Part of my problem, I think, is that I actively chose NOT to go to any of the proms I could have attended. I realize there are probably people who WANT to go, and can't. But is it really a crisis?

Some people starve because they can't afford food. This is a problem. But is not being able to afford a prom dress/ticket an equally serious societal problem?

Again, not judging. Could be the consensus is Yes.

I agree with you. It seems wayyyy down on the priority list of Things To Fix In The World.

hey why not? prom is expensive

I feel uncomfortable publically rating charities in terms of worthiness. Giving nice things to poor people seems like a noble cause, and I'd rather leave it at that. Saying that, I have a real beef with any charity that exists solely to subsidise High Art for rich people. I'm looking at you, "Arts Funding" people.

Giving nice things to poor people seems like a noble cause

I think I needed to hear that, seanyboy. Thanks.

I'm still conflicted, but that gives it some perspective, at least.

I remember reading after Hurricane Katrina about a high school student somewhere else in the country who started some kind of drive to get people to donate their old prom dresses so that the girls who'd lost everything in Katrina didn't miss out on their proms. I thought that was kind/good but I really don't like the celeb-endorsed thing designed to raise money for prom dresses.

Also, Sharon Stone seems to do quite a lot for other charities too.

But where is the charity for the fat, geeky losers who would be mocked for showing up at the prom without a date? Why does Sharon Stone only care about beautiful poor people?

In summary, I don't see anything about Sharon Stone sending poor kids to space camp. I rest my case.

MP-I have the same initial reaction too, but then, like seanyboy, I come down on the side of: if you have in excess of what you need, you should give to someone who has less, even if what you give is not a necessity.

There is also an argument to be made (and I am going to make it poorly) that, particularly in the US, the lower middle class and the poor are disadvantaged not simply because they lack resources for needed things (food, shelter, medicine, education) but also because they lack the resources to *look* upper middle class and successful. I work with a group that gives business clothes to poor women trying to enter the workforce but also teaches them what the middle/upper middle professional class is going to expect from them in terms of behavior, vocabulary, dress and the like. We call it self-esteem, which it is--in part, but it's also that American "like promotes like" and "nothing breeds success like success" attitude. There's also the very basic premise that you can't get a professional job if you don't have clothes to wear to it.

The poor kids in high school fail, not just because they don't have the family resources to support them while they struggle through high school and adolescence but because it's hard, too, to ever feel you'll have anything--even if you work hard to earn it--when you grow up with nothing. Also, nothing is more cruel that the most popular girl in high school (who is pretty much always from a family that can afford trappings for her) who knows you've got nothing.

Everything is connected in life, alas. So being able to do things that "everybody" gets to do gives adolescents the belief that they can have "finer" things in life. Sure, they know it's a charity prom, but they also get a hint that it isn't because they don't deserve things that they don't have those things. It's a tiny promise that they can have more.

Also, seanyboy, you guys don't really have proms (or haven't until lately?), right? So it may be harder to understand the sense of isolation a kid in the U.S. would feel if they couldn't attend their prom. Many of us chose not to attend, or chose not to view it as a Big Important Thing - but I'm guessing that most of us who felt that way had the means to do it with as much pomp and circumstance (for the most part) as we wished, if it were really a big priority for us.

For most kids it was (I don't know about now) quite important, and it was kind of a big deal for me because my friends organized our senior prom so that we left afterwards for a two-week beach holiday - it was all connected. I didn't spend a lot of money on a dress, or worry about my date (my friends worried for me, and set me up with X-Popular-Guy, whom I hated by the end of the night), but I had this sort of imperial disdain for the whole thing - which is quite a different story from simply not being able to afford to go at all.

I really didn't have much money to spend on stuff like that, and was already working (I worked since I was 12) to make my own money (which I certainly wasn't going to blow on an expensive prom dress), but I was "popular", so I didn't really have to think about it that much - my friends were going to make sure I went, and was dressed well (I think I was loaned a dress from a girlfriend), and had a date, and went to the after-holiday, even if I didn't plan for it myself. And, I admit that I think I also always knew that they would be doing that if I didn't play along, so it was kind of like having cake, and eating it. I could be very dismissive, but I knew they would always pull me in/along.

dang. For some reason, I thought seanyboy posted this. Color me stupid. Oye.

Sharon Stone can do whatever she wants with her time. Sounds like she's choosing to do something that affects peoples live for the better. To bring the "but there are starving people!!11" argument into it IS judging, and it's the kind of thing that is turning me off to this place.

Some kids get an opportunity they probably otherwise wouldn't have, and Sharon Stone gets some publicity that doesn't involve a bad movie. Seems like a win-win.

(Or, what seanyboy and crush-onastick said.)

Thanks for the perspectives, y'all. Helped a lot.

To bring the "but there are starving people!!11" argument into it IS judging, and it's the kind of thing that is turning me off to this place.

I certainly don't speak for her, but I don't think that mudpuppie was making a "but there are starving people !!11" argument against it. She was just asking if someone not being able to go to prom is on the same level of concern as them not being able to eat. Apparently people think it is. *shrug*

I agree with taz. There were some interesting articles around when Oprah Winfrey opened the girls' school in South Africa, about how it was ridiculous to open one elite school when she could have opened 20 or 30 "regular" schools and helped more people. But the point was to create an Ivy League-esque elite group of leaders for the country, who could then go on and work within the system to create more change.

People also harassed her for including hair and make-up classes, but I think the rationale is exactly what taz is saying -- you can't be a major player in an appearance-conscious world (esp. if you're a woman) without conforming, to some extent, to people's expectations of what a leader should look like.

All that said... I can't say I'd necessarily believe, given the tone of the press releases, that such major analysis went into this decision -- though I do think the whole "Let's recycle the Oscars dresses for a worthy cause!" thing is actually kind of neat. And I can't say it's the first organization to which I'd give my money, had I any money to give (this is also one of the main reasons why I refuse to donate to my goddamned college, no matter how much harassing they do).

But I know that even if everyone in the world put all their money and resources into all the causes I find worthy, the world will still have problems, because I just simply can't care enough about every problem enough to work to fix it. So I figure if someone else sees a problem and comes up with a solution to it, good on them. It's certainly a mindset to be encouraged, at least.

Agreed, and well put, occhiblu.

She was just asking if someone not being able to go to prom is on the same level of concern as them not being able to eat. Apparently people think it is.

Absolutely no one in this thread said anything even approaching the sentiment that being able to go to prom is on the same level as being able to eat. At best people said it was nice to give people things they don't have and some (like me) said the benefits of giving people things they don't have goes beyond the acquisition of the thing itself.

And the Glass Slipper Project has been helping poor girls go to prom long before Sharon Stone decided to recycle designer clothes for it.

Agreed, and well put, occhiblu.

agreed, and well put... but it was crush-onastick who made the insightful comments!

Now you can join me in the corner of poster-confusion embarrassment, occhi, darling!

Sigh. I would like to apologize for my lack of reading comprehension and hurry in reading this because I was trying to comment in between writing paragraphs for my paper, but... I can't do any of that, because PaxDigita has ordered me away from MetaChat until I finish this damned paper.

PaxDigita is obviously very wise, because I obviously shouldn't be commenting in this state!