Oxfam Sex Abuse Scandal

Roxxsmom · Feb 15, 2018

I don't think anyone has commented on this here yet. I have to admit I'm pretty gobsmacked by all this. I've given money to Oxfam for years and always thought they were one of the well-vetted, "good" charities that spent most of the money given them on helping people. Now I don't know what to think and I don't know which charities I can trust with my money, because it seems likely that Oxfam isn't alone in this. But not giving money will hurt people in need too.

There are too many stories covering too many angles of this to give a comprehensive list, but here are a few:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...aster-victims-for-sex/?utm_term=.6b4501562630

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...ions-that-prostitutes-hired-in-disaster-zones

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-43079090

It ties in with #metoo in a way too. Even some guys who work in humanitarian aid evidently don't think of women as people and will take advantage of differences in status and power whenever they can get away with it.

Tazlima · Feb 15, 2018

My roommate and I spent eight days in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina before we finally evacuated. One of the more bizarre moments during that time was when four guys drove up in a car and offered us water in exchange for sex. We told them to fuck off, but seriously... who does that? Apart from the creep factor, if they had enough gas in their car to waste time trolling deserted streets for pussy, why didn't they just evacuate? There was noplace within a hundred miles to fill up, and by that time all the non-diesel vehicles had long since been siphoned by evacuees and police. I'm just glad my large and fierce-looking dog was there. (A dobey mix, he was the world's biggest wuss, but he looked like a killer).

regdog · Feb 16, 2018

I too have always given to Oxfam believing them to be one of the better charities. Awful, just awful.

Friendly Frog · Feb 16, 2018

Oxfam is not one of my standard charities but I have at times visited their local shop.

I guess this goes to show that for some people a job in a charity is just a way to make money and not really a calling out of humanitarian motives. I tend to forget that sometimes although I've become rather more jaded towards some charities since the latest few scandals. Oxfam will sadly not be the last one.

Roxxsmom · Feb 16, 2018

Tazlima said:
My roommate and I spent eight days in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina before we finally evacuated. One of the more bizarre moments during that time was when four guys drove up in a car and offered us water in exchange for sex. We told them to fuck off, but seriously... who does that? Apart from the creep factor, if they had enough gas in their car to waste time trolling deserted streets for pussy, why didn't they just evacuate? There was noplace within a hundred miles to fill up, and by that time all the non-diesel vehicles had long since been siphoned by evacuees and police. I'm just glad my large and fierce-looking dog was there. (A dobey mix, he was the world's biggest wuss, but he looked like a killer).

This is incredibly creepy. What's wrong with some men that they would look at a tragedy on that scale as a chance to leverage sex out of desperate women?

Also (as a side note), is being with someone who actually would consider trading favors for water someone they'd want to have sex with anyway? If everyone is that thirsty, I imagine they wouldn't have bathed for over a week either. Sex is the last thing on my mind when I, and everyone else around me, is dirty and itchy and smelly.

frimble3 · Feb 16, 2018

Not everyone has your high standards. Remember, there are guys who will force themselves on women so drunk they don't even know what's happening. I'd bet some of them would not be dissuaded if the poor woman threw up on herself. Possibly if she vomited on her assailant, but I wouldn't bet money on it.

frimble3 · Feb 16, 2018

And, in the OP links, there are various references to 'prostitutes' and 'sex trade workers'. Has any distinction been made between 'professionals' who managed to find the only group that could afford them, and desperate women who would agree to anything for food and shelter?
'Sex trade workers' and 'prostitutes' implies that this is their usual work, not something they were pushed into by guys putting conditions on 'charitable' food.

Roxxsmom · Feb 17, 2018

frimble3 said:
Not everyone has your high standards. Remember, there are guys who will force themselves on women so drunk they don't even know what's happening. I'd bet some of them would not be dissuaded if the poor woman threw up on herself. Possibly if she vomited on her assailant, but I wouldn't bet money on it.

Given some of the drunken dorm rape stories that have been in the news over the past several years, a woman being puking drunk is not a deterrent to some men.

This is another thing I don't get. I understand that sex is wonderful, and orgasms feel great, but the pursuit of such at any cost? Even given that men typically have higher sex drives, on average, than women, it seems odd that some men will do almost anything, no matter how unethical or physically disgusting, to get laid. Why not just masturbate if the other person means so little to you that they're essentially just a big sex toy? Does it feel that much better for these guys than it does for most people, or is something else going on there? Is there a thrill with thinking they got away with something, or that they forced another person into a humiliating situation? Is it about bragging rights? Are other guys impressed when their friends tell them that they tricked a woman into having sex with them, or that they convinced a desperate woman to have sex with them?

As for whether or not the women the Oxfam workers were having sex with were regular sex workers or not, the allegations being made is that some of them, at least, were not. They were allegedly women who were desperate because of the Earthquake, or possibly even convinced by the workers to sell sex. There are allegations that some of the "women" were underage as well. The men accused deny this, so hopefully the truth will out. Even if they were long-time sex workers, it wouldn't be appropriate for Oxfam workers to be indulging in that wile visiting a country for relief purposes. The issue of prostitution in poor countries, and sex tourism, is touchy anyway. Does it really matter whether the woman or girl has been doing it for years or not if she was coerced into it at some point by someone, or if her reason for doing so is it was her only way to survive?

regdog · Feb 17, 2018

frimble3 said:
And, in the OP links, there are various references to 'prostitutes' and 'sex trade workers'. Has any distinction been made between 'professionals' who managed to find the only group that could afford them, and desperate women who would agree to anything for food and shelter?
'Sex trade workers' and 'prostitutes' implies that this is their usual work, not something they were pushed into by guys putting conditions on 'charitable' food.

Several years ago there was almost the exact same thing going on with UN Peacekeepers. When the women would file complaints the Peacekeepers would refute the rape claims, saying the women were disgruntled prostitutes who were unhappy with their pay and wanted more money, food etc.

It's my opinion, but I'm guessing the Oxfam workers labeled the girls prostitutes and sex trade workers so they could dispute any claims of rape.

Roxxsmom said:
Given some of the drunken dorm rape stories that have been in the news over the past several years, a woman being puking drunk is not a deterrent to some men.

This is another thing I don't get. I understand that sex is wonderful, and orgasms feel great, but the pursuit of such at any cost? Even given that men typically have higher sex drives, on average, than women, it seems odd that some men will do almost anything, no matter how unethical or physically disgusting, to get laid. Why not just masturbate if the other person means so little to you that they're essentially just a big sex toy? Does it feel that much better for these guys than it does for most people, or is something else going on there? Is there a thrill with thinking they got away with something, or that they forced another person into a humiliating situation? Is it about bragging rights? Are other guys impressed when their friends tell them that they tricked a woman into having sex with them, or that they convinced a desperate woman to have sex with them?

As for whether or not the women the Oxfam workers were having sex with were regular sex workers or not, the allegations being made is that some of them, at least, were not. They were allegedly women who were desperate because of the Earthquake, or possibly even convinced by the workers to sell sex. There are allegations that some of the "women" were underage as well. The men accused deny this, so hopefully the truth will out. Even if they were long-time sex workers, it wouldn't be appropriate for Oxfam workers to be indulging in that wile visiting a country for relief purposes. The issue of prostitution in poor countries, and sex tourism, is touchy anyway. Does it really matter whether the woman or girl has been doing it for years or not if she was coerced into it at some point by someone, or if her reason for doing so is it was her only way to survive?

Power and control. Weak men need to dehumanize and abuse women to feel more powerful.

Tazlima · Feb 17, 2018

regdog said:
Several years ago there was almost the exact same thing going on with UN Peacekeepers. When the women would file complaints the Peacekeepers would refute the rape claims, saying the women were disgruntled prostitutes who were unhappy with their pay and wanted more money, food etc.

It's my opinion, but I'm guessing the Oxfam workers labeled the girls prostitutes and sex trade workers so they could dispute any claims of rape.

That was my thought. I wrote my prior post simply because the story brought back the memory (it wasn't even in the top five oddest things we experienced during that time), but the more I think about it, I wonder about the "what ifs."

What if my dog hadn't been with us? There were four of them and two of us.

What if we hadn't had the water supplies we did? Water WAS at a premium. We were lucky in that as people around us left, they divvied up their remaining water supplies among those of us remaining behind, so that by the time we left, we actually had more water than when we started. Many, MANY people weren't as lucky as we were. How thirsty would I have to be before the offer started to carry weight? If circumstances were bad enough, would I have accepted? At that point, there would have been an agreed-upon transaction. Would that make me a "sex-worker" in the eyes of the world? Probably technically, in the same way the Donner Party would be called cannibals, although the alternative was death.

What if they had just gone ahead and raped us, then handed us the water and left? Sure, we hadn't agreed to the deal, but they could easily spin it as a "transaction" and claim we agreed. It would have been our word against theirs, and this is a world where, when it comes down to a woman's word against a man's, the men get the benefit of the doubt, even in situations where they hold power over resources and are surrounded by desperate people. They have the power and the means to get whatever they want, but somehow, it's the desperate who generally get blamed.

I also wonder if they ultimately found what they were looking for.

Marian Perera · Feb 17, 2018

Roxxsmom said:
This is another thing I don't get. I understand that sex is wonderful, and orgasms feel great, but the pursuit of such at any cost? Even given that men typically have higher sex drives, on average, than women, it seems odd that some men will do almost anything, no matter how unethical or physically disgusting, to get laid. Why not just masturbate if the other person means so little to you that they're essentially just a big sex toy? Does it feel that much better for these guys than it does for most people, or is something else going on there?

I don't think it's the sex so much as the sense of power. With a woman who's so drunk she doesn't know what's going on, or has passed out, you're in complete control. You decide what happens to her. That ability to dominate and control another person isn't usually present in a consensual relationship between equals, and it's certainly absent in masturbation.

regdog · Feb 17, 2018

Tazlima said:
That was my thought. I wrote my prior post simply because the story brought back the memory (it wasn't even in the top five oddest things we experienced during that time), but the more I think about it, I wonder about the "what ifs."

What if my dog hadn't been with us? There were four of them and two of us.

What if we hadn't had the water supplies we did? Water WAS at a premium. We were lucky in that as people around us left, they divvied up their remaining water supplies among those of us remaining behind, so that by the time we left, we actually had more water than when we started. Many, MANY people weren't as lucky as we were. How thirsty would I have to be before the offer started to carry weight? If circumstances were bad enough, would I have accepted? At that point, there would have been an agreed-upon transaction. Would that make me a "sex-worker" in the eyes of the world? Probably technically, in the same way the Donner Party would be called cannibals, although the alternative was death.

What if they had just gone ahead and raped us, then handed us the water and left? Sure, we hadn't agreed to the deal, but they could easily spin it as a "transaction" and claim we agreed. It would have been our word against theirs, and this is a world where, when it comes down to a woman's word against a man's, the men get the benefit of the doubt, even in situations where they hold power over resources and are surrounded by desperate people. They have the power and the means to get whatever they want, but somehow, it's the desperate who generally get blamed.

I also wonder if they ultimately found what they were looking for.

You were lucky to have your dog with you. It is scary that women face situations like this all over the world, especially when catastrophe strikes.

Sad to say, those men probably did find some women who were desperate enough to sell themselves for clean drinking water.

Roxxsmom · Feb 17, 2018

Marian Perera said:
I don't think it's the sex so much as the sense of power. With a woman who's so drunk she doesn't know what's going on, or has passed out, you're in complete control. You decide what happens to her. That ability to dominate and control another person isn't usually present in a consensual relationship between equals, and it's certainly absent in masturbation.

I think you're right, and I wish people would stop implying that it's just about guys needing sex.

I imagine something similar is behind the appeal of purchasing sex, particularly from someone who is desperate and isn't protected by a union or the law or anything else.

regdog said:
It's my opinion, but I'm guessing the Oxfam workers labeled the girls prostitutes and sex trade workers so they could dispute any claims of rape.

Which is another reason why they shouldn't be allowed to purchase sex while they're on an aid mission, regardless of whether or not it's legal in the country in question. Too many conflicts of interest, potential power differentials, and opportunities to muddy the waters. Plus, that's not what they are supposed to be there for.

neandermagnon · Feb 18, 2018

As far as I can tell from the news reports over here, the problem is the result of a lack of background checks and safeguarding, meaning that predators can infiltrate the organisation (similar to how paedophiles have in the past inflitrated all kinds of organisations that run activities or services for children).

The people running charities tend to assume that everyone who applies for a job/voluntary position is doing so out of charitable goodwill - probably because it's hard to understand the mindset of predators. Fact is some people will apply for jobs working with vulnerable people with the intention of exploiting them. A lack of sufficient monitoring of staff and volunteers and a lack of a robust channel for vulnerable people to make complaints, or robust procedures for dealing with staff/volunteers about whom complaints have been made, means the predators go unchecked. When they work overseas, there's the added factor that local laws may not be as robust as they are in the UK/EU, or due to emergency circumstances the country may not be in a position to enforce existing laws, so that's another level of potential protection that isn't there.

Oxfam is the tip of the iceberg - how many charities/volunteer organisations working overseas have sufficient processes and procedures in place to prevent them from being infiltrated by predators? Any charity that doesn't have sufficient checks in place then it's possible (probable?) that they've got predators posing as aid workers within their ranks. There are very robust laws in the UK to protect children and vulnerable adults within the UK, such as compulsory police and background checks before anyone's even allowed in the building (it includes all staff that go anywhere near children, not just those who work directly with the children, ever since a school janitor murdered two little girls). However I'm not sure whether any of those laws apply at all for people working overseas. And even with police checks, staff need to be trained to recognise predatory behaviour in colleagues and there needs to be a robust whistleblowing procedure... do all the various charities have this?

I'm pretty sure that laws will toughen up and loopholes get closed as a result of this.

Roxxsmom · Feb 18, 2018

neandermagnon said:
As far as I can tell from the news reports over here, the problem is the result of a lack of background checks and safeguarding, meaning that predators can infiltrate the organisation (similar to how paedophiles have in the past inflitrated all kinds of organisations that run activities or services for children).

Do we know yet whether it's a matter of poor screening, where people of bad intent purposely join these organizations in order to victimize people? Or could it be some people of originally good intent becoming corrupted by the power they have over the people they signed on to help?

neandermagnon · Feb 19, 2018

Roxxsmom said:
Do we know yet whether it's a matter of poor screening, where people of bad intent purposely join these organizations in order to victimize people? Or could it be some people of originally good intent becoming corrupted by the power they have over the people they signed on to help?

The impression I get is that it's the former, but it's hard to say without seeing inside the heads of the people who do that. Today's news said that the people involved had physically intimidated witnesses when Oxfam investigated the allegations in 2011. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43107985 Apparently people fired by Oxfam over this have gone on to work for other charities, which I would say is the behaviour of a systematic predator.

It's also extremely worrying and highlights a complete lack of any procedures to share this sort of information across the whole charity work sector, and a total lack of any half-decent internal procedures to investigate and deal with allegations, or to protect whistle blowers. All those things mean that it's extremely likely that the same kind of behaviour's going on in other charities and still going on now. It's pretty shocking to me, to be honest. I used to teach so I'm familiar with all the very strict legislation and procedures in place for child protection. I currently work in the financial sector so I'm familiar with a ton of legislation and compliance procedures for preventing and dealing with fraud, money laundering, bribery and corruption, tax evasion, etc. Schools and banks would be hung, drawn and quartered for not following the required legislation. Meanwhile, in the overseas charity sector, people exploit very vulnerable women in poor countries, physically intimidate witnesses who try to blow the whistle on them, get fired (eventually), then go to work for other charities...

ETA: I want to make it clear that I'm not just blaming the charities here, but also the government for the lack of legislation in place (or if there is legislation that's not being followed, for failing to see that it's followed) because in situations like this, incompetence, naivety, a lack of training of well-meaning staff and a lack of procedures or support for dealing with allegations is all it takes for exploitative people to infiltrate organisations.

Roxxsmom · Feb 19, 2018

Hopefully, this scandal will cause these organizations to change their policies.

I will want to see evidence of substantial changes before I'll feel comfortable giving them money again.

waylander · Feb 19, 2018

neandermagnon said:
ETA: I want to make it clear that I'm not just blaming the charities here, but also the government for the lack of legislation in place (or if there is legislation that's not being followed, for failing to see that it's followed) because in situations like this, incompetence, naivety, a lack of training of well-meaning staff and a lack of procedures or support for dealing with allegations is all it takes for exploitative people to infiltrate organisations.

Multiple governments, as Oxfam is not just spending UK government aid in addition to private donations, but EU and UN too.

frimble3 · Feb 19, 2018

waylander said:
Multiple governments, as Oxfam is not just spending UK government aid in addition to private donations, but EU and UN too.

I suspect that is part of the problem - none of those entities want bad press, so they're all passing the buck and shrugging their shoulders.

talktidy · Feb 20, 2018

This is infuriating.

The Beeb is reporting that donations are drying up. What a surprise. There are people relying on the charity and now face being left in the lurch.

Criccieth · Feb 20, 2018

talktidy said:
This is infuriating.

The Beeb is reporting that donations are drying up. What a surprise. There are people relying on the charity and now face being left in the lurch.

I'd hazard a guess that in this day and age, with our understanding of enabling behaviour, many people feel they are condoning the abuse by continuing to donate. The odd thing is they may well be feeling that they are harming the vulnerable by continuing to donate to Oxfam, failing to realise that if Oxfam lose all their funding, it's the people on the ground who will suffer, as Oxfam has to pull it's staff out of projects etc. Then that causes a project to stutter or fail and it can remove expert local knowledge and trust that has taken years to build up.

What baffles me is that we already know, from abusive ministers, teachers and fosterers that predatory abusers will target vulnerable people and will move from target to target. If Charity One removed a volunteer or fired a staffworker because of allegations of abuse, why don't they inform other charities?

Technophobe · Feb 20, 2018

Probably because if they inform the other charities, someone might get wind of it, and start demanding investigations into them and their hiring process and their other employees. And who knows what might get turned up?

In regards to the other conversation happening, I'm reminded of something I read in a textbook for social studies (which is where the sex-ed happened). It said "A person doesn't commit rape to relieve a sexual urge any more than an alcoholic drinks because he or she is thirsty."

Roxxsmom · Feb 20, 2018

Lest people think I'm heartless, I feel pretty torn up about this for the reasons others have mentioned--cutting them off hurts people who receive aid from them. It's damned both ways.

I am waiting to see what they do nd how they handle this before I decide for sure, but if I do decide to not give them money anymore, I'll look for another aid organization (and vet it as carefully as I can).

The question I have is how we KNOW whether or not they are sleazy. What are the signs we missed and should have spotted as prospective donors?

Alessandra Kelley · Feb 21, 2018

Roxxsmom said:
The question I have is how we KNOW whether or not they are sleazy. What are the signs we missed and should have spotted as prospective donors?

Afua Hirsch, in the Guardian, talks about some of the signs.

Our ignorance and prejudice towards countries such as Haiti has long been on open display. Aid agencies have blatantly held themselves up as white saviours in the way they operate. A toxic and exploitative mentality is highly visible: in the dehumanising images of children in fundraising campaigns, in the language that foreigners have implanted into the very geography of the places they work. When I worked in development organisations in west Africa 15 years ago, I remember hearing Sierra Leone’s war-torn capital described as Freaktown; in Chad I heard Kome, the oil-producing region saturated with bars and prostitutes for foreign oil workers, nicknamed Satan.

Now that the trickle of sexual abuse and exploitation revelations against British aid organisations has turned into a flood, much can be discerned by the language used: the way some of the alleged victims of Oxfam staff in countries such as Haiti are being described as “child prostitutes”, when people who have sex with children below the legal age of consent are, in fact, rapists.

Meanwhile, we have remained utterly uninterested in the thousands of incidents of UN peacekeeper sexual abuse that have emerged over the past decade, including a rape-for-food initiative in Central African Republic, a child-sexual-abuse ring in Haiti, regular sexual assaults of girls as young as 12 in Liberia, and other incidents whose depravity is hard to grasp, such as the time blue helmets are alleged to have tied up four young girls and made them have sex with a dog.

As for the underlying worldview, in which aid workers see poor countries as a moral vacuum in which to purchase pleasure while we sympathise because they are working in difficult situations – that won’t change until we fully understand the colonial hinterland such attitudes rest on.

Criccieth · Feb 21, 2018

Alessandra Kelley said:
Afua Hirsch, in the Guardian, talks about some of the signs.

God, that's horrific.....

But that beg the question that as very few of us actually work in the field, how can those of us whose closest contact with people in need abroad is through these agencies spot these tell-tale signs? We can't assume that every charity that uses an image of a child to demonstrate their work is a charity to steer clear of - many specialise in helping children, so of course they'll use children and their stories in their publicity. And it's not possible, even with the Net, for a person in say the UK or the US to thoroughly investigate a website that says it is that of a purely local charity working with street kids in Cairo, for example.

Oxfam Sex Abuse Scandal

Beastly Fido

The Scavengers

Snarkenfaugister

Beastly Fido

Heckuva good sport

Heckuva good sport

Beastly Fido

The Scavengers

starting over

The Scavengers

Beastly Fido

Nolite timere, consilium callidum habeo!

Beastly Fido

Nolite timere, consilium callidum habeo!

Beastly Fido

Who's going for a beer?

Heckuva good sport

Beastly Fido

Sophipygian