-social media, were already affecting our work, yet, I seemed to be the first person to be talking about it, at least at my agency.

We have a saying in English: closing the barn door after the horses are already out. It means you are too late in trying to address an issue. Now, all these many years after trying to sound the alarm, I fear that there are entire generations of people that will now never be convinced that global climate change is real and devasting to communities, particularly to poor communities, or that will never believe that vaccinations do NOT cause autism nor infertility, or that will never believe that condoms can prevent HIV, or that will never accept fluoride in their water because they believe too many outrageous things I can’t even begin to list here, and on and on. I fear these generations are lost forever in having basic scientific literacy. And I fear that if we don’t make a concentrated, sustained effort on educating young people about science and how to evaluate information they are hearing and reading, more people will die, more communities will be devastated, more lives will be shattered.

Also see:

What you don’t understand about UN Peacekeepers

There is SO much misunderstanding about what the term United Nations Peacekeepers means, and what members of such a deployment can do – and cannot do. And I admit that, before 2001, I didn’t really know what it meant either.

Here are four facts about United Nations Peacekeepers that I wish everyone understood, and that I wish journalists did a much better job of explaining whenever they write about UN Peacekeeping operations:

(1) There is no standing military of UN Peacekeepers. When you hear the term UN Peacekeepers, it means men and women who are members of their respective country’s armed forces and are still entirely under the command of their own country’s military leadership. When you hear the term “a group of UN Peacekeepers”, it means a group of, say, army infantry from Nigeria, or the or India, or Belgium, or any number of other countries that may be participating. There is NO United Nations “army”. A person can’t sign up somewhere to be a UN peacekeeper – you would have to join your own country’s military or police and hope that, somehow, your country will choose to donate your unit to a peacekeeping operation.

(2) 125 countries contribute military troops, police, and civilian personnel to UN Peacekeeping operations, including 126 peacekeepers from the USA. Pakistan, India and Bangladesh are among the largest individual contributors with around 8,000 units each. African nations contributed nearly half the total, almost 44,000 units.

(3) UN peacekeeping operations are deployed on the basis of mandates from the United Nations Security Council – and that mandate must be unanimous. If one of the permanent members of the Security Council – China, Russia, the USA, France or the UK – says “no” to a deployment in a country, even if they host country wants such, then there will be no UN peacekeeping operations in that country.

(4) UN peacekeeping operations cannot happen without permission of the country where they will be deployed. That host country must invite them, approve of their being there and approve the definition of what they do. Peacekeeping missions need the consent of the host governments to operate, cannot do anything beyond what their host country has agreed they can do, and can be ordered to leave by that host country at any moment. That means that, very often, those in command of UN peacekeeping forces will refuse to undertake a life-saving action protecting foreign refugees, an ethnic minority or even local women, because such actions might upset the host country. For instance, in 2016, local and foreign aid workers were raped, beaten and robbed in South Sudan, by South Sudanese government troops, just minutes away from the main UN compound in Juba, the capital. Despite desperate phone and text messages from the victims to those in command at that compound, the 2,000 or so troops never stirred. Most articles, including this one from CNN, never identify what country those peacekeepers represent, giving the false impression that these troops are under the command of the UN. The troops that ignored the pleas from aid workers in Sudan were, in fact, from China, India, Ethiopia and Nepal. Belgian troops, acting as UN Peacekeepers, stood by Tutsi people were slaughtered in Rwanda in 1994, and a year later, Dutch troops failed to stop the massacre of 8,000 Muslim men by Serbs in Srebrenica, a supposedly UN “safe area.” It is up to those individual countries to discipline their troops stationed in these countries for not fulfilling their duties, and only IF it can be proven they did not do what they were explicitly mandated to do – all the UN can do is strongly urge them to do so.

This blog also cites statistics from the official UN Peacekeeping website, from the UN Foundation blog 7 key facts UN peacekeeping, and from this article in the Guardian.

Should the UN Peacekeeping system be changed? That’s someone else’s blog to write… I just want who the peacekeepers are and what they can and cannot do to be better clarified, by journalists in particular.

Also see:

United Nations personnel system needs radical overhaul

International aid workers having sex with people in countries in crisis

Frank description of what it’s like to work in communications in the UN

UN Agencies: Defend your “internships”

UN Volunteers, IFRC, ILO & others make HUGE misstep

My work in international development (including the United Nations)

online communities, sexual harassment & hate speech – UNESCO weighs in

During the 62 Session of the Commission on the Status of Women (CSW62), UNESCO participated in an event exploring the role of online communities in relations to sexual harassment and hate speech. The event took place on 13 March at the Permanent Mission of Finland to the United Nations in New York and other partners were Ministry of Social Affairs and Health in Finland, National Institute for Health and Welfare and Kenya Human Rights Commission.

Interventions to combat the online hate speech were presented including a guidebook, #WeWillNotBeSilent – What is hate speech and what it has got to do with gender? (PDF)

This multi-stakeholder effort raises awareness of the (sexist) hate speech and offers guidance for youth on responding and preventing (sexist) hate speech online.

Currently, 1 in 5 women using the Internet lives in countries where abuse of women is likely to go unpunished and 73 percent of women online have experienced some form of online violence.

Gender equality is one of UNESCO’s global priorities and well reflected in UNESCO’s interventions. These include efforts to counter online hate speech, empowering women and girls to harness digital and media literacy skills, promoting the safety of women journalists and gender parity in media. UNESCO is also addressing the issue through the development of international frameworks to build an open, human rights based, accessible and pluralistic knowledge societies and media environments.

Also see this publication, Countering online hate speech

More: