Donkey charity receives more donations than four leading domestic abuse charities combined

[IwantToRetire]

A donkey welfare charity received more donations in a single year than four leading domestic abuse charities combined, new figures show.

Data from the Charity Commission register reveals that four domestic abuse charities – Women’s Aid, Refuge, IDAS and SafeLives – together raised far less money through donations than The Donkey Sanctuary.

The four domestic abuse charities received a total of £11.3m during the 2022-2023 financial year, while The Donkey Sanctuary was the recipient of £51.7m in 2022.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/domestic-abuse-donkey-charity-funding-b2607499.html

I can remember there was a news story about this situation, maybe as much as 10 years ago. I wonder if the difference is getting bigger.

Animal charities don’t even make it into the top 10 richest in the UK, despite the misconception that they get all the donations.
Both dv and animal welfare come way down on the list.

Isn't it due to advertising? I'm aware of both Donkey Sanctuary and Brooke because of TV or print adverts.

I've heard of Refuge and Women's Aid in passing (mostly on MN) but not the other two. I've never seen any fundraising campaigns for them and they're not on my radar for "needing" donations, unlike food banks for example.

People often disparage organisations having professional fundraising staff, but this shows how successful it can be.

I know of the donkey sanctuaries through advertising/ SM too. I'm only aware of WA through having to use their services although I have heard of Refuge. I wasn't aware of the other two and didn't come across them when I was looking for help either.

I don't think it's lack of advertising. I think there's so much ignorance and misogyny that domestic abuse charities suffer.

I've been shocked on twitter/X at the disgusting comments every time Refuge run a campaign. Idiots think it's a charity for refugees and spout xenophobic and racist nonsense. If it's not that, they saying "what about men ? Where's their charity? " It's just awful.

Animal charities always do well. But Donkey Sanctuary have sanctuarys across the UK, we have one by us. Lots of events they put on are great for children and super cheap, summer fates, silent fireworks etc. They have lots of different animals, the one by us does toddler events in the week etc. I imagine they all do this and make a good chunk of money this way.

I work in charity fundraising and charities get income from a wide range of sources - grants, delivering contracts, commercial (shops, cafes, pay to enter sites), legacies, membership fees, large donations from philanthropists, lots of smaller donations from less wealthy people etc.

Animal charities are likely to do well with lots of smaller donations as they have broad appeal. It doesn't mean that other charities aren't supported in different ways to deliver their charitable objectives. This kind of article is misleading but that's not surprising as public understanding of charity income often isn't very good.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dVLWVj_yapw

I hope this isn’t seen as bad taste, if so I’ll delete, but the thread reminded me of a Mitchell & Webb sketch where it’s decided to donate £3bn to donkeys.

I agree with above, advertising will play a role. Animal charities have loads of ads on daytime tv and the channels with all the repeats of classic shows.

Richard Herring used to raise money for Refuge on International Women’s Day and spent hours replying to men asking when IMD was.

Women have agency and can help themselves. I know women who point blank refuse to leave abusive men, even with all the help in the world. Animals have no such agency and the abuse they suffer is just appalling. They can't escape or go to the police or complain, so I get why people donate money to the charities who look after them.

There are many other charities that support women and women’s issues that you haven’t considered. It’s not a straight comparison between donations received by donkeys versus women, because you’re only thinking of one thing that affects women. If you compared donkey donations with donations for DV, breast cancer, miscarriage and still birth, FGM, lack of education for girls in other countries and every other female issue, it might appear more balanced.

Women escaping abuse can access council houses and benefits; they have friends and family, they can get jobs, they can get legal aid for court. It's not like they don't have other resources. Not all abused women are downtrodden and unable to help themselves.

I support a horse and donkey charity abroad. Without donations those poor animals will die; they have no other means of support other than donations.

I'm sadly not surprised donations to women's DV services are so low, but I also think it's something the government should be paying for anyway. Sometimes the charity sector is just an excuse for the government to ignore its responsibilities.

Please excuse my little rant, but I HATE the donkey sanctuary advert where the woman is ridiculously over-invested in which donkey to adopt. Soppily listing their supposed personalities and preferences! They're donkeys fgs and not even her own donkeys so acting like she cares about them so much is totally weird. Makes me cringe.

Wasn't the RSPCA founded years and years before the NSPCC? We've always been a bit odd about animals in the UK.

Yes it was.

The charities I generally donate to are animal ones, not people. We are regular donkey sanctuary donors as a family.

I do sponsor people that are supporting other charities but in terms of my donations-they are only animal or related. Mostly cat and equine but also air ambulance as us equestrians are frequent flyers!

I’m just not invested in anything else, and a lot of the human ones have political leanings that I don’t support.

That's not true. You have to proves you are being abused and how do you do that when he denies it? But social services work off the risk of harm not the proven harm- so I was told I have to leave or they will take my child. I left only to discover there was no help. I couldn't go to refuge and couldn't get council help as I owned a property. But I couldn't go to my property. And then all the benifits calculations take into account you have property.

Had I had absolutely nothing then I would have got help.

I ended up sleeping in a single bed heavily pregnant with my toddler. No one would hire me while I was pregnant so I agreed to work cash in hand for less than minimum wage to get the money for my phone and to pay the mortgage for the house I wasn't living in. I couldn't afford childcare so had to put my child to bed and rely on the family members to watch them while I worked- a family member who had abused me all my life growing up but it was that or starve. I used food banks. Given clothes by church.

The first night I almost slept in the car. It was only when i said I would post on fb asking for help I shamed my family member into letting me stay. I wasn't allowed to use the fridge or cupboard space.

What if I didn't have that single bed to go to? If I'd have actually slept in my car the social services would have taken my child.

It really gets to me when I see people saying women have the agency to leave. Most women honestly don't get help to leave. You can either afford it independently or you have nothing in which case you get benifits. Us in the middle are fucked

Odd? Caring about and looking after animals is odd?

Bit of a sweeping generalisation regarding abused women and agency there.

I only donate to animal charities - I don't have lots to donate and on the whole I think animals are worthier recipients than humans, If it were not for humans, animals wouldn't need charity, they'd be getting on with their natural lives and not having to cope with their habitats being destroyed, being 'captured' and ill-treated by humans. I hope that animals continue to thrive long after the human race has died out.

I donate to the donkey sanctuary. They have a special place in my heart due to ties with a family bereavement.

People can't donate to every charity and it's not always a case of 'who is most worthy'.

The donkey sanctuary near us spends millions each year buying donkeys out of the food chain.

They travel all over the place and buy donkeys who are destined to become salami and bring them back to live a long and happy life for 40 years in Oxfordshire...

So that's nice.

I think donkeys is a "possibly achievable" goal that maybe you £40 donation might actually save a donkey. Whereas VAWG seems unsolvable (and people apparently seem to think that because women "choose to stay" they bring it upon themselves.)

Compared to most other countries, yes. It's not a value judgment, I'm not saying it's a bad thing to do, but we are unusual as a nation in that we (based on our charity activities) seem to care more about animals than people.

I agree an achievable goal makes a huge difference. I end up donating to crowdfunders because of that. The public library that got trashed by the racist drunks having a punch up with the police touched a lot of wallets, including my own, because I could imagine my money buying books or a piece of shelving.

Excuse me?
Donkeys in salami?
Not in England???

And I very much doubt people in the UK are thinking about donkeys in other countries

I think they will be, as even the most cursory glance at the website (whatever drew someone there) will make it clear that they work internationally. Ditto Brooke (used to be horses, and is now both horses and donkeys) who has very effective ads in horsey and countryside magazines.

I don't think it's helpful to attempt to rank the "worthiness" of charities - personally, I think it's dreadful that there are people on this planet that still do not have access to clean water and adequate sanitation, and that thought gives me a completely different slant on what is worthy.

But I don't expect people to follow my giving habits. I am just glad that people give.