The Student Room Group

Oxfam - what's all the fuss about?

expats and aid workers have been having sex with local hookers since foreign travel began - what's the big deal?

Scroll to see replies

I think the idea is that it is a s******* country and it's people are on their knees crying for the help of charities.
Charity workers like it or not are held, in the public's mind, the to higher standards than Matelots on shore leave.
The other thing being that the upper echelons of the charity colluded to keep this out of the public eye which resulted in the people involved being given glowing references for the next charity they went on to work for.
But I get what you're saying
This has been a long running problem, for example, in UN bodies that work in developing countries and in the peacekeeping forces. UN peacekeepers in places like Bosnia in particular were accused of such crimes. It is appalling and the last thing that people need from third world charities is further abuse of desperate people.

That said, this story in the Times digs up an old case that Oxfam dealt with by dismissing the staff. Oxfam has been accused of being political by the Right for highlighting global inequality and this is presumably payback - the Times is owned by Murdoch, one of the global plutocrats accused by Oxfam.
Perhaps Oxfam should make its workers take vows of chastity before they are allowed overseas ? :dontknow:
Reply 4
Original post by the bear
Perhaps Oxfam should make its workers take vows of chastity before they are allowed overseas ? :dontknow:


and then watch how applications from single male staffers would plummet

and secondly, these staff members are actually giving more money to the locals this way, prob most of the women were hookers already, now just getting extra work
Original post by the bear
Perhaps Oxfam should make its workers take vows of chastity before they are allowed overseas ? :dontknow:


I find it incredible that people don't understand the basics of good behaviour. Do people really need to have a clause in their contracts that tells them not have have sex with prostitutes whilst on business?
Original post by ByEeek
I find it incredible that people don't understand the basics of good behaviour. Do people really need to have a clause in their contracts that tells them not have have sex with prostitutes whilst on business?


in today's climate the answer is a resounding yes.
Reply 7
Today is a day to celebrate I feel. I think this is the first thing view you've expressed I happen to agree with!
Original post by So-Sarah
and then watch how applications from single male staffers would plummet

and secondly, these staff members are actually giving more money to the locals this way, prob most of the women were hookers already, now just getting extra work


If single men aren't going to do charity work because they dont have access to foreign prostitutes then maybe it' best they don't.
Original post by So-Sarah
and then watch how applications from single male staffers would plummet

and secondly, these staff members are actually giving more money to the locals this way, prob most of the women were hookers already, now just getting extra work


Sexual exploitation is a good thing?

How about they just give them the money instead of exploiting the economic situation of the people for sexual gratification.
The story is part of the attempt of the right wing of the Tory party to reduce the foreign aid budget.

See also the well-known Roman Catholic, Jacob Rees-Mogg, on the front page of the Express this week, saying letting children starve is what Jesus would have done.
Original post by unprinted
The story is part of the attempt of the right wing of the Tory party to reduce the foreign aid budget.

See also the well-known Roman Catholic, Jacob Rees-Mogg, on the front page of the Express this week, saying letting children starve is what Jesus would have done.


what a nasty post.
What an evil front page.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
an old case that Oxfam dealt with by dismissing the staff.


Not quite. The story is that it has emerged that Oxfam did not dismiss all those involved, preferring to massage its reputation than to ensure that other charities were not alerted to senior people's naughtiness, and allowed them to resign. They turned up in other charities as if nothing had happened. In this case such behaviour contravenes UN rules for aid staff and is a major institutional no-no, not just a personal peccadillo.
Original post by Good bloke
Not quite. The story is that it has emerged that Oxfam did not dismiss all those involved, preferring to massage its reputation than to ensure that other charities were not alerted to senior people's naughtiness, and allowed them to resign. They turned up in other charities as if nothing had happened. In this case such behaviour contravenes UN rules for aid staff and is a major institutional no-no, not just a personal peccadillo.


Clearly there was a lack of concrete evidence in some cases, so 'allowing to resign' is a euphemism for 'we don't have enough to sustain an unfair dismissal case but we can make it so you are completely marginalised, or you can stand down'.

As I mentioned, this has been widespread across UN organisations operating in war zones and developing world countries, so I would hardly hold up their rules as the exemplar in cases like this.

I do strongly suspect a campaign against Oxfam from the organised Right here. No surprise that it pops up soon after Davos, where plots and retaliatory strikes on behalf of the global plutocracy are planned.
Original post by Fullofsurprises

I do strongly suspect a campaign against Oxfam from the organised Right here. No surprise that it pops up soon after Davos, where plots and retaliatory strikes on behalf of the global plutocracy are planned.


It couldn't possibly be, as it certainly appears from the point of view of an open-minded observer, a case of a couple of whistle-blowing aid volunteers, frustrated at what goes on in big charities and in disaster relief generally, blowing the gaff then? It has to be politically motivated?
Original post by Good bloke
It couldn't possibly be, as it certainly appears from the point of view of an open-minded observer, a case of a couple of whistle-blowing aid volunteers, frustrated at what goes on in big charities and in disaster relief generally, blowing the gaff then? It has to be politically motivated?


It's nothing to do with that - it's the level of attention the major media are putting on it. This is clearly coordinated. Then we have the source - the Times, which knows perfectly well this has been a widespread problem, not just affecting Oxfam, but paints it entirely as an anti-Oxfam story, as do the government and the BBC. Then we have the sheer hypocrisy of DFID and their minister wading in, ignoring decades of brutal policies associate with dam projects, forced resettlements, corruption and channeling of British aid funds into private hands.

This is one of those win-win things for the upper parts of the Tory establishment.
Original post by Fullofsurprises
paints it entirely as an anti-Oxfam story


You obviously haven't seen this morning's Times then.
Original post by Good bloke
You obviously haven't seen this morning's Times then.


I will look!
It could be because they've come from a country where prostitution is illegal and I'm sure it's illegal in the aid countries. Secondly, the prostitutes in those countries are often young children, sex slaves or are being pimped out by someone, so buying into that industry reinforces the sex trade and the abuse of young children and allows pimps to continue their exploitation.

Quick Reply