KEY TOPICS: Plan Canada, Public Outreach, campaigns, female equality
*Summary not included.
Originally this blog post was called, "Don't avoid the folks in blue: why 'Because I am a Girl' campaigners matter." I wanted to write a positive piece that would raise the street campaigner to the level of social engager. How I saw it, these folks weren't just promoting a social justice cause that needed our money. They served to remind us that people can help ease human suffering.
Here is the introduction from that earlier draft:
These days, if you've any business in downtown or even mid-town Toronto, you'll have noticed the folks in blue: Plan Canada's "Because I am a Girl" campaigners.
Positioned at major intersections, like Yonge & University, Bloor & St. George and Yonge & St. Clair, these folks want to discuss one of the world's most pressing problems, face to face: underprivileged girls. The effects and cause well-documented, they want you to know that girls suffer disproportionately from abuse, neglect and poor health because they are girls. Their natural effervescence, you'll discover, springing from genuine concern.
I go on to set Plan Canada in an equally favourable light:
Plan Canada hopes we'll come to understand that gender inequality may be the norm in many countries but it certainly isn't normal that countless girls marry as children, are subject to honour killings or remain illiterate all their lives. Indeed, the injustice is profound; but, like all campaigns for social change, "Because I am a Girl" is built on optimism. Being a girl today needn't mean hardship.
Those folks in blue urge you to find out how you can help.
The last line meant to evoke some moral compunction on the part of the reader.
However, in the midst of drafting this article, two significant conversations occurred. As a result, I changed the title, introduced a disclaimer and revised my premise.
Despite declining my photo request (for this article), the male campaigner on Bloor Street engaged in what would be the first of two critical conversations. He revealed, after some questioning on my part about his wages, that Plan Canada hired Public Outreach to find, train and pay him. I didn't see that coming, and I told him so. But now I felt compelled to reassure my readers that I certainly wasn't a mouthpiece for a big charitable organization or - worse? - a for-profit company that helps non-profits increase their fundraising revenue. In came the new title, "Who pays the 'Because I am a Girl' campaigner and should it matter?" along with the disclaimer, a simple but clear statement of integrity:
Let me say from the outset that I have no affiliation with Plan Canada, Public Outreach nor with any of the street campaigners employed by Public Outreach.
My opinions would be my own. After all, this blog is a product of my desire and right to broadcast - just as so many others do - a range of social and political observations.
Yet, I'd initially hoped that a set of apparently youthful, conscientious folk would challenge my skepticism of society's do-gooders. I'd hoped that individually they'd infuse me with their optimism. That, you could say, I might awaken more fully to the possibility of a kinder, not just a less harsh, world.
So, I ask now, does it really matter who pays the "Because I am a Girl" campaigner? Does the involvement of Public Outreach eliminate the possibility of inspired dialogue on our very own streets? The fact remains that communities around the world grossly undervalue girls, and, many will agree, we need to address this serious problem. Those folks in blue really do seem to care about the bottom-line: easing human suffering.
However, am I seeing the big picture?
Shortly after my surprising discovery, the second critical conversation occurred. "It's called consumer-feminism," said Alissa, an academic and friend, as we finished our meal. Plan Canada's "Because I am a Girl" campaign, a consumer-feminist project? There's no single definition here but for our purposes consumer-feminism is the turning of gender politics into a feel-good commodity for "purchase" by a privileged class who wish to affect change. Could Alissa be right? If so, then the whole lot of girls' focused campaigns by Plan Canada and others could be accused of being naive, at best, or, at worst, thoroughly misguided.
Consumer-feminism needn't apply only to gender politics, any social change oriented politics can be commodified and "consumed."
For example, The Gap's "Red" campaign invites consumers to support AIDS awareness through the purchase of specially designed red-themed clothing promoted by a range of celebrities. While the 1970's Virginia Slims' "You've come a long way, baby" campaign positioned cigarettes as a useful tool of the U.S. women's liberation movement: to smoke a Virginia was to show others, men in particular, that you'd been freed from the patriarchal cage. In other words, the product offered the (American) woman the promise of an improved social status. Not surprisingly, the cigarette company didn't donate revenue to any women's causes (given the nature of their business, could that have even been possible?). That kind of "feel good" consumer-feminism would become popular later on.
Back on Toronto's streets, few campaigners are visible now that winter has set in, but Plan Canada continues to advocate online and in print. In 2013 alone, their concerted efforts launched 249 girls' projects, garnered the support of 22 countries and directly impacted 2 million girls worldwide. With these results, "Because I am a Girl" is rightfully optimistic. However, it will continue to need donors from rich countries, like Canada, the US, Germany, the U.K. and Australia, to pay for programs that aim to bolster girls. And that's the crux of the matter, isn't it: the need for rich donors, individuals or organizations, to help.
If countries across Latin America, Africa and Asia, where Plan Canada (and other non-profits) work, were independent then the current matrix would be useless. To understand why so many countries remain dependent on the West is a long discussion. Let me simply end with this observation: doing the right thing - or "red" thing - isn't as straightforward as it seems, no matter how compassionate the argument. Those folks in blue helped remind me of that.
*Summary not included.
Originally this blog post was called, "Don't avoid the folks in blue: why 'Because I am a Girl' campaigners matter." I wanted to write a positive piece that would raise the street campaigner to the level of social engager. How I saw it, these folks weren't just promoting a social justice cause that needed our money. They served to remind us that people can help ease human suffering.
Here is the introduction from that earlier draft:
These days, if you've any business in downtown or even mid-town Toronto, you'll have noticed the folks in blue: Plan Canada's "Because I am a Girl" campaigners.
 |
| "Because I am a Girl" Campaigners at Yonge & St. Clair |
I go on to set Plan Canada in an equally favourable light:
 |
| Campaign Logo |
Plan Canada hopes we'll come to understand that gender inequality may be the norm in many countries but it certainly isn't normal that countless girls marry as children, are subject to honour killings or remain illiterate all their lives. Indeed, the injustice is profound; but, like all campaigns for social change, "Because I am a Girl" is built on optimism. Being a girl today needn't mean hardship.
Those folks in blue urge you to find out how you can help.
The last line meant to evoke some moral compunction on the part of the reader.
However, in the midst of drafting this article, two significant conversations occurred. As a result, I changed the title, introduced a disclaimer and revised my premise.
Despite declining my photo request (for this article), the male campaigner on Bloor Street engaged in what would be the first of two critical conversations. He revealed, after some questioning on my part about his wages, that Plan Canada hired Public Outreach to find, train and pay him. I didn't see that coming, and I told him so. But now I felt compelled to reassure my readers that I certainly wasn't a mouthpiece for a big charitable organization or - worse? - a for-profit company that helps non-profits increase their fundraising revenue. In came the new title, "Who pays the 'Because I am a Girl' campaigner and should it matter?" along with the disclaimer, a simple but clear statement of integrity:
Let me say from the outset that I have no affiliation with Plan Canada, Public Outreach nor with any of the street campaigners employed by Public Outreach.
My opinions would be my own. After all, this blog is a product of my desire and right to broadcast - just as so many others do - a range of social and political observations.
Yet, I'd initially hoped that a set of apparently youthful, conscientious folk would challenge my skepticism of society's do-gooders. I'd hoped that individually they'd infuse me with their optimism. That, you could say, I might awaken more fully to the possibility of a kinder, not just a less harsh, world.
So, I ask now, does it really matter who pays the "Because I am a Girl" campaigner? Does the involvement of Public Outreach eliminate the possibility of inspired dialogue on our very own streets? The fact remains that communities around the world grossly undervalue girls, and, many will agree, we need to address this serious problem. Those folks in blue really do seem to care about the bottom-line: easing human suffering.
However, am I seeing the big picture?
Shortly after my surprising discovery, the second critical conversation occurred. "It's called consumer-feminism," said Alissa, an academic and friend, as we finished our meal. Plan Canada's "Because I am a Girl" campaign, a consumer-feminist project? There's no single definition here but for our purposes consumer-feminism is the turning of gender politics into a feel-good commodity for "purchase" by a privileged class who wish to affect change. Could Alissa be right? If so, then the whole lot of girls' focused campaigns by Plan Canada and others could be accused of being naive, at best, or, at worst, thoroughly misguided.
Consumer-feminism needn't apply only to gender politics, any social change oriented politics can be commodified and "consumed."
 |
| The Gap's "Red" Campaign Poster |
Back on Toronto's streets, few campaigners are visible now that winter has set in, but Plan Canada continues to advocate online and in print. In 2013 alone, their concerted efforts launched 249 girls' projects, garnered the support of 22 countries and directly impacted 2 million girls worldwide. With these results, "Because I am a Girl" is rightfully optimistic. However, it will continue to need donors from rich countries, like Canada, the US, Germany, the U.K. and Australia, to pay for programs that aim to bolster girls. And that's the crux of the matter, isn't it: the need for rich donors, individuals or organizations, to help.
If countries across Latin America, Africa and Asia, where Plan Canada (and other non-profits) work, were independent then the current matrix would be useless. To understand why so many countries remain dependent on the West is a long discussion. Let me simply end with this observation: doing the right thing - or "red" thing - isn't as straightforward as it seems, no matter how compassionate the argument. Those folks in blue helped remind me of that.
