Oxfam's analysis of its 'inclusive language crises'

[ArthurbellaScott]

Fascinating marketing analysis of the impact of Oxfam's inclusive language guide.

https://adroitinsight.com/oxfam-inclusive-language-crises/

Really worth reading for insights as well as comedy value.

Conclusion:

'Future communications can consider issues such as family, motherhood, and fatherhood, to incorporate them into a point of view that is more appealing to more conservative sectors.
This could make it easier to connect with people who certainly do not want anyone to starve to death, but who react more easily if the problem is explained to them from a point of view that incorporates concerns, they have: the family, for example.
In other countries, such as Spain, Italy or Germany, there could be a similar reaction if Oxfam shares this guide, and it is picked up by the media or a group of influencers.
It would therefore be advisable for the organisation to prepare a communication strategy in advance to deal with the controversy and negative comments that could be generated.
In the specific case of Spain, it would be even more of a priority considering that the debate on inclusive language, transgender rights and the reality of non-binary people has already generated a major debate, with laws in favour and currents actively against that have produced a lot of polarisations in society.'

It's fighting to maintain the social structures around gender that we have now.

LOL. Men don’t want women to have a space where we can talk to each other free of male supervision, in case we start plotting our liberation. “Trans rights” are reactionary male tantrums in response to the recent progress women have made.

I walked past an Oxfam shop in Epping this week and saw the usual sign 'we welcome him/her/they/them'.etc etc in the window. It actually made me want to throw up..i'm not even sure why, it's just i don't think i've ever hated an organisation more than Oxfam..how they can have that sign up after all the bollocks they've written helping to erase women...bastards.

I would just like to know the ‘identity’ of the two overseas employees who have each received upwards of £300,000.00 this year.

I have worked for charities in London for years and this is a very common scenario: charity pays workers peanuts and use the fact that the staff usually really want to help make a difference to people or animals' welfare to keep wages low using the excuse 'we can't afford to pay you more, we are a charity'.

Meanwhile the CEO and directors enjoy a nice, fat wage and the trustees are wealthy people enjoying a vanity project.

Charities usually have a high staff turnover because of it and they also use volunteer to plug the gaps to do the work that realistically would need to be done by paid staff.

It has made me lose a lot of faith in the sector in general.

I volunteered briefly for Oxfam, they were letting the charity shop where I was doing a weekly shift fall apart and the managers and volunteers were working in dodgy if not dangerous conditions. I left it after a few weeks because I refused to support the charity any longer.

Oxfam is not the only charity to underpay workers on the frontline, others like St Mungo's have had that reputation for years. I have also seen a lot of bullying of staff, including those with mental health issues and disabilities, by charity management who at the same time pride themselves on supporting vulnerable clients...

I think it is a bit like the NHS where frontline staff can be treated appallingly.

Quite.

Much contact with the head offices of large charities does a really effective job of making you re focus all donations to small, local charities where the people doing the work have actual beliefs and a grip on reality and actually care about the on the ground work. As opposed to mostly writing very exciting bids with all the current buzz words and fads, having lots of meetings with other ivory tower charity senior staff and essentially focusing on the smooth running of the gravy train.

I walked past an Oxfam shop in Epping this week and saw the usual sign 'we welcome him/her/they/them'.etc etc in the window.

What does that even mean? How are they talking about you in the third person if you decide to enter their shop?

I'm not sure that's true.

What we have now is de facto self ID, because the Gender Recognition Act was passed 20 years ago while everyone was distracted by Iraq and fox hunting and we've all recently woken up to the fact that it is now very difficult to prevent men from accessing women's spaces.

The status quo is what was imposed on us without any consultation or consent, and that is what we are fighting against.