My office is a "war room" for international civil society. I am command central for anyone wanting to be dispatched to the front. All the nooks and crannies are crammed with articles, notes of what-has-happened, who-is-who, and information about innovative, grassroots humanitarian organizations from the backwaters of Kerala to the steppes of Central Asia to the altiplano. My internet business, NGOabroad, matches peoples' skills to international needs so I keep a pulse on the planet.

On my mental map of the world (because there is definitely no room on the wall filled with packed bulletin boards), I have a pin stuck in Tajikistan, where women self-immolate as a way to escape their life of servitude, subjugation and being beaten to death.

According to Swiss Development Agency's data on violence against women in Tajikistan:

- 50% of women suffer from physical violence;

- 51% psychological violence from her family;

- 47% from sexual violence from her husband;

- 24% physical violence from the side of other people;

- 47 % psychological violence outside the family.

I get requests for my matchmaking service from all over the world, all skill sets, people who are interested in voluntary or paid international service. I am eager to send armies of fiery feminists to Tajikistan to stand shoulder to shoulder with these women.

I realized when I awoke this morning, that I may have been the first recruit in shifting attitudes towards women in Tajikistan.

For the last two weeks, I have been in e-mail correspondence with a man from Tajikistan who sought my services. He asked: "I want to make my cover letter and resume smart. I have been working for non-government organizations (NGOs) here in Tajikistan and I would like to work in other countries. I know paid international work is very competitive but I also understand that this is what you help with."

We batted the terms of service back and forth endlessly.

Finally I threw up my hands. Why am I trying to be nice to a guy who is so self-serving? I was furious at his attitude. I was burning up.

The gestalt came this morning: I suspect that I was running up against a cultural attitude. I felt condescended to, like he expected me to do all this work for him for a pittance while he has a well-paying job at an NGO. Given the statistics above, that condescending attitude towards women may permeate his interactions.

So fine. Toe to toe then, bud. Meet your first fiery feminist from the West.

I realized in a flash that these global interactions are going to transform women's struggles.

People change if they must. If I have something that Mr. Tajikistan wants, and he has just lost that opportunity because he was so obnoxious, then it may give him pause. It may slowly change how he interacts with women.

I take every opportunity to assist my sisters all over the globe. When I get e-mails that start with, "Sir, attached is my resume." I simply send a reply that says, "I am not a sir." Start again. I won't even read the rest of your e-mail until you acknowledge that a woman can direct a program.

There may not be many women in their country directing programs yet but mountain moving day is coming, I tell you. I was coordinating with our team's organizational and grant-writing wizard about the many requests that I get from all over the globe for grant-writers and fundraisers. Our wizard said: "The UN, World Bank, foundations, and almost every donor will not fund organizations that are not 50% women and that do not have women at the top." I then got this news back to the numerous men who have asked for money or access to it: "Ann, we'll get right on it. We'll get more women into our ranks. I'll have the women leaders start e-mailing to you." That is major incentive: tie the dollars to women's presence and leadership in the organization!

Why do major donors believe it is so important to have women in organizations and in leadership? Not because they are fiery feminists at the World Bank or in the NGO boardrooms, but because stereotypically speaking, women are more honest and less corrupt. They don't pocket the money for themselves. Female head of households will see that the kids are fed and have shoes. Men might drink it away and spend it on boys' toys. Same thing happens at the organizational level. Women's agendas, whether personal, professional, or legislative, are usually: health, education, and children.

Men's agendas, in contrast, are sometimes more self-serving. All the international donors, I am told by our wizard, acknowledge that if you give money to organizations with only men, not much is accomplished towards the stated mission. Graft and corruption is dominated by men; women are too busy drawing water from the well to even invent such schemes.

I think I ran onto all of this head-on with Mr. Tajikistan. He felt so, so self-serving. His goal was not to help anyone else. He wanted a better job for himself.

Lesson learned.

I have wanted to send someone to Tajikistan to rattle cages. So I did it myself.

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Name

Email

Website

Comment

smaller | bigger

I have read and agree to the Terms of Usage.

Add Comment