I Love Dove

My day job, as I'm sure many of you who read this may know, involves helping corporations develop strategic philanthropy programs that engage them in their communities through grantmaking, volunteering, cause marketing, etc. and leverage their internal strengths. It's part-using philanthropy to reach business objectives and part-straightforward, big hearted giving back.

I love my job. I love (most of) my clients and find these big name corporations populated by very good people who genuinely care about giving back. I'm proud of the work they do in their communities and glad to be a part of it.

My one critique of course, coming from the background that I do, is that, for the most part, companies don't do enough. And by this I mean they don't take risks. They play it safe - understandably - in choosing their issues: kids, education and of course the cause du jour: breast cancer (US Weekly highlighted beauty and fashion products alone - there were 27 giving a portion of proceeds to Breast Cancer this month, not to mention the work done by Avon, Campbell's - I could go on). All of these causes are EXTREMELY worthy and I would never belittle corporate involvement in them - but so many other causes go unfunded for fear they are too provocative. No one wants to rock the boat.

Except maybe Dove. Dove has by far my favorite corporate philanthropy program. I had the opportunity to get a indepth look while doing research for another client and I continue to be impressed with their provocative campaigns that tackle the issue of body image and self-esteem in women and young girls. In an industry that was made to gloss over the imperfections, Dove highlights their falsity in a way that is innovative and SO necessary.

Check out their latest commercial:



Learn more about how to participate in Dove's project.

Football matches linked to rise in domestic violence

Home Office research revealed that incidences of domestic violence increased by 31% during England's World Cup match days this summer.

This is sort of bitter-sweet information.

As much as I am horrified with this news, I'm also pleased that it's come out. There has already been alot of research linking organised sports to violence, but this tends to focus on 'holliganism' and team competition. There has been some feminist research that looks at organised sports and sexual violence but it is extremely limited. As far as I know, this is the first goverment intiative to monitor domestic violence and sports.

Amish Shooting and the Veil Debate

Bob Herbert's recent article in the New York Times was great. Not only did it provide me with new information about the shooting in Pennsylvania, but the New York Times needs more articles that are blatantly and directly about violence against women and how no one is doing enough about it.

I hadn't actually realized that only girls had been killed. I guess I assumed that it was an all-girl school or maybe it was never actually mentioned as only girls in any of the news reports I watched. In the UK, press tended to focus on a) the bizareness of Amish communities and b) how once again crazy, American people are shooting eachother. Herbert calls a spade a spade:

"Imagine if a gunman had gone into a school, separated the kids on the basis of race or religion, and then shot only the black kids. Or only the white kids. Or only the Jews.

There would have been thunderous outrage. The country would have first recoiled in horror, and then mobilized in an effort to eradicate that kind of murderous bigotry. There would have been calls for action and reflection. And the attack would have been seen for what it really was: a hate crime."

This brings to mind the debate that is going on in the UK at moment about Jack Straw's moronic comments about Muslim women wearing the veil. He's managed to upset everyone (not just the Muslim 'community') by asking women to remove their veils when visiting him in his office in Blackburn, claiming that it acted as a boundary. This has revived the veil debate but not in terms of women's rights. Instead it has focused primarily on two issues: a) how much more of nanny statecan the UK become by telling people what they can and cannot wear and b) the demonisation of Muslim culture in the UK. Not about women and the veil. Lord Ahmed commented on how instead of demonising the Muslim community, the goverment should be tackling the high unemployment and low levels of education attainment within the Muslim community. But no where did he mention a call for these issues to be examined according to gender. As if Muslim women's low level of educational attainment or Muslim women's high unemployment wasn't a subject worth discussing.

Both the Amish shooting and veil debate has centered on concerns about muliticulturalism and isolation, not on how these two subjects are extremely gendered.

When Straw first made his comments, the support did receive was linked to the fact that they felt this was a subject that had become taboo.

Technorati Tag why aren't we shocked
jack straw

Man Map....

I know that this came out a few months ago, but it is only now getting press (LK Today) in the UK. Man Map seems to be a little bit tacky and weird, http://www.propertyshark.com/maps/
And I realize that it is most likely an ingenious publicity stunt to get web hits but I still hate the banter around it, all the 'Sex in the City' references, the struggling single over-30 working woman, etc etc etc. The fact that it is most likely to be tongue-in-cheek doesn't exclude the fact that it is completely upholding a stereotype of the gold-digging, desperate woman.

Oriana Fallaci

Oriana Fallaci dies at 77. Read her obituary (and HER BOOKS)!
Somehow I seemed to miss this.

See what other blogs are saying about oriana fallaci