to wonder why some charities are seen as more compulsory than others?

[SparklingExplosionGoldBrass]

There are, after all, shitloads of charities, all needing donations, and no one has enough spare income to support them all. Yet it seems like some are so extra special that unless you're visibly supporting them, you can get harassed for it.
OK this is partly inspired by this thread, but I was also remembering a fuss a few years back when some or other TV presenter was seen on TV in early November NOT WEARING A POPPY and you'd think he'd shat on a box of babies or something... About the only other charity I can think of that triggers this level of near-bullying among the stupid is Comic Relief - anyone else got any candidates?

there is already a fuss about jon snow not wearing a poppy this year

Why should he have to, though?

for me, personally, I think the poppy thing is less about giving money to a charity, more about reflecting on sacrifices from which we have directly benefitted. It's about never forgetting and paying our respects. so in that way I think it's different.

The blanket issue of poppies to all TV presenters on Nov 1 is a bit odd - it comes over as corporate diktat rather than individual choice, which is what it should be. Nevertherless, I think something along the same lines as Hatwoman.

'for our tomorrow they gave their today'

[btw - I agree with the point about newsreaders - or anyone, for that matter. my point was just that I do think there's a difference between wearing a poppy and wearing other symbols (wrist bands etc) and giving to other charities. I don't buy/wear a poppy because I want to give money to veterans. I wear one to be reflective and show respect iyswim.]

The problem with that, hatwoman, is that you cannot show that reflection without actually giving money for your poppy, so you can't escape the charity aspect. And the money will not be spent on the dead of WW1 and WW2, it will be spent on people who (in the opinion of some) have made our tomorrow considerably more uncertain. Possibly even on some who have been involved in human rights abuses on civilians.

I disagree cory, it is very easy to make your own poppy, and it actually shows more dedication than buying it.

Having said that, I make a point of NEVER displaying anything that has to do with my personal feelings or my private donations. They are called personal and private for a reason.

I don't wear a poppy as living in Northern Ireland it's all a bit ridiculously political. I always give a donation though. As to general charity giving - I agree it is unfair that some charities are glamorous and well supported and some are not. I never give to cancer charities for this reason and instead give to mental health charities. One thing that is very telling - comparing the waiting area in a hospital for a children's cancer unit and a children's mental health unit.

The huge profile of breast cancer - and the pink ribbon campaign pisses me off...yes, I know it's a cancer that affects a lot of women - but i hate the 'pinkness' and 'girliness' of it all.

I also hate it when people give to animal charities over people charities.

I wish people would think beyond big hitters like the NSPCC and RSPCA when they want to make a charitable donation.

It's true that some charities are just not sexy or cute - and they suffer as a result.

If you want to wear a Poppy to remember the past lost lives to make our world better you effectively contribute to financing wars of the future that you are not necessarely supporting and that is a very big issue to me. Maybe the solution is for some of us who want to remember to make our own popies?

I give money to animal charities. People are unspeakably cruel to animals.

I tithe to the charities I support, and that's my standard answer to requests too.
I've never felt compelled to conform by supporting more 'acceptable' ones.

I get cross when the charities that i support ring me up and ask me to donate more money. I got very cross last time and told the woman on the phone that if she wasnt careful i would cancel my donation altogether and that she should be grateful for what i was able to give.

I've done that too.

The sad fact is that cancer patients, sick children, and fluffy bunnies and donkeys are easier heart tuggers than many other worthy charities such as old people, learning disabilities (and mental health in general), and indeed physical disabilities- it's far easier to raise money for an 8 yr old leukemia victim than for someone like Riven's daughter.

Why? Firstly, people tend to give more where they have personal experience of the affliction- so most people know someone who has either died from, or survived cancer and they could easily get cancer themselves, so there's also an element of "pay it forward". Not as many people know someone with multiple disabilities/ facial disfigurement etc. and you're less likely to suffer from it yourself if you dont have one already. Secondly, for max impact you need the cute and helpless angle- kids and animals tick those boxes big time- adults with learning disabilities not so much.

There is a great book called "The Wisdom of Whores" about AIDS. The author argues rather convincingly that in order to attract charitable/public donations for AIDS victims, reporting on the actual causes of the transmission of AIDS has been surpressed, so making actually curing it harder- ie they have made out it is a disease that "anyone can get" when in fact lifestyle factors are overwhelmingly important. However, getting money to help drug addicts and sex workers is a lot harder than getting it for African babies born HIV positive.

just found that

It aseems that they only take care of ex service men/women. I did not see any mention to children cerebral palsy.

It seems that they do not indeed finance anything to do with armement. i will think about it.

I donate to the RBL who were very good to some of my elderly relatives, but don't wear a poppy - just because I don't like the expectation.

I rarely donate to childrens charities as they tend to be more 'attractive' than charities for older people or less popular causes.