Tag Archives: ethics

Poverty porn, survivor porn, inspiration porn

Leave a reply

Sophie Otiende is a program consultant for HAART Kenya, a nonprofit that bills itself as the only organization in Kenya that works exclusively on eradicating human trafficking. In this podcast with The Nonprofit Quarterly, Otiende discusses her anti-trafficking work and why awareness campaigns fail to deter vulnerable women who are already suffering from poverty and abuse in their own homes. She also says donors must do a better job of providing emotional support to frontline staff. And she talks about the ethics around what The Nonprofit Quarterly calls “survivor porn,” which happens when survivors of trauma are asked by a nonprofit to provide an account of their causes, in a video, in an interview with the press, etc., to provide an emotional hook to attract donors to the nonprofit. The podcast asks some hard questions about the power dynamics between survivors and the nonprofits that have helped them.

On a related note is this article from March 2019 from the Thinking Person’s Guide to Autism: “Inspiration Porn: How the Media and Society Objectify Disabled People.” This article is about, specifically, someone film or taking photos of a person with a disability in public doing just about anything – eating, getting on and off a bus, going down the street – without that person’s permission, and then uploading it to social media with some sort of inspirational message, making the person with a disability’s experience a “feel good” story. Even journalists are guilty of this. Often, the stories are about someone helping the person with a disability – say, to push their wheelchair over a corner curb that doesn’t have a curb cut – which deflects from what should be the real story: why doesn’t the curb have a curb cut? As one person in the story says, “Inspiration porn makes us feel that everything is going to be OK.”

Both of these are, like “poverty porn”, voyeuristic. As Skye Davey says in this article, “It captures human beings in vulnerable, deeply personal moments, and packages that trauma (and humiliation) for consumption.” All three over-simplify poverty, famine, human rights issues, sex trafficking, accessibility and challenges for people with disabilities, and other complex issues. It promotes a fiction that these issues can be fought with charity and message-promotion on social media, without structural change.

In this opinion piece in The Guardian, Jennifer Lentfer notes:

Poverty, disease, injustice, and conflict are all heartbreaking. But sometimes the work needed to tackle them is not new, innovative, or sexy. It might be citizens demanding fundamental services like improved healthcare or better roads; or governments better managing their budgets; or pressing local agencies to be more responsive to public concerns… We must highlight the grey area between our interventions and the reality of how social change occurs. Trust the public with a little more nuance – they can handle it.

The subhead on this Guardian piece says, “Our job is to tell compelling stories without trivialising people’s lives – and to promote a more nuanced narrative about how to achieve lasting change.” Without poverty porn, survivor porn or inspiration porn. It can sometimes be a difficult balance, but it’s a balance worth pursuing.

There are some good resources regarding ethics and photography in humanitarian work that have advice that can be applied for nonprofits working with vulnerable populations (people who are homeless, people experiencing addiction, people who have experienced domestic violence, foster children, people with disabilities, etc.) in their own countries, including:

I would love to hear from others about how they maintain this balance in their representation of vulnerable populations in public relations and marketing materials.

Also see:

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help. 

Teaching youth about poverty – teaching compassion or supremacy?

Leave a reply

I’ve drafted a new resource: Ideas for Teaching Children Compassion & Understanding Instead of Pity With Regard To Poverty. It’s part of the section of my web site to help people that want to volunteer, rather than those that manage volunteers.

It was inspired by so many of the ideas for volunteering for young people that, in my opinion, are dreadful, suggestions that teach supremacy and superiority, that encourage a young person’s introduction to different regions of the world – say, the country’s of Africa – through a lense of poverty instead of first talking about the beautiful culture and rich history and many talents and skills of the people there.

How can adults – parents and teachers – encourage young people to be compassionate for and kind to others while not cultivating pity and feelings of superiority? Here are some ideas. It’s a first draft – suggestions welcomed (post in the comments or contact me directly).

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help.

Does Your Org’s Practices Reflect Its Own Mission?

Leave a reply

I recently joined the board of a brand new nonprofit. I am helping with the content of its first ever web site. I decided to look at the web sites of some other similar organizations to get some ideas.

I found nonprofit associations that have classes on how to prepare an annual report – but they don’t have any of their annual reports posted on their web site. I found foundations that demand copies of the latest 990 from nonprofit applicants, but they don’t have their 990s on Guidestar. I found a nonprofit that has its board of directors listed on its web site, and always has, but has a different board listed on their 990s for those same years on Guidestar.

Why aren’t these organizations walking their talk, doing what they want other organizations to be doing?

And then there is the nonprofit organization that I consider famous, that you have probably heard of. Were I to say its name, which I’m not, and its name would probably bring to mind images of innovation, of bucking the status quo, of direct confrontation, and lots and lots of action. You would think of it as an organization that doesn’t recognize any tradition or rule as absolute. You would think of it as an agency embraces new ideas and experimentation, and works in a flexible, pro-active manner, putting its mission goals before bureaucratic ones. So imagine my astonishment when talking with this organization to receive such a hostile reaction to the idea of employee telecommuting / cloud commuting. The human resources manager sounded as though she couldn’t breathe at the thought of such a radical idea, and once she did find her words, said that this organization’s HR policy absolutely forbids any such practice. When I suggested that it would be a good idea to modernize that policy, another staffer jumped in, reminding me that doing something so “substantial” as changing a policy takes “a lot of time” and “much reflection” and “a great deal of research about legal issues.”

Here’s an organization that prides itself on not playing by the rules, and even sometimes asks its volunteers to violate the law in pursuit of its goals – no kidding! But revise its human resources policies to allow employee telecommuting? Why, that’s crazy talk!

There’s another organization you probably would not have heard of, but you would be familiar with its work: trying to address conditions and practices that lead to global climate change. But while this agency is writing guidelines, holding conferences and lobbying corporations and governments, the overwhelming majority of its staff, even those who live less than half a mile from the organization, are driving to work, despite the outstanding mass transit system available in its city. The organization has no policies regarding recycling its own office waste, and there’s no emphasis on any energy-saving practices within its offices.

Can you imagine if the press, or a group working counter to this organization, identified these practices and detailed them publicly, and the enormous public relations fallout that would occur?

These are real-life examples of organizations promoting practices or an image that isn’t actually reflected in their practices or culture, of organizations not truly “walking their talk.” And there’s more:

  • there are organizations that say they have a commitment to fighting for human rights and inclusion that have web sites and online resources (apps, videos, etc.) that aren’t accessible for people with disabilities – and they balk at the idea of making that commitment to digital inclusion
  • organizations that encourage corporations to allow their employees to volunteer on company time, while not allowing their own employees to do so.
  • organizations that advocate for feminism and women’s rights, but have antiquated dress codes and business practices regarding women that work and volunteer for them.
  • companies holding seminars on innovation and efficiency in the workplace who have antiquated computers, software and other devices that inhibit their staff productivity.
  • initiatives that tout the importance of local control of local activities, local decision-making,  but ignore the feedback of clients, volunteers and frontline staff, even imposing requirements of them with no discussion from them.

Take a look at your organization, particularly your mission statement, and ask yourself, “Is what we promote to others being practiced by ourselves?” Look at the behavior you encourage or talk about in your programs – do you exude that behavior yourself, as an organization? Survey your staff and volunteers, allowing them to anonymously provide feedback on where they see disconnect in the organization’s mission and the organization’s own internal practices.

Not only will you avoid a public relations nightmare, your own practices will become marketing tools for your organization’s mission.

If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into researching information, developing material, preparing articles, updating pages, etc. (I receive no funding for this work), here is how you can help.

See also:

Disrupting Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Leave a reply

logoCorporate social responsibility (CSR) means financial donations by for-profit businesses, as well as in-kind donations, employee volunteering or taking on community roles as a representative of a company, such as serving on an advisory board at a nonprofit or government group. CSR also includes commitments and demonstrated action regarding responsible or sustainable environmental practices, pay equality, safe working environments, etc., beyond what is required by law.

Nonprofits, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), charities, schools and other mission-based organizations have wanted to say some things quite frankly to corporations and foundations, but they have been afraid to, for fear of losing their funding.

These organizations are tired of being mocked by the corporate world for not being innovative while also being denied overhead funding necessary to be able to experiment and explore innovation. They are tired of hackathons developing apps that their clients will never use because stakeholders were never consulted. They are tired of being expected to attend roundtable discussions and conferences to talk about serious social issues but not having their time paid for regarding these consultations to give corporations and foundations “insight.” They are tired of having  “executives on loan” from a high-tech company for six months who are more burdens than help.

I’ve even had public school teachers tell me how much they want to tell the big high tech company in their city “no” to its offer to “help” because the company’s ideas are more about good photo opps for the company than actually supporting learning goals – in fact, the company’s ideas take away from essential classroom learning time.

These folks feel they can’t make their complaints known about the attitudes of the for-profit world, so they tell me, in low voices over coffee. They are stressed out – they want a good relationship with the for-profit world, they want volunteers from corporations, but they want to be listened to, they want partnerships to be equal, and they want t

As an independent consultant, I have more freedom to speak than these colleagues. There are things I’ve always wanted to say to the for-profit world about how they approach financial donations, in-kind donations, employee volunteering and other corporate social responsibility (CSR). So I decided it was time to finally say them: I’ve launched a new section on my web site that targets corporations, whether large or small, regarding Corporate Social Responsibility.

My advice is meant to be provocative. It’s meant to be disruptive. Because I believe that CSR is long overdue for some serious disruption.

In my opinion, most CSR-related resources are more concerned with feel-good publicity and have an attitude that mission-based organizations are run by amateurs who chose their professions because they couldn’t make it in the “real” world. There’s a disturbing belief that businesses know better than nonprofits and should, therefore, use their financial gifts to push nonprofits, even public schools, into the directions businesses feel are best.

A lot of people, including several high-profit politicians and the US Supreme Court, believe corporations are “people.” Okay, if that’s the case, then every business, whether a tech-savvy startup, a small storefront or a large corporation, is a citizen of a community: that company’s employees and customers live and work somewhere, and how the employees do their work, how they travel to and for work, and how that work is produced or services are provided impacts neighborhoods, people, cultures and the environment, positively and negatively. No business, no corporation, not even a consultant working at home, is an island that has no impact on other places or people, near or far.

That impact comes with responsibilities, costs and consequences – financial costs, environmental costs and cultural impacts. Maybe farmland becomes industrial lands and housing, small towns become bedroom communities, the land where a popular bowling alley stands becomes so valuable that the prosperous business owners sell and retire – and the community loses a beloved gathering place.

Many of the financial costs that communities, neighborhoods and individuals have to shoulder that result from corporate/business prosperity are not covered by taxes – especially in this day and age of massive tax breaks for corporations and other for-profit companies. Many people are struggling to address those additional costs without any additional funding, while corporations and other businesses experience record profits and larger-than-ever tax breaks.

It’s from that reality that my web pages of advice regarding corporate social responsibility (CSR) have been developed. Expect to be challenged, because my advice is quite different from most, and maybe all, of the other advice you may have been reading or hearing.

Also see:

Charity isn’t enough

Leave a reply

The current Presidential administration in the USA wants to cut federal funding for a range of programs, including Special Olympics. Betsy DeVos, the President’s Secretary of Education, says it’s because these programs “enjoy robust support from private donations.”

Charity has never been enough to address homelessness, illiteracy, maternal health problems, gaps in education, the needs by those affected by domestic violence, the needs of people with disabilities, and on and on. Charity isn’t enough to promote the arts (arts involvement isn’t just nice – it’s essential to a whole range of quality of life issues), maintain public lands, and on and on. Charity is essential – but, alone, it will NEVER be enough, for Special Olympics or any other ESSENTIAL program. There MUST be government funding – tax dollars – for human service, environment, education and arts programs to be more than little feel-good PR moments benefitting just a small group of people.

My mother announced when I was 14 that I would be volunteering to escort the Henderson County team to the state Special Olympics in Bowling Green, Kentucky – a cousin was involved in organizing and this was how we, as a family, would support her – with me. Yes, it was a “voluntold” moment. I had never been around people with developmental disabilities and I had no idea what Special Olympics was and I had no idea who Eunice Shriver, the featured speaker, was. I won’t say I entirely understood it all at 14, but that participation changed ME for life and how I relate to people with developmental disabilities. It put me on a lifetime journey of trying to understand – all because of volunteering at one Special Olympics event. It wasn’t just a “nice” thing to be involved, not a oh, look at these poor children isn’t their spirit adorable thing – it was a TRANSFORMATION, for athlete, family member, volunteer and audience alike. This is so much more than “charity.” And government support is necessary for it to be anything more than a few small events here and there.

In fact, the Oregon Special Olympics keeps canceling events because of lack of funding. Special Olympics Oregon lost $325,000 on $4.5 million in revenue in 2016, lost more in 2017, and expects to lose money again in 2018, according to a news release. The reality is that corporations and other funders are NOT stepping up to fulfill the needs of Special Olympics.

The San Francisco Bay Area, including Silicon Valley, has rapidly become the richest region in the country. It’s a place where $100,000 Teslas are commonplace, unfiltered “raw water” goes for $37 a jug, and companies pay mega bucks for parties for employees, featuring high-profile comedians and other celebrities. Yet Sacred Heart Community Service, a San Jose nonprofit that helps low-income families with food, clothing, heating bills, and other services, actually received less in individual donations from the community in 2017 than it did the previous year. “We’re still not sure what it could be attributed to,” Jill Mitsch, the funds development manager at Sacred Heart, said in this story about corporate profits and philanthropy in Silicon Valley. It’s not the only nonprofit trying to keep donations up—the United Way of Silicon Valley folded in 2016 amidst stagnant contributions. Here’s more in this story. Record homelessness, record numbers of people needing health care, more and more polarization in society, more and more social isolation, less and less feelings of community – and, yet, Silicon Valley is holding on tightly to its wealth and not investing in the nonprofits that cannot keep up with demand.

Charity isn’t enough. In fact, volunteering, by itself, isn’t enough to save the world. But that’s another blog…

Also see:

know before you go: volunteering by foreigners is illegal in some countries

Leave a reply

I’m one of the moderators of the forum on Reddit – called a subreddit – on volunteering. Most of the questions on that forum are by people looking to volunteer and, often, they are looking to volunteer for a few weeks in another country. This is voluntourism, and anyone who reads this blog regularly knows I’m not fond of the practice: it is vanity volunteering, focused on giving a foreigner a feel-good experience rather than actually helping someone and, in fact, such “volunteering” can actually harm children, wildlife – even the volunteers themselves.

In some countries, volunteering by foreigners is, in fact, illegal. Despite its illegality, some NGOs – which are really for-profit companies – try to recruit foreigners to pay thousands of dollars to come “help” in their communities.

For instance, in most cases, volunteering by foreigners in Indonesia is illegal. The Indonesian immigration police in the country make regular visits to certain communities to check the legal status of people who say they are volunteers and foreigners who say they are being paid to work. You can read a news report from July 2016 about one of the raids on foreign volunteers here.

Bukit Lawang in North Sumatra, Indonesia is a popular tourist destination located on the edge of the Gunung Leuser National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site home to numerous bird, plant and mammal species, most famously the Sumatran orangutan (Pongo abelii). Nearby tourist businesses operate jungle treks, transport, tours, and other activities in the area – and field a LOT of questions about wildlife volunteering.

bukitlawang.com has a page about the laws regarding volunteering by foreigners in Indonesia, one that I wish more countries and popular tourism sites had. The Bukit Lawang page says that the main type of foreign visas for the country are the following (the bullets are cut and pasted from the site):

    • visa-free entry permit (received on arrival, free, at the airport) – voluntary work is always illegal

    • visa-on-arrival (paid on arrival at the airport at the cost of $35) – voluntary work is always illegal

    • tourist visa (paid abroad at the cost of around $50) – voluntary work is always illegal

    • social visa (paid abroad at the cost of around $50) – voluntary work is usually illegal. For the voluntary work to be legal, the social visa must have been sponsored (with an accompanying letter) by a registered Indonesian yayasan (charity/foundation) and during the application, the sponsorship letter must state that the foreigner is performing volunteer work for the foundation. A sponsorship letter that merely says something along the lines of ‘I am an Indonesian citizen and I am sponsoring Mr. X to visit Indonesia’ would NOT be valid for volunteer work in Indonesia, it ONLY entitles you to stay in Indonesia for a holiday/family visit, and no kind of work is permitted. A sponsorship letter from an individual, one that is not stamped by a charity/foundation is almost certainly NOT valid for work in Indonesia.

  • KITAS – sponsored by a charity or employer. This costs around $1200 per year (including work permit and visa) and is valid for paid and/or unpaid work of the specified nature at the specified employer.

The page also offers the following throughs about voluntourism. Remember – these are coming from an Indonesia-based organization:

Voluntourism is big business around the globe. In Indonesia specific considerations are:

    • low cost of labour – the minimum wage is around $5/day, and many earn even less. If you emphasise the ‘tourism’ aspect of voluntourism, then it may make sense to spend thousands on your trip, but the ‘volunteer’ element may be lacking.

    • your skills – if you are a young person with no work or life experience unfortunately you may have little to offer except your time. Effective volunteers will have specific skills that are relevant and scarce in a rural developing area.

    • culture differences – Indonesian culture is very different from your own. Communities are interconnected and foreigners are ‘other’. You will also face a language barrier – while those working in tourism will speak English, these are certainly not the people in need of help – those in need are generally far from the tourist areas.

    • transparency – Indonesia does not have a big charity culture; rather, charity is said to begin at home, and the concept of working for free is largely alien. You should therefore check exactly how the goals of the charity or project organiser himself are aligned with those of the charity. Do not be afraid to ask questions. Indonesian staff need money, but they must explain to volunteers exactly how they benefit financially from their charity.

    • safeguarding – Indonesia and other developing countries are open and have few safeguarding policies in place. This means that children can be at risk. If your project is working with children be sure to check about their safeguarding policies

    • effectiveness – be sure that your project is effective in achieving its and your goals. Ask specific questions and look at how results are measured.

  • immigration concerns – your volunteer work is likely to be illegal – see above.

It’s refreshing to see a local institution speak out so strongly against voluntourism and be so explicit about what the law is.

All that said, I should note that it is certainly possible for foreigners to visit Gunung Leuser National Park and see the Sumatran orangutan, something I hope to do myself someday. I learned about it by reading Lone Rider by Elspeth Beard. She’s one of the first women to ride a motorcycle all around the world, doing so back in 1982 – 1984. She wrote about an NGO working in this area, helping to address the huge problem of Indonesians abducting baby orangutans and then wanting to get rid of them when they grow older and are so much harder to care for. Her account of this visit is a good example of transire benefaciendo: “to travel along while doing good” – she didn’t attempt to work at the NGO as a volunteer (which would have been illegal), but she did elevate its work through her book.

I did something similar in Hungary: while camping in Hortobágyi Neuzeti Park, a sea of grasslands, the camp host told us that there was a bird rescue clinic right next door. The next morning, I went there. It turned out the clinic allowed visitors, so we toured, taking photos of their rehabilitation rooms and spaces and getting information, which I translated once we were home so that I could write about the Hortobágy Bird Clinic on my blog. Here is the web site of the clinic as well.

In addition to researching the laws regarding foreign volunteers in a country where you want to go, you should also look at your own country’s laws regarding going elsewhere to volunteer. For instance, Tauqir Sharif, 31, from Walthamstow, England, founded the organization Live Updates from Syria in 2012, providing support and assistance for families in Syria and raising awareness about the devastating situation on the ground. He has been living and working in Idlib, Syria alongside his British wife, Racquell Hayden-Best. He had his UK citizenship revoked in May 2017.
If you have benefited from this blog or other parts of my web site and would like to support the time that went into developing material, researching information, preparing articles, updating pages, etc., here is how you can help.

Also see:

Also see: My consulting services

school parent volunteer engagement ethics

2 Replies

graphic by Jayne Cravens representing volunteersI got this message from a friend. And then I had another situation I had wanted to offer up on a blog as well. So… what do you think about the ethics of required parental volunteering in schools?

I’m preparing to go to [[name of private school redacted]] to work a basketball game. I don’t want to go at all but I have to put in so many volunteer hours every school year for my daughter to be able to go see a movie with her class at the end of the year. And nobody wants to be that deadbeat parent whose child has to stay behind because they didn’t volunteer enough. She’s not even playing basketball! They’ve got quite a racket going here: work me for 20 hours for a $20 movie trip.

Apparently, a parent can’t simply pay the movie ticket admission and, say, a bit for gas: they must volunteer or the child isn’t allowed to go on the trip.

A neighbor also told me that her son is on the swim team for the public high school where he attends but she can’t afford all of the fees for him to participate, so the school gave her the option of volunteering 30 hours a semester so her son could participate.

But, on the other hand, students at schools with high volunteer involvement flourish – good grades, fewer discipline problems, etc.; schools without much parental involvement struggle – students with poor grades, more discipline problems, etc., so there is a big incentive by this and other schools to get parents into the school for student events or into the classroom. And this kind of required time better guarantees that happening.

What are your thoughts about the ethics and optics of either of these cases? What about a situation where a parent absolutely cannot volunteer, because of childcare issues, caregiver issues, job issues or lack of transportation? What if a parent has a conviction that precludes him or her from ever volunteering in a school?

Also see:

Comparing schools with high & low volunteer engagement

How schools & small governments should be using social media

Proliferation of SmartPhones leads to proliferation of rape videos

Leave a reply

I have talked with women who help manage or even just use community tech centers all over the world – in Egypt, Afghanistan, Jordan and various countries in Africa – and very often, they have told me something that they never put into a program report for UNDP or whomever was funding the center: that the men and boys coming to the center used the computers to view porn more than any other subject.

This story from the BBC has brought this memory back to me. Here’s an excerpt:

…even as it becomes easier to access pornography thanks to cheap data and smartphones, there is concern that this isn’t being accompanied by any meaningful understanding of sex and relationships. Local boys in the village freely admitted to the BBC that they watched videos of molestation and rape. One 16-year-old said he had seen more than 25 such videos, adding that his friends often shared them on their smartphones.

Sunita Krishnan, the founder of Prajwala, an organisation in the southern city of Hyderabad that deals with issues of sexual violence and trafficking says these violent videos reinforce the old belief that a woman’s choice is insignificant and she has no agency.

This earlier story from BBC about the kidnapping, rape and murder of a child talks about some of the reasons for the attitude in the country about women.

India is not alone when it comes to high rates of incidence of rape. But many believe patriarchy and a skewed sex ratio may be making matters worse. There is public apathy as well: the rights and security of women never become election issues.

This story for INews by Divya Arya gives more background:

India has seen an internet revolution of a different kind in the past few years. Low-cost smartphones, cheap data and popular social media apps have enabled vast rural parts of the country to stream videos like never before. Pornhub, widely reported to be the world’s largest porn website, claims that India is now the third largest consumer of its content in the world after the United States and United Kingdom. The majority of its content in India is accessed using mobiles.

For many young Indian men, their introduction to sex is the first time they watch porn. India does have an Adolescent Education Program but implementation remains a challenge and girls and boys rarely mix with each other in smaller cities and villages. As I started travelling and talking to young men about this for a new BBC World Service documentary airing as part of the 100 Women season, the impact of watching porn in the absence of real interaction with women became clear. It was not only leading to objectification of women in their mind, but also re-enforcing the entitlement men have traditionally felt on women’s life decisions. In marriage, motherhood and desire to work, women remain secondary citizens…

Multiple men confirmed to me that videos of molestation, and professionally shot violent pornographic content, both were the most searched content online in cities as well as more rural areas. As more violent content became available, watching simple sex stopped being the preference for many. These men confided about wanting to replicate what they saw online and some of them explained that it did affect their personal relationships adversely.

Clicked on a link within the original story about a related story and it opened with a situation that sounded all too familiar to me:

On his many trips to Internet cafes in the bustling central Indian city of Indore, lawyer Kamlesh Vaswani discovered what he calls the “epidemic” of pornography.

“I would go to download important Supreme Court judgments, and pornographic adverts would pop up instead. And when I looked around, I saw rows of children surfing porn openly without a care in the world,” 

There are calls for bans on porn but there are fears this will lead to banning sites regarding sexual health, even breast cancer.

Here’s an hour-long documentary from BBC’s 100 Women series about the proliferation of online porn in India via smartphones.

I’m glad to see the discussions about what to do about the massive increase in the use of smartphones and social media leading to widespread myth-spreading and all of the consequences of that – but what about this very real issues of these online tools being used to promote and encourage violence against women?

Also see:

Signs that a nonprofit idea is doomed – a blog inspired by the words of Anthony Bourdain

1 Reply

In honor of Anthony Bourdain, whose loss I still mourn, I read Kitchen Confidential: Adventures in the Culinary Underbelly for the first time. It’s a fantastic read – I highly recommend it. There’s a short section where he lists all of the wrong reasons to start a restaurant and a list of signs that a restaurant is in trouble, followed by a long narrative of his personal experiences at such failing restaurants. It got me thinking about what I’ve always considered the obvious signs of a nonprofit that’s in trouble and the wrong reasons to start a nonprofit, based on my what I’ve seen and experienced.

So I’ve spent several days thinking about it and making a list. Here it is:

The vanity project. This can be everything from I’ve always wanted to run a nonprofit, so I’m going to start one to my little precious snowflake got turned down from volunteering with a group he wanted to help so we’ve started a nonprofit in his name. These projects are all about the founder – the web site and any media articles are about the person who started the organization, how wonderful they are, or cute, or admirable – not about the clients served, the difference actually made. Many nonprofits are started by a dynamic someone with a particular vision, and I’m not at all saying that’s bad – it’s been my honor to work for some amazing visionaries. In fact, such a champion is often essential to a nonprofit getting off the ground. But when a nonprofit is mostly about the person who started it, you can bet that nonprofit isn’t going to be around long.

We have passion, not a business plan! A group of people feel passionately about trees. Or fish. Or homeless dogs. Or live theater. That’s terrific. That passionate group of people is essential for a nonprofit to be launched successfully and attract donors. But what’s also essential is an old-fashioned, text-to-paper business plan. What actual activities do you want to do in your first year and how much do you estimate that’s going to cost? How are you going to staff those activities? How are you going to ensure the safety of participants? How are you going to evaluate whether you’ve done what you said you would do and ensured you haven’t actually made things worse? What kind of facilities do you need to make all this happen? And you have to have at least a general plan for your first three years where you try to answer these questions as well.

We have a great idea that’s NEVER been done before! Yes, it has. In fact, there is a probably project like the one you are proposing already in your city or county, or online. You are so in love with your idea that you just cannot believe no one has thought about it before. So you announce it, launch it, and then are shocked when asked, “How is your project different from such-and-such?” Sure, you might get a lot of initial press over your “brand new” idea, from reporters who also didn’t do their homework and don’t know this initiative already exists somewhere. But those other established initiatives have an advantage over you: they were here before you, they learned from a litany of mistakes and misdirections you don’t know about, and they know how to avoid those now. They will be here when your idea isn’t so hot and new anymore and you go back to grad school. Here’s a better pitch: We have a great idea for something this community needs, and here is our extensive proof that it’s needed and how it’s different from other projects, along with why we can do this!

Our board of directors doesn’t give money, just ideas! Your board is fiscally responsible for this organization. The executive director reports to the board, who evaluates his or her performance. The board should know how to do that. Boards that don’t know how to do that are shocked when the executive director resigns and, whoops, the bank account is empty! The board should have a set amount of money they need to raise or give every year to the organization in order to keep their seat on that board. Also, how can your nonprofit ask for money unless your board members are showing leadership in donating themselves? If you just want their ideas, put them on an advisory board. If your board of directors isn’t providing a good percentage of your operational funds, either out of their own pockets or via their network of associates, your nonprofit isn’t going to last long.

Our first step: a high-profile fundraising event! So many nonprofits start with trying to find a celebrity to endorse their idea or trying to organize a big concert or even an entire music festival to launch their initiative. The organizers think that all you have to do is get your heart-wrenching letter or energetic pitch in front of some big movie star or music celebrity and, poof, that person is going to be calling you to say, “I have to be a part of this! How can I help?!” It doesn’t work that way. The landscape is littered with failed fundraising concerts – and even lawsuits that resulted from such. One of the parts of Loretta Lynn’s autobiography that doesn’t make it into the film based on that book is one of her early attempts at organizing a fundraising concert for a cause that she cared about – it was a disaster because organizers – people with a lot of great intentions – didn’t have a business plan or a budget. Money was lost, hearts were broken, reputations harmed. See also: NetAid.

Our main message is: give us money! I am not going to follow you on Twitter or Facebook or anywhere else if all your nonprofit is going to do is hit me up for a donation. Show me photos of your volunteers in action, of your happy box office staff taking reservations for your next show, of actors acting in your current show, of someone happily adopting a dog from your shelter, of your staff getting ready for your next farmer’s market, of your executive director talking to the Rotary Club or, if its appropriate, of your clients. Tell me success stories, tell me stories of the challenges your clients face, tell me something funny… don’t just tell me, or beg me, to donate!

We have an angel! It’s not just Broadway producers that dream of a wealthy person that falls in love with an idea and is willing to put up major bucks to fund it – a lot of people that start nonprofits dream of it as well. And like most Broadway producers that want to rely on such, they get their heart broken. But sometimes it DOES work out, and a nonprofit gets the attention of that wealthy someone who gives half, or even the bulk, of the money needed for the first year of operations. Or maybe its a foundation. Hurrah for you! But here’s a spoiler alert: that gift will disappear some day. Maybe not next year. Maybe not the year after that. But it will happen: the angel will get other interests, or die. A nonprofit or NGO that is not constantly cultivating a diversity of funding streams – other foundations, lots of individual donors, fees for service, contracts for service, etc. – is, sooner or later, going away.

GIve us money or volunteer with us or we’ll have to close! Then maybe you should close. Because if this is what it’s come to, it means that, even if you get the money you need to stay open this month, you will be making the same desperate plea next month.

That’s my list. What do you think are the signs of a nonprofit or non-governmental organization (NGO) doomed from the start? Share in the comments.

Also see:

Tearing down women who dare to lead

Leave a reply

The next time you see a glowing article about or an interview with a woman who has started her own initiative or nonprofit in the town or neighborhood where she lives, or who is running for office, or who is leading a fight against some polluter or oppressor in her area, no matter what country it’s happening in, consider what this woman is probably dealing with that isn’t talked about in the article: vicious, constant personal attacks and criticisms.

In a blog I wrote a year ago, called Barriers to women’s leadership we don’t talk about, I wrote about women in other countries who pay a hefty price in their attempts to be ambitious at work and exert any kind of leadership, particularly via gossip but also per constant insults and criticisms from other women. And I noted that those barriers happen right here in the USA to women who try to lead in some way, small or large.

Women are continually, regularly discouraged from thinking of themselves as powerful or ambitious or worthy of leading in any efforts, no matter how large or small. When women try to lead – whether on a project or even just regarding a topic during a discussion- the reaction can be discouraging or even ugly. The reactions come from colleagues, from the community, even from those they try to serve. Even from family members.

Women who try to lead are often subjected to insults and attacks designed specifically to prey on personal fears and insecurities. I’ve certainly it experienced myself. Newly-elected congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is experiencing it to a degree that would make most people wither – any Internet search of her name will illustrate it. 

Right here in the small town in Oregon where I live, a few years ago, a young woman decided to create a participatory project that she hoped would build community cohesion, something the population was struggling with. She planned carefully, encouraged and welcomed participation, shared decision-making and made it completely transparent, and personally reached out and guided participants in the project, all while making sure her vision was always at the forefront – it was about that vision, not about her. The project flourished: more and more people participated and her vision was being realized: more and more people became aware of local government meetings and action (and how to participate in such), new resources from the county public health office, road conditions, and even new restaurant openings. Rumors were quickly squashed. Neighbors were helping each other – neighbors who might never have met otherwise. Involvement in her project grew to a number that was more than 25% of the population, and it included me – I was skeptical at first, but quickly bought into her efforts. A newspaper wrote a story about her efforts. At a debate for candidates running for local office, two candidates talked about her project in their remarks and how it was so important to the community and they wanted to better leverage it.

But some people didn’t like her success. A small minority of participants provided constant public and private criticism of how she moderated and facilitated activities and how she reinforced the goals of the project, and rarely was the criticism constructive. People who violated the project’s policies – policies that are in writing and about which regular reminders are sent – were angry when they were gently reprimanded, even if that reprimand happened well behind the scenes, discreetly. They were furious when their actions, in violation of the written policies, lead them to being blocked from further participation. The founder received personal insults via direct message and text, like the one posted next to this paragraph (it’s one of the milder ones, actually). At least one person created a fake account on Facebook and posted outrageous messages, trying to make people think it was the group founder. At least three rival projects were launched by disgruntled former participants  – all failed after just a few weeks or months. But that tiny, vocal, persistent minority and their constant insults and attacks finally did her in: after four years, she resigned her role as project owner and manager, not because she thought the project needed fresh leadership, not because there were people who had demonstrated that they were ready to take over, but because, emotionally, she just couldn’t take the belittling and abusive comments anymore. It will now be up to the remaining volunteers to keep the project going. And maybe the project will continue. But what I’m worried about is that she’s probably going to continue to be targeted for comments by people in any endeavor she undertakes in this small town because she DARED to lead.

For anyone who offers advice for women who want to be leaders that is focused on smoothing out presentation style and being more gentle or diplomatic, I say, quite frankly: bollocks. Being overly concerned by one’s image with everyone or even the most vocal group of critics, however large or small, diminishes that person’s mental and emotional resources needed for leadership. People who are distracted about how everyone else perceives them – or even a vocal minority – are less clear about their goals and less capable of reaching them. And make no mistake: women are targeted by this kind of criticism far, far more than men.

I hate most of the articles I have ever read on women’s leadership. One I did not hate is Women Rising: The Unseen Barriers by Herminia Ibarra, Robin J. Ely and Deborah M. Kolb. A version of the article was published in the September 2013 issue of Harvard Business Review. And I loved this quote from the article in particular:

Integrating leadership into one’s core identity is particularly challenging for women, who must establish credibility in a culture that is deeply conflicted about whether, when, and how they should exercise authority. 

The reality is that effective leaders must have the confidence, and maybe even arrogance, to take initiative and action despite insults and criticisms. They have to know when a criticism is something to be considered, something to be used for improvement, and when it’s meant solely to be spiteful, to undermine and derail efforts and to personally attack someone and undermine their confidence. Effective leaders must be firmly anchored in their purpose. They need to always keep their cause, mission, project, objective, key message, whatever it is, as the first and foremost priority in all they do, and remember that everything they do needs to be true to that cause or message – a cause or message bigger than themselves. Absolutely, leaders need to listen to and consider comments and criticism about their performance – but they also need to know when to ignore insults. They need to know when they are hearing constructive criticism and when something is being said or done solely to tear someone down. And that can be difficult for even the best leaders.

When men are firmly anchored in their purpose, they are admired as confident. When women do this – well, we all know what is said about women who do this. But maybe instead of telling women to alter their behaviors if they want to be leaders, we need to start calling out the double standards in how we describe and respond to women leaders.

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: