I'm doing it for charity.

In My Humble Opinion
1

At a previous; job during a staff briefing we were asked to congratulate two staff members for losing so many pounds weight on a sponsored diet for Children in Need.

My immediate response was that they were trying to slim down because they felt less attractive carrying extra pounds, plus being obese was bad for their health.

Not only were they not doing it for charity, they were actually using the charity to motivate themselves to achieve their own ends.

And people don’t normally sponsor themselves in these events, so they’re not even giving any of their own money to the charity concerned.

I’ve seen it so many times, people who enjoy running, “running for charity” .

Fanatical swimmers doing likewise, people who have always fancied doing a parachute jump, people who have wanted to give up smoking, drive round Europe in vintage cars …

All doing it “for the children”, for the Third World ", etc.
Why don’t these people instead of helping themselves; do something for the community.

Something not particulary pleasant that helps other people, not just themselves ?

Picking up rubbish on the sea shore (amongst other things saving birds from strangling on beer can plastic and fishing line).

Clearing out polluted minor waterways, taking pensioners dogs for walks, and exchanging their books at the library.

Cleaning graffiti off of walls.

Not as much fun as dressing up as a cowboy, or French maid "for charity ", or going sailing on a Tall Ship, I know; but a hell of a lot more use to the community and underpriveleged individuals.

And also IMO ordinary people would be a lot more enthusiastic about becoming sponsors in the first place, AND actually be more generous in the amount they’re prepared to donate.

I couldn’t care less how many pounds weight you lose, and might, under pressure. grudgingly volunteer a small amount of money.

But if I’m paying so much for every bag of dogs crap you’ve picked up in the local area, not only am I more then happy to sponsor you, the more money I have to give you the happier I will be.

AND I will genuinely admire your very real self sacrifice for other peoples good.

I will also have a very real respect for the sort of person who is prepared to do this.

Unlike the self servers who use charitable causes for their own ends.

2

Or, you could look at it as while doing something they’d do anyway, they find a way to raise money for charity while doing it, instead of only doing it selfishly.

3

I have a feeling we’ll be a minority here, but I’m totally with you. Why should I pay someone to do something they want to do anyway? Has never made any sense to me. But it is charity, so we can’t really disagee without seeming mean and uncaring. And I suppose that the “job done” as far as money going to charity goes…but it is not a way I really care for personally.

4

I can understand this, and yeah thats neat, but, I count me in with Lust4Life and PookahMacPhellimy

5

Why does someone have to sacrifice when they’re doing something for charity? If you have a natural aptitude for something and then you use that to raise money/awareness for a good cause, isn’t that enough?

6

Yes, it does make me sound like a cranky old Communard, but when rich swells throw charity balls to network and get their pictures in the paper, while donating sums that hardly hurt them to part with, since they’d acquired the money more through the unequal income distribution of our society than through “honest hard work” (oh, by whom?)…no, I don’t feel all glowy about their altruism.

Resolved: charity perpetuates economic injustice rather than seeks to remedy its shortfall. [/cranky old Communard]

7

I’ve run a handful of charity events. As a side effect of that, I get hit on for money from all my friends charity activities. I’m ok with that, because I like to help. However, many of them are the type described here - “Give me money, and I’ll send it somewhere while doing something for myself.” Fine, if that’s what works for you, and it gets some money to a good cause.

I personally try to make sure the person donating the money gets a good experience in return.
Most recently, I’ve been running a garden Tea…there’s a thread somewhere out there about it.
We do approach some people for flat out donations - the guy who owns the big tent that we get set up as a backup plan in case it rains, for instance. But that’s at virtually no cost to him if it wasn’t going to be used by someone else, saves us several hundred dollars, and enables us to draw in more people so we can raise even more.

The rest of the people come to enjoy the food, decorations, and the garden itself.

It just makes me more comfortable if I can tell my donors that I spent two days slaving in the kitchen so they can eat fresh pastries and scones.

That being said…not everyone is able to do things like this, for one reason or another. If people are going to do something, and find a hook that enables them to raise some money, good for them. Some money going to good causes is better than no money going to good causes.
-D/a

8

I have a natural aptitude for reading, care to sponsor me to read the new Terry Pratchett book when it comes out ?

No I thought not.

Years ago when I worked on ships, somebody came up with the bright idea to do a sponsored pub crawl "for charity ".

A hell of a lot of people volunteered to do it, I mean, who wouldn’t ?

A nights drinking with the added bonus of it being an icebreaker with strangers along the route.

But in the event it was cancelled, because while everyone wanted to do it, no one would sponsor the beer drinkers.

This was an actual proposed event.

Obviously this is an example of hypocrisy at its most blatant, but is it anymore hypocritical then people with self induced health problems doing something for themselves while claiming that the main reason that they’re doing it is a selfless desire to help the needy ?

And expecting praise for it ?

Now if they actually put themselves out to help their local community in the ways that I outlined in the o.p. they would get more Bang for their Buck as it were.

Their actions would help people/the environment whatever, and the money that they collected would also help people.

And the donors and potential donors would be convinced of their sincerity rather then thinking of it as a self help stunt.

AND the people concerned could GENUINLY feel good about themselves for what they had done.

And rightly so.

By all means give up smoking, but don’t expect me to massage your ego for doing it.

And yes I do know how hard it is to give up, I gave up some years ago but didn’t kid myself that I was doing it for anyone elses benefit but my own, nor did I expect to be flattered by others for doing it…

9

Readathons for charity are incredibly popular.

10

Hogwash, you’re not paying anyone to do anything. When someone is “running for charity”, they’re not getting anything monetarily out of it, so why do you say you’re paying them? Yeah, it gave them a platform and an opportunity to ask you to donate - so what? When’s the last time you asked someone for a donation to your favorite cause?

11

This was a terribly conceived idea. I’ve seen plenty of successful pub crawls for charity. Everyone pays $20 which goes directly to charity, all the bars involved offer drinking specials for the participants (and possibly throw in a donation to boot) - the bars get a guaranteed increase in patrons that night, the crawlers have a good time, and the charity of choice gets a nice check at the end of the night. If your group managed to screw that up, whoever was in charge simply didn’t know what they were doing.

12

No they’re not getting anything financial out of it, but they are doing something that they either enjoy or feel they need to do for their own fitness sake.

Plus they also get as much publicity for themselves as they do supposedly for the charity, and also get to caress their own ego.

But that aside, I reiterate my point, which everyone who thinks that its o.k. to do self promoting charity stunts, has sidestepped.

If they are so passionate in their desire to help others why don’t they do something USEFUL for others, and DOESN’T benefit themselves in one way or another ?

If it is such a sacrifice for them to go on a run, or cut down on their meals, or fulfill a lifelong fantasy by dressing up, then why don’t they make the sacrifice of actually, physically helping underpriveleged people directly AND get sponsored to do it ?

Of course there wouldn’t be cheering crowds watching them do it, and it probably wouldn’t get them on t.v. ,and it certainly wouldn’t give them a trophy certificate and medal to show off after the event …

But it would do good to others directly, as well as do good for others when the sponsorship money is handed over to charity.

Running so many miles doesn’t help anyone but themselves, helping out old age pensioners to the park DOES.

If their motivation is selflessly helping the poor and underprivileged then this is the way to do it.

The fact that they are so shy of doing this,and would rather do what is basically having fun, or addressing their own health problems; in the name of helping others, suggests that their motivations are more self oriented then philantropic.

When I give money to charity its directly given to them, not via the hand of someone who wants to their picture in the local newspaper.

13

Newsflash - people are selfish. This is not noteworthy or new to anyone. Pure altruism doesn’t exist - that is also not (hopefully) a surprise to you. So why in the world are you begrudging anyone who does something for both their own personal gain as well as helping out a worthy cause? What’s so horrible about that? I don’t think anyone is under the mistaken impression that losing weight for charity doesn’t benefit the person losing the weight.

Why SHOULDN’T someone engage in an activity that benefits themselves as well as others?

Are you somehow under the impression that people who engage in “running for charity” never give money of their own in the same way you do? If so, you couldn’t be more wrong. As a fundraiser, I’d rather have one person running for my organization than five people like you who don’t do anything to spread the word and get new donors.

14

Luckily its not about you, or even people like you.

You want to massage your own ego and then pretend its to help other people then fine.

Fill your boots.
But what its really about is helping the poor sods who need it.

It must turn their stomachs when they see the phonys parading in front of the media, modestly telling the journos how saintly they are, but are too scared to get their hands dirty doing something that is actually worthwhile to help the underpriveleged.

Though that was not my primary consideration when I opened this thread, I knew that I’d touch some raw nerves in those whos motives weren’t entirely genuine.

And it would seem that I have done so.

My main point was to try and persuade people to do something USEFUL for the underpriveleged when they’re organising, or taking part in charity stunts.

If you’re conscience is bothering you :sort it out for yourself.

Don’t think that you’ll solve your problems by lashing out at complete strangers.

15

Never claimed it was. The work I do doesn’t get me a bit of publicity. The fact that you somehow think that the newspapers are filled with fluff pieces of people who raise a few hundred for some charity makes me think you’ve never actually picked up a newspaper or watched the news before. Because they’re not - they’re a figment of your imagination. The people that take the time to run for charity are also the people that take the time out to volunteer, are the people that go out of their way to get others around them involved in their organization, and who dig a little deeper into their pockets when they’re asked to donate. Regular donors are fantastic - but those superstar donors who are doing everything are absolutely invaluable. I wish they got more recognition - but outside of the organization, that recognition just simply doesn’t exist.

You have yet to demonstrate that (a) what they’re isn’t useful and (b) they aren’t additionally doing things above and beyond the work you’re aware of. Again - I can assure you that they are.

16

Sure, they are not getting money, but aren’t we at least pretending some sort of “deal” is going on? Like “You give me 50 euroes and I will walk the Inca trail”. Otherwise why drag the sponsoring thing into it at all? IMO it is implied that the asker is being “paid” to do something, and they then go on to donate that money.

Look, I don’t begrudge the charity the money and since the charity does end up getting the money in this way, I suppose, job done. But personally I’d much rather pay way over the odds for your homebaked cookies or a massage or to do good in the community as the OP suggests, because at least I’m paying you for goods or services rather than for you to pursue your hobbies. And that really honestly isn’t about the money. I just don’t really see the logic of sponsored fun is all.

17

In my experience, people are much more likely to donate to a charity if someone is making some sort of perceived sacrifice, even if they are personally getting something out of it. I run and cycle for charity (probably 75% of the runs around here benefit a charity of some sort) and it’s much, much easier for me to get $5 from someone for that then if I just ask for money for other charities I volunteer for where I’m not putting in that perceived effort.

18

Then I think you’re getting the wrong impression. If you write a check for this, you should be writing it to the organization, not to the person hiking the Inca trail. Otherwise, you may be getting scammed. You could also have problems claiming that donation on your taxes - but that’s a minor concern. The goal is to get someone to think, “gosh, if they’re willing to do that for Charity X, the least I could do is cut Charity X a $25 check.”

You mean other than the fact that the money benefits a (hopefully) worthy cause? One of the few actual points L4L had was that people rarely do things that are purely fun for charity - i.e. read a book. No one gets sponsored to go camping for a weekend, but they may get sponsored to climb a mountain. No one gets sponsored to walk to the store and back, but they do get sponsored to run from the North Pole to the South Pole. As you can see, there is an element of difficulty that we’re acknowledging, and we see that the act itself is newsworthy, and attaching a charity to the feat also brings publicity to that organization - and hopefully additional donations from the general public. I don’t see the giant leap of logic you’d need to make to see that, hopefully it’s obvious.

19

[QUOTE=Munch;14059472.

You have yet to demonstrate that (a) what they’re isn’t useful and (b) they aren’t additionally doing things above and beyond the work you’re aware of. Again - I can assure you that they are.[/QUOTE]

Yes I do read newspapers and watch t.v. news and where I live its almost a daily thing to read an article about people doing pointless activities in the name of charity raising, and weekly on the area t.v. station.

I will reiterate my previous point as you don’t seem to have grasped it.

Running so many miles isn’t useful to anyone, least of all the poor and the underpriveleged Period.

Doing a pensioners shopping, taking their dog for a walk, doing their gardening, keeping them company, helps the pensioners.
Your excuse for assigning selfless,caring motives for self indulgent activities is that it publicises the charity (as well of course the saint whos the indulgee).

Well publicise your charity by helping the pensioners, or the poor or the handicapped and the publicity will be even better then some obese person laying off of the chocolates for a week or two, or going on a fun run, or a sponsored farting marathon or whatever .

People will be more likely to believe that your motives are genuine, rather then an excuse for egotistical self promotion.

And as a result will be more likely to give in the first place, and give MORE.

I’m sorry but I can’t put it any simpler then that.

And now I’m off to bed for a sponsored nights sleep, followed by a sponsored days work tomorrow…

All for charity of course.

.

20

Yes, I know that. That’s completely not the point. The point is that IMO it is a transaction, even if symbolic.

As I’ve already said that as long as a good cause gets money, it is all fine by me. And I do like your point about motivating people by doing something that takes effort - that was something I hadn’t thought of and it’s a valid point.

Maybe it’s a personal thing, though, but I’ve never been one to be so terribly impressed by people making difficulties where there are none (mountain-climbing, parachuting etc). If you want to do that, then do so and that’s fine. I just have a hard time admiring it because it doesn’t in and of itself achieve anything* and the difficulties that are being overcome are self-created…just give me the homebaked cookies, okay! :wink:

*Yes, yes, money goes to charity, but that argument is a little circular.