4 ms·

So happy to see someone else flag this horrible abuse. I would rather donate the cost of a case of cookies to the Guides than support the free labour, but of c

So happy to see someone else flag this horrible abuse. I would rather donate the cost of a case of cookies to the Guides than support the free labour, but of course the policy forbids such donations. I would think many other people would be happy to offer a 5$ donation direct to the Guides rather than line the pockets of a corporate parasite.

mmt 8y ago
At least here in the US, it's quite easy to donate directly to a local chapter (as well as higher levels of the organization). I've done it. Is that not the case where you are? Or is the problem that you're trying to support a specific troop or want to support a specific individual, and that's forbidden? Do you have a link to something documenting the prohibition you've encountered?
- thatcat 8y ago
  They don't solicit donations, they sell cookies for no personal gain instead. Sure you can go out of your way to donate - but they aren't asking for that. If Girl Scouts want to use children as labor they should pay them the commission, then ask the children for donations. If this isn't a form of forced labor they would make the same amount.
- foolrush 8y ago
  When the girls are doing their rounds, I don't believe you are able to donate directly as an "instead of" option. That is, instead of cookies, a donation box, which would clearly state _all_ proceeds would be going to support the local troop. It is also quite shameful that the distribution of funds isn't clearly indicated when the girls are funding. I suspect more people would donate directly instead of the cookies if they saw the distribution ratios. Here, I believe the Guides take 3.00$ of the 5.00$, with a mere 1.00$ going to the girl in question. I would prefer to simply give 100% of the 5.00$ to the local troop that the girl is supporting, and in turn support five girls in her troop for the same donation amount.
  - mmt 8y ago
    > I don't believe you are able to donate directly as an "instead of" option. I'm pretty sure that's not the case, at least here, as I've been personally present when a friend did exactly that. Again, I question that what you're describing is a matter of any explicit prohibition due to policy, rather than your conclusion based on observed behavior (which, itself, can be explained by optimizing for maximum overall revenue, rather than maximum revenue to any particular participant). To me, the split between the individual girl and the scouting organization (at troop, regional, national, or whatever level) is immaterial, because, at least here [1], the scouting organizations have routinely been in the news for their inclusive policies, even of otherwise politically marginalized girls, including putting their money behind such policies. [1] Again, the US. Other countries may well be different.
wand3r 8y ago
> horrible abuse I mean, it’s voluntary and frankly not exactly torture. I understand how it could be considered somewhat exploitative if you look at it from a business standpoint but it seems like a fun and friendly competition which tons of people like to support and indulge. They aren’t selling life insurance. I guess I get where youre coming from but that statement seems a bit hyperbolic.

mmt 8y ago

At least here in the US, it's quite easy to donate directly to a local chapter (as well as higher levels of the organization). I've done it. Is that not the case where you are? Or is the problem that you're trying to support a specific troop or want to support a specific individual, and that's forbidden? Do you have a link to something documenting the prohibition you've encountered?

thatcat 8y ago
They don't solicit donations, they sell cookies for no personal gain instead. Sure you can go out of your way to donate - but they aren't asking for that. If Girl Scouts want to use children as labor they should pay them the commission, then ask the children for donations. If this isn't a form of forced labor they would make the same amount.
foolrush 8y ago
When the girls are doing their rounds, I don't believe you are able to donate directly as an "instead of" option. That is, instead of cookies, a donation box, which would clearly state _all_ proceeds would be going to support the local troop. It is also quite shameful that the distribution of funds isn't clearly indicated when the girls are funding. I suspect more people would donate directly instead of the cookies if they saw the distribution ratios. Here, I believe the Guides take 3.00$ of the 5.00$, with a mere 1.00$ going to the girl in question. I would prefer to simply give 100% of the 5.00$ to the local troop that the girl is supporting, and in turn support five girls in her troop for the same donation amount.
- mmt 8y ago
  > I don't believe you are able to donate directly as an "instead of" option. I'm pretty sure that's not the case, at least here, as I've been personally present when a friend did exactly that. Again, I question that what you're describing is a matter of any explicit prohibition due to policy, rather than your conclusion based on observed behavior (which, itself, can be explained by optimizing for maximum overall revenue, rather than maximum revenue to any particular participant). To me, the split between the individual girl and the scouting organization (at troop, regional, national, or whatever level) is immaterial, because, at least here [1], the scouting organizations have routinely been in the news for their inclusive policies, even of otherwise politically marginalized girls, including putting their money behind such policies. [1] Again, the US. Other countries may well be different.

wand3r 8y ago

> horrible abuse I mean, it’s voluntary and frankly not exactly torture. I understand how it could be considered somewhat exploitative if you look at it from a business standpoint but it seems like a fun and friendly competition which tons of people like to support and indulge. They aren’t selling life insurance. I guess I get where youre coming from but that statement seems a bit hyperbolic.