Women's Philanthropy--Women's Issues

WELCOME TO WOMENS PHILANTHROPY -- WOMENS ISSUES

 

  I do not wish women to have power over men,

but over themselves. 

                                ~~Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley

 

Cost of War to the United States | COSTOFWAR.COM.

Personal Statement

 

Two of the causes for which I am an avid proponent are Free Tibet and domestic violence.  I am especially interested in any organization that works with victims of domestic violence (ALL family members, including the perpetrator, as well as the individual victims).  It is my firm belief, primarily because of my personal experience (as a victim of sexual abuse that was caused by my father when I was seven years of age), that the entire family suffers from this insidious dysfunction.  Consequently, a major focus for me is highlilghting information about my divergent interests when it comes to my attention.

I also post information about additional issues of particular personal interest to my Women's Philanthropy--Women's Issues [WPWI]  blog since I believe it is an invaluable forum for me to share information.  A couple of these seemingly 'unrelated' WPWI issues focus on spirituality (most especially Buddhism, Taoism to name only two), as well as information regarding various practices that are designed to reduce and/or neutralizae stress and/or tension.  While I say seemingly, it is my strong belief that anyone -- male OR female -- benefits from the different modalities that foster living a mindful, insightful life.  Consequently, these 'issues' are something I believe appropriate to include on this blog -- albeit these may, at first blush, suggest a somewhat divergent focus -- perhaps.  I say 'perhaps' because it is also my firm conviction that anyone alive benefits from knowing how to empower him or herself.  Learning about the various modalities of practice and/or techniques provided by each help to facilitate that process, as well as strengthen and enhance personal development as human beings.  

In a somewhat different vein, I have received requests from readers to include their writing about issues of interest they believe are appropriate for inclusion in this blog.  I do not solicit, nor am I in any position to financially remunerate, writing from anyone.  I am also disinerested in anyone 'volunteering' their time to write whatever they believe should be included in my blog. 

This blog is a very personal endeavor that I initially created as an outlet and forum for me to share information that I find personally relevant to others, specifically those interested in the work within the non-profit sector.  I ask that anyone refrain from sending me such requests.  I will no longer spend any of  my time to acknowledge these requests and/or comments.  Please be assured that I do not make this decision lightly or with any unintended arrogant posturing in mind. 

Since I do not receive any funding support to maintain this blog, the time I invest is my own.  Consequently, I am exceedingly discerning about how I choose to allocate the time I spend doing this work -- most especially since, for me, the work of creating and maintaining this WPWI blog is a labor of love.  For this reason, I do not wish to spend ANY of my personal time whatsoever, responding to unsolicited requests to write and/or comments from anyone concerning the content of this blog.  Since the world of cyberspace makes it possible for anyone to create and/or maintain such a creative outlet, to those who believe what they have to say is germane, there are alternative sources available to you for that purpose.

In the meantime, and not incidentally, I deeply value your willingness to read the various items that I post and your various expressions of interest.  While I had initially hoped this blog would serve as a forum to discuss issues and exchange ideas, it has been my experience that those who contact me do so with a somewhat different agenda.  I never created this blog for any other purpose than serving as a clearinghouse for information I believed is relevant to the community at large.  I am wholly unwilling to accept requests from anyone to highlight their organization and/or to publilcize events.  Each is time-intensive and does not fall within the scope of my purpose for creating my WPWI blog.

With respect and admiration for the work of the non-profit sector,

 

 

Today in my Facebook newsfeed, I read the following graphic posted by the page

for which I've included their banner.  This is my message to my readers for May

Dance, sisters, D - A - N - C - E -- life's elixer . . . .

“Nobody cares if you can't dance well.

Just get up and dance. Great dancers are great

because of their passion.” ~Martha Graham

Foundation Transparency: The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same

05/17/2013

(Aaron Dorfman is executive director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). He frequently blogs about the role of philanthropy in society. Follow NCRP on Twitter @ncrp.)

As I reviewed “Foundation Transparency: What Nonprofits Want,” the latest publication from the Center for Effective Philanthropy (CEP), I had an overwhelming sense of déjà vu. So I dug deep into the archives to find reports on the subject produced by the organization I now lead, the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP).

What I’m left with is a sense that, on the issue of transparency, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

In May 1980, NCRP released Foundations & Public Information: Sunshine or Shadow? It was a scathing report that took foundations to task for their reticent approach to sharing information, and it launched a decades-long commitment by NCRP to promote increased transparency. The report explored why foundations should be accountable and transparent, and also the inadequate government requirements at that time. It ranked and scored 208 of the largest philanthropies using a rigorous methodology and found that 60 percent of foundations in the sample did not meet an acceptable standard of transparency. Just 4 percent were found to be “excellent.”

The methodology included a heavily weighted assessment of whether foundations provided the kinds of information that nonprofits most desired, including information about grantmaking interests and policies, and how grant applications were evaluated and decisions made about which organizations to fund.

I see many parallel findings between that report and CEP’s excellent new report. A full 33 years later, nonprofits are still clamoring for more information about how foundations make funding decisions and they want clear and open communication about priorities. They want to know whether it’s worth their time to cultivate a relationship and pursue funding. And despite an explosion of glossy annual reports and fancy websites, leaders of grant-seeking organizations are still highly frustrated by the lack of clear communication about a central element of foundation activity, namely how foundations decide which organizations to fund.

Foundation Transparency surveyed 138 nonprofit leaders, and I was unsurprised to see many of the respondents reference a desire to know how foundations assess their own performance and the impact they have. It only seems fair that since foundations are requiring this from grantees, that they be willing to be accountable for articulating impact, too.

Some of the findings suggest to me that nonprofits really want foundations to function as true partners. For example, the fact that an overwhelming majority of respondents wanted to know more about what foundations are learning indicates that grantees want learning to go both ways.

The CEP report doesn’t explore the regulatory framework for foundation transparency, nor does it explore in-depth the arguments for why greater transparency may be warranted. But another report released this year does revisit those questions. The Philanthropy Roundtable published in March 2013 Transparency in Philanthropy: An Analysis of Accountability, Fallacy, and Volunteerism.

As I reviewed Foundations & Public Information in light of the Roundtable’s current offering, I was struck by how little the arguments in favor of greater foundation transparency have changed since 1980. The original NCRP report looks at the partially-public nature of philanthropy, which is revisited by the Roundtable (though our organizations obviously come down on different sides). The partially-public dollars argument asserts that because of the preferential tax treatment afforded to foundations, a high level of transparency and accountability is owed to the public and grantees. NCRP repeated and expanded on this argument in our 2009 publication Criteria for Philanthropy at Its Best: Benchmarks to Assess and Enhance Grantmaker Impact.

In 1980, NCRP devoted some attention to why greater transparency is in the self-interest of foundations and how it might improve their effectiveness. This topic is explored robustly in the Roundtable’s new report, Criteria, and is touched on in the CEP report. Because I see additional regulation as unlikely in the near future, the link between effectiveness and voluntary transparency merits further exploration.

Speaking of regulation, there has been some increase in activity around this in recent years, though nothing has actually changed for more than 20 years in terms of mandated disclosures. Most philanthropy insiders are familiar with efforts by the Greenlining Institute to pass AB624, which would have required new disclosures for the largest foundations in California. Fewer are aware of quieter efforts by the Philanthropy Roundtable to pass legislation in several states banning efforts similar to AB624.

The last substantive change that shaped the current required information disclosure in the IRS form 990-PF can be traced to when NCRP worked with Senator Dave Durenberger (R-Minn.) to influence the IRS to change what it required in the form. Those changes contributed to helping the Foundation Center produce the best data available about the sector. An abbreviated version of how NCRP’s efforts on transparency evolved, including the Durenberger intervention with the IRS, can be found on page 10 of this look back at NCRP’s history.

What I’m left with is a sense that, on the issue of transparency, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Coincidentally, around the same time as I was reviewing the new CEP publication and beginning to think about crafting this blog post, Bob Bothwell invited me to join him on a Friday evening for a baseball game at Nationals Park. Bothwell was NCRP’s executive director from its inception in 1976 until 1998. I am reminded again of how important it is for those of us from a new generation who are leading nonprofits and foundations to intentionally nurture connections to our history, even while we attempt to take our organizations in new directions.

And in case you’re wondering, the Washington Nationals beat the Cincinnati Reds 1-0, and Jordan Zimmerman pitched a one-hitter.

--Aaron Dorfman

(Aaron Dorfman is executive director of the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP). He frequently blogs about the role of philanthropy in society. Follow NCRP on Twitter @ncrp.)

As I reviewed “Foundation Transparency: What Nonprofits Want,” the latest publication from the Center for Effective Philanthropy (CEP), I had an overwhelming sense of déjà vu. So I dug deep into the archives to find reports on the subject produced by the organization I now lead, the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy (NCRP).

What I’m left with is a sense that, on the issue of transparency, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

In May 1980, NCRP released Foundations & Public Information: Sunshine or Shadow? It was a scathing report that took foundations to task for their reticent approach to sharing information, and it launched a decades-long commitment by NCRP to promote increased transparency. The report explored why foundations should be accountable and transparent, and also the inadequate government requirements at that time. It ranked and scored 208 of the largest philanthropies using a rigorous methodology and found that 60 percent of foundations in the sample did not meet an acceptable standard of transparency. Just 4 percent were found to be “excellent.”

The methodology included a heavily weighted assessment of whether foundations provided the kinds of information that nonprofits most desired, including information about grantmaking interests and policies, and how grant applications were evaluated and decisions made about which organizations to fund.

I see many parallel findings between that report and CEP’s excellent new report. A full 33 years later, nonprofits are still clamoring for more information about how foundations make funding decisions and they want clear and open communication about priorities. They want to know whether it’s worth their time to cultivate a relationship and pursue funding. And despite an explosion of glossy annual reports and fancy websites, leaders of grant-seeking organizations are still highly frustrated by the lack of clear communication about a central element of foundation activity, namely how foundations decide which organizations to fund.

Foundation Transparency surveyed 138 nonprofit leaders, and I was unsurprised to see many of the respondents reference a desire to know how foundations assess their own performance and the impact they have. It only seems fair that since foundations are requiring this from grantees, that they be willing to be accountable for articulating impact, too.

Some of the findings suggest to me that nonprofits really want foundations to function as true partners. For example, the fact that an overwhelming majority of respondents wanted to know more about what foundations are learning indicates that grantees want learning to go both ways.

The CEP report doesn’t explore the regulatory framework for foundation transparency, nor does it explore in-depth the arguments for why greater transparency may be warranted. But another report released this year does revisit those questions. The Philanthropy Roundtable published in March 2013 Transparency in Philanthropy: An Analysis of Accountability, Fallacy, and Volunteerism.

As I reviewed Foundations & Public Information in light of the Roundtable’s current offering, I was struck by how little the arguments in favor of greater foundation transparency have changed since 1980. The original NCRP report looks at the partially-public nature of philanthropy, which is revisited by the Roundtable (though our organizations obviously come down on different sides). The partially-public dollars argument asserts that because of the preferential tax treatment afforded to foundations, a high level of transparency and accountability is owed to the public and grantees. NCRP repeated and expanded on this argument in our 2009 publication Criteria for Philanthropy at Its Best: Benchmarks to Assess and Enhance Grantmaker Impact.

In 1980, NCRP devoted some attention to why greater transparency is in the self-interest of foundations and how it might improve their effectiveness. This topic is explored robustly in the Roundtable’s new report, Criteria, and is touched on in the CEP report. Because I see additional regulation as unlikely in the near future, the link between effectiveness and voluntary transparency merits further exploration.

Speaking of regulation, there has been some increase in activity around this in recent years, though nothing has actually changed for more than 20 years in terms of mandated disclosures. Most philanthropy insiders are familiar with efforts by the Greenlining Institute to pass AB624, which would have required new disclosures for the largest foundations in California. Fewer are aware of quieter efforts by the Philanthropy Roundtable to pass legislation in several states banning efforts similar to AB624.

The last substantive change that shaped the current required information disclosure in the IRS form 990-PF can be traced to when NCRP worked with Senator Dave Durenberger (R-Minn.) to influence the IRS to change what it required in the form. Those changes contributed to helping the Foundation Center produce the best data available about the sector. An abbreviated version of how NCRP’s efforts on transparency evolved, including the Durenberger intervention with the IRS, can be found on page 10 of this look back at NCRP’s history.

What I’m left with is a sense that, on the issue of transparency, the more things change, the more they stay the same.

Coincidentally, around the same time as I was reviewing the new CEP publication and beginning to think about crafting this blog post, Bob Bothwell invited me to join him on a Friday evening for a baseball game at Nationals Park. Bothwell was NCRP’s executive director from its inception in 1976 until 1998. I am reminded again of how important it is for those of us from a new generation who are leading nonprofits and foundations to intentionally nurture connections to our history, even while we attempt to take our organizations in new directions.

And in case you’re wondering, the Washington Nationals beat the Cincinnati Reds 1-0, and Jordan Zimmerman pitched a one-hitter.

--Aaron Dorfman

NURTURING BODY, MIND, SPIRIT | FROM HUMANITY HEALING The Axis Mundi and Axis Coeli

 

 

The Axis Mundi, or The Lesser Heavenly Cycle, and Axis Coeli, or The Microcosmic Orbit, are ubiquitous symbols that represent cycles of energy of rebirth and restoration and that cross diverse human cultures.  They have also been referred to as the cosmic axis, world axis, world pillar, columna cerului, and center of the world.

The image expresses a point of connection between sky and earth where the four compass directions meet. At this point, travel and correspondence is made between higher and lower realms of planes of reality and human beings.

Communication from lower realms may ascend to higher ones and blessings from higher realms may descend to lower ones and be disseminated to all. The spot functions as the omphalos, or navel: the world’s point of beginning. This is the point where we find our anchor point in this incarnation, our cord that attaches us with all manifestations of life.

There are two distinct phases for the complete Axiatonal Initiation and Attunement.  The first is the Axis Mundi and the second is the Axis Coeli.

The Axis Mundi reconnects and activates the Subpersonal Chakras, starting with the Earth Star Chakra, to the Earth.  A good analogy is grounding spike driven deep into the ground.

The Axis Coeli reconnects and activates the Transpersonal Chakras, starting with the Soul Star Chakra, with the Divine.  A good analogy is a lightening rod.

The Axis Mundi and Axis Coeli are connected by way of the Hara Line, which sits one level outside and above the seven physical chakras and forms a line from the Soul Star Chakra to the Earth Star Chakra and is anchored to the physical body through the Tan Tien.  A good analogy is the wire that connects the lightening rod to the ground spike.

The Axiatonal Initiation and Attunement is a Spiritual manifestation of Balance.  While these Attunements can be done at any time, there are times when they can be done more efficiently and less energy is required by the Teaching Master to make the initial connection.  This is particularly helpful when doing the Attunement for a large group of people.  The Axis Mundi Attunement is most effective when done on the Equinoxes.  The Axis Coeli Attunement is most effective when done on the Solstices.

Full Axiatonal Attunement and Initiation allows an individual to BE a true Column of Light between Divine Source and Mother Earth.  The individual becomes one of the Threads in the building of the Planetary Antahkarana.

There are two main objectives of each Attunement.  The first is the connection, which allows you to build the bridge.  The second is a flushing, cleansing and activation of all the meridian points in our bodies.

The Axiatonal Initiation will firstly and permanently fasten your own God Self energy into your physical body integrating the divine energy permanently into your energetic centers.

Humans have a field of subtle energy around themselves which is often referred to as the Auric Field, aura or etheric body. This energy is made up of emotional, spiritual and mental particles. We also have Axiatonal lines, which are energy pathways that supply our physical bodies with vital energy.

This energy extends from the ground, into the atmosphere and out into the universe.  The Axiatonal Alignments are a simple yet powerful “tune ups” of the energy system. It is a powerful healing tool that works to reconnect and realign the meridian lines of the body, to enable your energy system to function smoothly, and rejuvenates all levels of the body:  physical, mental, emotional and spiritual.

This is not simply an Axiatonal repositioning as performed by other energetic healers, these are tools to anchor your life purpose into your bodies of Light, along with the Stellar Syllables of the four Royal Stars as the graphic configuration of these higher vibrations into a safe and sound energetic matrix board.

NURTURING BODY, MIND, SPIRIT | Hay House World Summit 2013 June 1 - 10

 

About the Hay House World Summit

Hay House is proud to introduce the first-ever Global Online World Summit – available in 3 languages: English, German, and Spanish!

The Hay House World Summit, premiering June 1-10, 2013 , will offer free access to more than 100 hours of enriching and life-changing conversations with your favorite teachers on our website. This extraordinary event brings together world-renowned experts and tomorrow’s rising stars, for exclusive conversations on a wide range of topics–providing insight and practical advice–sure to appeal to all of our listeners. We hope that you will join us for this entertaining and educational experience.

During these enlightening, never-before-heard interviews, you’ll have the opportunity to listen to your favorite authors share their personal moments of transformation. You’ll also discover new voices in today’s generation of spiritual teachers and learn how all these inspiring leaders apply their expertise to their own lives.

This rare and original content—more than 100 hours of interviews—will all be available at no cost, as streaming audio, on the Hay House World Summit website. As a registered guest for this free 10-day online event, you can enjoy at least 10 new conversations by today’s top authors each day!

Register now and you will immediately receive six bonus videos giving you 10-minute previews of candid conversations between Hay House President Reid Tracy and these amazing teachers: Louise Hay, Wayne Dyer, Esther Hicks, Suze Orman, Cheryl Richardson, and Doreen Virtue.

Register today for our premier online event—The Hay House World Summit!

The woman who started it all
Louise L. Hay

Conversation with Reid Tracy
Exercise Included

At 86, Louise is constantly learning new things and staying excited about life and this interview is an up-close-and-personal view of exactly how she maintains her vibrant lifestyle, including her personal views about good nutrition. She also offers some of her personal affirmations, her wisdom about the importance of forgiveness, and tips for removing negative thoughts. You won't want to miss her advice about how she has relied upon listening to her inner "ding"—the intuition that we all have inside that can guide us to positive change.

Hay House World Summit

Hay House World Summit.

Hay House World Summit 2013

NURTURING BODY, MIND, SPIRIT | Evoke, Embrace, Evolve

On-Line Registration

$135 / Person
$200 / For Two

EVENT DAY REGISTRATION
$150/Person

LUNCH & GIFT BAG INCLUDED

REGISTER NOW

For More Information:

www.itsmyseat.com/Heal

info@healwithin.com
(818) 551-1501

 EXPERIENCE AN AMAZING MINI RETREAT!

THIS IS NOT A DAY TO AWARD YOU BECAUSE OF WHAT YOU HAVE DONE FOR AN ORGANIZATION, COMMUNITY, PARENTS, KIDS, HUSBAND OR THE COMPANY YOU WORK FOR. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH WHOM YOU ARE MARRIED TO, OR WHAT GROUP YOU BELONG TO EITHER.

THIS EVENT IS TO REWARD YOU FOR BEING YOU.
TAKE “TIME OUT” TO NOURISH YOUR ALL-SELF, AND TO EVOKE, EMBRACE AND EVOLVE AS YOU UNLEASH YOUR POTENTIAL, AS A WOMAN.

Feel free to come dressed casually!
Come with your friend, and bring along your mother and daughter(s) too!

Saturday, June 15, 2013 — 9:00 am – 4

Saturday, June 15, 2013 — 9:00 am – 4:00 pm

The Castaway — 1250 E. Harvard Rd. Burbank, CA 91501

Registration & Check-in:  8:30am

:00 pm

The Castaway — 1250 E. Harvard Rd. Burbank, CA 91501

Registration & Check-in:  8:30am

WOMEN'S MEDIA CENTER Journalism Project | WOMEN UNDER SEIGE

Women's Media Center

• Facebook
• Twitter
• YouTube
• Flickr

Women Under Siege

Email Zip

• Blog
• Conflicts
• Witness
• Join Us
• About
• Contact
• Give

 

About

WMC’s Women Under Siege is a journalism project that investigates how rape and other forms of sexualized violence are used as tools in genocide and conflict throughout the 20th century and into the 21st. Originated by Gloria Steinem, it builds on the lessons revealed in the anthology Sexual Violence Against Jewish Women During the Holocaust by Sonja Hedgepeth and Rochelle Saidel, and also in At the Dark End of the Street: Black Women, Rape and Resistance—a New History of the Civil Rights Movement from Rosa Parks to the Rise of Black Power by Danielle McGuire. In the belief that understanding what happened then might have helped us prevent or prepare for the mass sexual assaults of other conflicts, from Bosnia to the Democratic Republic of the Congo, this Women’s Media Center project is exploring this linkage to heighten public consciousness of causes and preventions.

The project has two main components:

1. A public education plan to demonstrate that rape is a tool of war (not only a crime of war, but also a strategic tool). This plan includes testimony from and partnership with survivors of modern wars from Bosnia to Darfur.
2. An action plan to push for the creation of legal, diplomatic, and public interventions to ensure the United Nations, international tribunals, and other agencies with power will understand the gender-based threats as a tool of genocide and will design protocols to intervene and halt gender-based genocide.

Please click over to WomenUnderSiegeSyria.crowdmap.com for our live, crowdsourced map of rape in Syria. To read more about the map, click here.

WMC’s Women Under Siege project is funded by contributions from individuals, corporations, and foundations. We are not funded by the U.S. or any other government.

Staff

	Lauren Wolfe, Director Lauren Wolfe is an award-winning journalist who has written for publications from The Guardian to The Atlantic. She is on the advisory committee of the International Campaign to Stop Rape & Gender Violence in Conflict. Previously, she was the senior editor of the Committee to Protect Journalists, where she focused on journalists and sexualized violence. Her CPJ report “The Silencing Crime” broke ground in documenting the issue. Before that, Wolfe spent three years reporting on September 11th for two New York Times books. She studied at Wesleyan University and Columbia University’s Graduate School of Journalism, and is the recipient of the 2012 Frank Ochberg Award for Media and Trauma Study and four Society of Professional Journalists awards. She also blogs at laurenmwolfe.com and can be found on Twitter at @Wolfe321.
	Michele Lent Hirsch, Associate Editor Michele Lent Hirsch draws on both science journalism and international experience to report on sexualized violence. In her previous role at Psychology Today magazine, she wrote and edited a wide range of pieces that made the latest research on behavior and the brain more accessible (and more fun). As a freelance writer before that, she worked by day at the global network of Soros foundations, where she helped social justice programs adhere to national and international regulations. A native New Yorker and graduate of Cornell University, she is also at work on a collection of essays. Find her on Twitter at @Lent_Hirsch.
	Shazdeh Omari, Copy Editor Shazdeh Omari is the deputy editor for news at the Committee to Protect Journalists. Before that, she was the copy chief at The Village Voice for four years. She has worked as a reporter, writer, editor, medical editor, and copy editor in the United States and Greece. Prior to her career in publishing, she taught English at Western Connecticut State University and reported, wrote, and produced radio features as an intern at United Nations Radio. Omari was born in Saudi Arabia and raised in Karachi, Pakistan, where she learned to read, speak, and write Urdu.
	Rachel Halder, Social Media Associate Rachel Halder is a recent graduate of Goshen College, Indiana. With communication and women studies degrees, she is the social media power behind WMC’s Women Under Siege, creating conversation around sexualized violence in conflict on multiple platforms, including on Twitter at @WomenUndrSiege. Prior to this, she lived and worked for a year at a women’s empowerment center in Jayapura, Papua, Indonesia. She’s also a freelance writer and is pursuing a personal project called Our Stories Untold about sexualized violence in the Mennonite Church. You can follow her on Twitter at @raerrh.

What the media is saying about Women Under Siege:

“A fantastic organization. I urge our viewers to follow you on Twitter because your organization very regularly puts out fascinating reports—depressing—but very interesting to read and stay in touch with.” —Hala Gorani on CNN International, January 10, 2013

“There are so many powerful stories on the Women Under Siege website.” –Xeni Jardin on BoingBoing, “The invisible genocide of women,” February 14, 2012

“A site worth watching… .The new site states its mission bluntly; Women Under Siege looks to be a project with an edge. But there is another reason to visit the Web site: its original content.” —C.J. Chivers on the New York Times’ “At War” blog, “What We Are Reading: Women Under Siege,” February 9, 2012

“With both the silencing and shame of rape victims a global phenomenon, I found this project moving and inspirational. Go and have a look.” —Jane Martinson on The Guardian’s “Women’s Blog,” “Why has it taken 65 years to recognise that rape is a weapon of war?” February 9, 2012

“[Stories] are also just stories. Can they change the lived reality of women in conflict zones and misogynistic cultures? Can they leverage implementation of dormant laws and cajole corrupted law enforcement officials out of their jobs? That remains to be seen. But at least perhaps a global chorus of voices and first-hand experiences is a step in that direction.” —Jessica Mack on RH Reality Check, “The Launch of "Women Under Siege:" A Journalistic Megaphone For Victims of Sexual Violence,” February 8, 2012

 

Comments: WMC’s Women Under Siege reserves the right to moderate blog comments.

Search

Featured Blog Posts

• Covering rape responsibly

  By Helen Benedict/Guest Blogger — February 1, 2013

• Why Steubenville is not Delhi: How we are failing in this country

  By Lauren Wolfe/Director — January 14, 2013

• Eight reasons why victim-blaming needs to stop: Writers, activists, and survivors speak out

  By Lauren Wolfe/Director — December 17, 2012

• Blog
• Conflicts
• Witness
• Join Us
• About
• Contact

©2013 The Women's Media Center | Privacy Policy | Contact Us

WOMEN FOR AFGHAN WOMEN

.http://www.womenforafghanwomen.org/

Women For Afghan Women, Securing Women's Human Rights.

We are WAW

Bringing you the voices of the WAW community -- from New York, Afghanistan and beyond! Writing by WAW staff, board, volunteers, clients and supporters on our work on the ground and the issues at stake.

Open Society Foundations (OSF)

Open Society Foundations (OSF).

Open Society Foundations

 

The Open Society Foundations work to build vibrant and tolerant democracies whose governments are accountable to their citizens.

Learn more about our mission »

 

• Issues
• Regions
• Grants
• Voices
• About Us

ABOUT US

Mission & Values

Mission & Values

Our Mission

The Open Society Foundations work to build vibrant and tolerant societies whose governments are accountable and open to the participation of all people.

We seek to strengthen the rule of law; respect for human rights, minorities, and a diversity of opinions; democratically elected governments; and a civil society that helps keep government power in check.

We help to shape public policies that assure greater fairness in political, legal, and economic systems and safeguard fundamental rights.

We implement initiatives to advance justice, education, public health, and independent media.

We build alliances across borders and continents on issues such as corruption and freedom of information.

Working in every part of the world, the Open Society Foundations place a high priority on protecting and improving the lives of people in marginalized communities.

Our Values

We believe in fundamental human rights, dignity, and the rule of law.

We believe in a society where all people are free to participate fully in civic, economic, and cultural life.

We believe in addressing inequalities that cut across multiple lines, including race, class, gender, sexual orientation, and citizenship.

We believe in holding those in power accountable for their actions and in increasing the power of historically excluded groups.

We believe in helping people and communities press for change on their own behalf.

We believe in responding quickly and flexibly to the most critical threats to open society.

We believe in taking on controversial issues and supporting bold, innovative solutions that address root causes and advance systemic change.

We believe in encouraging critical debate and respecting diverse opinions.

Contact Us

Open Society Foundations
224 West 57th Street
New York, NY 10019
United States

Phone:

1-212-548-0600

Fax:

1-212-548-4600

Email:

Email us

About IWHC & Akimbo

About IWHC & Akimbo.

About IWHC & Akimbo

• digg
• 0

   
  EmailShare

The International Women’s Health Coalition (IWHC) leads global and local actions to secure every woman’s right to a just and healthy life. We are creating a world where women are free from discrimination, sexual coercion and violence, and have access to health services and information. We promote and protect the sexual and reproductive rights and health (SRRH) of all women and young people, particularly in Africa, Asia, and Latin America, by helping to develop effective health and population policies, programs, and funding.

Our blog Akimbo is where we publish perspectives on world events and policies affecting women’s health and rights. The blog is less formal than our print publications and will provide some insight on our daily reactions to what’s happening in reproductive health and sexual rights on the global scale. Our contributors include IWHC staff members and our partners from around the world.