I don't know how to explain this to you more clearly than I already have. Selecting a subset of the population to help is not some evil form of 'discrimination', it's the only reasonable option. A charitable organization that follows your absurd standards literally cannot exist.
EDIT: To be illustrative, here are some examples of actual destructive discrimination that exist, unlike the OPW 'discrimination' you're upset about:
Predominantly white male politicians in (mostly southern) US states revising voting regulations in ways that conveniently exclude minorities from being able to vote while conveniently not making it much harder for their white male voter base
Uneven enforcement of laws and sentencing guidelines for people of color and other minorities versus the prosecution and sentences handed out to white males
Practices like 'stop and frisk' where law enforcement explicitly targets people based on their appearance and treats them as criminals regardless of whether there are any actual indications that they were involved in a crime
Those are examples of real discrimination, and much of it affects men, not just women. That's the kind of discrimination you should be upset about, not that the OPW happens to be using money in a way you disagree with. Get out there and fix the world.
Sorry but your own arguments undermine the very points you're trying to make. Yes, charities do need to decide who they want to help in order to succeed, but this supports teacup50's argument that Gnome should've stuck to their own stated aims and scope. Likewise, your examples of "actual destructive discrimination" are aimed in large part at the same group teacup50 was complaining these outreach programs don't help - you're basically arguing that it's OK they're not included in outreach programs because worse things happen to them, but then why have one for women either?
Comments
Yes, that's the problem with discrimination.
I don't know how to explain this to you more clearly than I already have. Selecting a subset of the population to help is not some evil form of 'discrimination', it's the only reasonable option. A charitable organization that follows your absurd standards literally cannot exist.
EDIT: To be illustrative, here are some examples of actual destructive discrimination that exist, unlike the OPW 'discrimination' you're upset about:
Predominantly white male politicians in (mostly southern) US states revising voting regulations in ways that conveniently exclude minorities from being able to vote while conveniently not making it much harder for their white male voter base
Uneven enforcement of laws and sentencing guidelines for people of color and other minorities versus the prosecution and sentences handed out to white males
Practices like 'stop and frisk' where law enforcement explicitly targets people based on their appearance and treats them as criminals regardless of whether there are any actual indications that they were involved in a crime
Those are examples of real discrimination, and much of it affects men, not just women. That's the kind of discrimination you should be upset about, not that the OPW happens to be using money in a way you disagree with. Get out there and fix the world.
Sorry but your own arguments undermine the very points you're trying to make. Yes, charities do need to decide who they want to help in order to succeed, but this supports teacup50's argument that Gnome should've stuck to their own stated aims and scope. Likewise, your examples of "actual destructive discrimination" are aimed in large part at the same group teacup50 was complaining these outreach programs don't help - you're basically arguing that it's OK they're not included in outreach programs because worse things happen to them, but then why have one for women either?