As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options
Chartiy: Are we feeding the cildren, or feeding off the children?
Casually Hardcore
Once an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered User regular
Once an Asshole. Trying to be better.Registered User regular
Man, I hate to come across as the heartless guy who was lucky enough to be born and raised in a 1st world country, where my biggest concerned growing up was getting my homework done. But I really don't see the point of some charity fundraiser events.
Now, let me be clear. I do understand charity and I appreciate their effort, as long as they're legit. But sometimes I get the impression that many of these charity events is about 'making the news'.
For example, a popular charity even are these 'Sleep in a Box' event, that is targeted towards teens and college age people. The main idea behind these event is to sleep outside, in a box, and experience a a night of being homeless. While the overall idea is pretty clever, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Pizza, movies, live music, and security guards is not what I call an authentic experience and I believe all that energy could have been invested in a much meaningful way. One of the most common replies I get from my previous comment is "Well, I just want to help in a way I can help.", and that reply is a bit insulting. The only way you can help out is by partying?
I also been on the other side of the fence, where I participated in setting up events to bring awareness to one thing or another, and the focus of these events was never about bringing awareness to the issues, it's always about bringing awareness to the organization.
I always get asked the, 'do you have any better ideas?', and I do. Instead of wasting a night to raise a few thousand dollars, where most of the donation will be used to host the next charity event, why not focus those man hours becoming educated and help society through innovations? I mean who's helping the homeless more, the guy who spends the night eating pizza and watching movies outside at an event, or the guy who spends a large part of his life developing food processes that makes food more affordable for everyone across the globe?
So that's the question. Are charities going about this the right way? Is it effective to spend a large amount of time and energy for something that'll only help for a short amount of time?
Now, let me be clear. I do understand charity and I appreciate their effort, as long as they're legit. But sometimes I get the impression that many of these charity events is about 'making the news'.
For example, a popular charity even are these 'Sleep in a Box' event, that is targeted towards teens and college age people. The main idea behind these event is to sleep outside, in a box, and experience a a night of being homeless. While the overall idea is pretty clever, the execution leaves a lot to be desired. Pizza, movies, live music, and security guards is not what I call an authentic experience and I believe all that energy could have been invested in a much meaningful way. One of the most common replies I get from my previous comment is "Well, I just want to help in a way I can help.", and that reply is a bit insulting. The only way you can help out is by partying?
I also been on the other side of the fence, where I participated in setting up events to bring awareness to one thing or another, and the focus of these events was never about bringing awareness to the issues, it's always about bringing awareness to the organization.
I always get asked the, 'do you have any better ideas?', and I do. Instead of wasting a night to raise a few thousand dollars, where most of the donation will be used to host the next charity event, why not focus those man hours becoming educated and help society through innovations? I mean who's helping the homeless more, the guy who spends the night eating pizza and watching movies outside at an event, or the guy who spends a large part of his life developing food processes that makes food more affordable for everyone across the globe?
So that's the question. Are charities going about this the right way? Is it effective to spend a large amount of time and energy for something that'll only help for a short amount of time?
Casually Hardcore on
0
Posts
But for the most, though you won't find a lot of love here, I agree, the best thing you can do for the homeless is to work towards an increased standard of living, which comes from, among other things, industry. Particularly industry that makes something they need cheaper and better.
From a practical view, I would agree. The actual activities of sleeping outside or running around a track a bunch of times or even walking a certain distance for AIDS aren't inherently productive. I'd be more willing to support a charity that was, I dunno, picking up garbage or something - instead of paying someone for every mile they walk, pay for every piece of garbage.
On the other hand, this sort of charity doesn't really trade on how useful the activity is; it trades on getting as many people involved in the activity, and getting all of those people to get money from their friends. They want to cast as wide a net as possible to bring in as much money as they can. I have absolutely no data to back me up, but I'd guess (just based on popularity) that people have more luck recruiting people for something easy like the AIDS walk than something a bit more productive.
One event that annoyed me recently was something called the "Booby Ball" - it's a night of partying to raise money for breast cancer research. One, the sexualisation of a deadly disease is pretty fucked up in itself, but in addition to that it just reeks of apathetic twenty-somethings who are only interested in helping a cause if it gives them an excuse to party on a boat with bottle service.
There are two types of charity (essentially): actively changing something and paying to have something changed. Both are quite effective (when done properly/legitimately). It's up to you to choose which path to take.
Can't afford the $200 plate? Go paint a fence or volunteer at a soup kitchen.
The commercialization of breast cancer research happens to be one of my pet peeves. First off, it's not the only damn form of cancer out there. Second, just because a product bears a pink ribbon doesn't mean that any significant portion of the proceeds are actually being donated to effective research or treatment. Third, it's a way for corporations to skip out on corporate responsibility. Who cares if Avon is putting carcinogenic chemicals in cosmetics... as long as 5 cents from every stick of lipstick goes to finding a cure!
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Obviously, it is a lot more fun to loaf about outside watching movies and eating pizza while you can brag to your friends that you're a very social and caring person than if you'd stand outside on the street with a sign telling people why homeless people need your help.
If the goal is to raise awareness it pays off to do this in the most ridiculous way possible, because the most effective way is probably not going to get anyone anything.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
The living in a box thing isn't authentic, but it doesn't matter - the point is to raise money.
Of course people prefered to spend one night doing pleasant fundraising to dedicating their lives to agricultural research. But these are marginally interested people. There choice isn't between doing something for one day and doing it for a lifetime. Their choice is between doing something for one day and doing nothing.
A fucking pointless waste of effort designed to make people feel good about themselves.
Note: I'm not trying to say charity is pointless. Merely agreeing with the OP that some of these things are more about people being smug and feeling good about themselves, than actually helping anything.
You know, on one hand, I find this pretty sad. When the best excuse you can find for a mediocre effort is, "Well, it's better than no effort at all," that's damning with faint praise. Even spending a few Saturdays volunteering to sort cans at a food bank would be better than a publicity stunt.
On the other hand, complaining about token efforts doesn't do any good either. If anybody is reading this post thinking, "Yeah, living in a cardboard box overnight is pretty stupid!" then you should ask yourself, what have you done recently to make the world better? Do you really have room to judge?
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
So, either you completely skipped this part of the OP, or you just didn't read it at all.
I have to agree with you a bit, thugs. The event in the example seemed like it had a noble cause but was executed poorly. To try and show people what its like to be homeless, then have pizza, movies, and other forms of entertainment is just silly.
And no, Dyscord, this "charity event" doesn't sound like it was really raising awareness about homelessness, at all. If something like, say, fixing up old neighborhoods or helping out at soup kitchens had been apart of the agenda, then you would be correct. But they were not, and this almost mirrors "carbon exchange", in that those participating are either (a)trying to get their name out there-- the organizers, or (b) some pretentious douchebag who "wants to do what he can to help"-- the people who really don't care.
I'm not saying it can't be fun, I agree that charity work can/should be. But if it really doesn't help fix the problem, then why do it?
Right, so a bunch of people did some dumb stuff to try and raise some money for the homeless, and it's too bad that we need to go through the motions of having this event to get them to take part.
which is what I said
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Oh, I read it as more of a sarcastic argument.
I just think it's a silly argument
Yes, most people are casually selfish and won't give of themselves to solve problems unless there is something in it for them. And that sucks.
So... ?
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Seriously, though, is this a recent thing? It seemed like all of a sudden I started seeing breast cancer swag all over the place, starting with "Save the ta-tas!" It's weird.
This site also made me uncomfortable.
I think the endless pink breast cancer month stuff started when people realized how many more sales they can get by sticking a Susan G Komen logo on something since women typically do more shopping than men.
Or, you know, trying to improve the level at which the state provides mental health care to the populace.
Because that's a massive factor in the homelessness rates in any first-world nation.