I have always believed that this is a complex issue – not new to me, but complex!

You have picked up my message, Nancy. Spot on in fact. I believe that charity begins at home. The apportionment of personal funds/resources/assistance (but not necessarily just money) can be a controversial issue in itself.

I note, with some trepidation, the billions – no, trillions – of dollars coming from western government coffers to support the western (global?) financial plight. But even this is complex, for the economies of other less prosperous countries hinge on the world economies.

The haves and the have-nots. Probably, and it would be unfortunate, these will always exist.

This year, my youngest daughter (14y) went on a mission to Fiji, with a group of like-minded young people from our local church. I deliberated for ages on whether the fare money and other expenses for this mission should not have just been passed along to the needy in Fiji, instead of assisting the mission. I still wonder about that. But I’m also not sure of what is right in these circumstances. Who does know? It is a very personal thing.

Catchya later

But my experience has shown this is not just about higher standards of living from a consumer perspective, but about basic rights of clean water, food, shelter and education. AND, about a girl/woman having respect and not be treated as property herself.

This is complex and your caution reminds us not to oversimplify it. And the importance of change the world and start at home. Both in terms of our own consumption and the support we give girls in our lives, every day. Like Ken is noting in his comment.

Sugunasri, I guess I should have used the word “learning” — which can be anything, including learning to live into our own passions (yes, Cristina!). Education implies the formal – and often patriarchal. Learning, in my mind, would encompass everything you noted.

Beth – amen to freedom to choose! And even better, the knowledge to make choices early that create less anguish.

And HOW does a girl with 7 years of education have fewer children? Because she’s richer, she’s a consumer, and she doesn’t have TIME for more children.

Raising the standard of living means raising the ecological footprint. Yes it reduces the birth rate, but that is not the point. The point is lowering the ecological footprint.

Never give money to foreign aid organizations. Instead, go and talk to a real girl, in the real place, and do something real, and never mind the preaching.

Passion seems to be the key/People who are proud and carry out their job with care – that’s the way forward.It used to be called vocation. It should not come as a surprise thought, but these days it’s so rare.. that’s a shame!

By the way, I am investing in one… I hope to support others in future.

In India there are people who desert girl babies…but there are also couples who fondly opt to adopt girls.

I’m investing in two of those.

Ka kite
from Middle-earth

Bev, how much of our “ignoring of the data” has to do with our own national and institutional sexism and how much to do with the nature of patriarchal and tribal societies?