There is no single relevant framework for examining gender and philanthropy, since philanthropy studies is interdisciplinary. In any form of area studies, researchers frame questions, and then decide which disciplinary resources they will draw on to answer them. Any study of gender and philanthropy should draw on feminist theory and on previous work in gender studies, but both of those are such broad areas themselves, that you will need to choose a specific location within each of them, before you can start your inquiry. You might find Mieke Bal's Traveling Concepts in the Humanities useful here, when you attempt to frame your specific research question. Concepts travel through the social sciences and sciences as well, so the model is applicable outside humanities research, too.

It is easiest to provide useful answers to specific questions, so refining your query might get you better results. I would ask you what form of understanding you seek, since the intersection between gender and philanthropy can be viewed from many perspectives.

Philanthropy is a concept that is laden with ethnic , class, able-bodied assumptions as well as those associated with gender and patriarchy. A critical, intersectional approach is required in considering the use of philanthropy as a concept embodying privilege in feminist/gender studies.

Use Gilligan's ethics of care theory of feminine morality as distinct from ethic of justice that characterises masculine morality. You may use Erickson's theory of the consciousness of the inner space characteristic of the feminine psychology of order

Let's start with a very simple but not easily answered question. What do you mean by gender Are you conflating it with natal sex/birth sex? Are you talking about gender self-perception/identity/expression? We can't answer the larger question until we answer these questions.

Dear I thinks that the social structure, goverment, empowerment are important variables to consider in a study as it.

I do agree with Tarynn that in the name of love of humanity (Philanthopy), we need a broader base than feminism to study anything concerning gender, gender self-perception, gender expression and not least gender permission and gender formalizations. One place to take a look is into Amnesty internationals recent view into how atypical genders are met in different "developed" countries

Esben .... How are you. Long time no see. Do you have a link to that Amnesty International document? I could really use it.

I am fine thank you, you will find what you need on:

http://tgeu.org/TGEU_welcomes_Amnesty_Trans_Report

Esben Esther

Although I take Tarynn and Esben's view on board, my own views align closer to Hazel's. An intersectional approach offers the possibility of considering various genderings without neglecting privilege/power that is so intrinsic to philanthropy. While gender may be the issue of interest, as Hazel points out race, ethnicity or other social constructions may dominate in specific cultural and historical contexts.

While I understand Linda and Hazel's perspective, I think that this highlights the conflict between feminist approaches and the more general trans-feminist/queer approaches to questions. I don't disagree with the the points either Linda or Hazel make. However, I think that power is not just buried in natal/genital sex but in perceptions of gender and natal sex and, as such very much involves both natal/genital sex status as well as gender (self-perception, self-expression and the semiotic interactionism of both the viewer and the presenter). As such, I think what we are seeing is the emergence of a more complex view of the question of the interaction between gender and philanthropy. I like it. Let's debate more.

I think that the theory that may serve as a framework is the social learning theory. This theory can deal with socialization roles of various change-agents and explains how the individual learns through what is expected from him (here you could introduce feminist theory). By using this theory you can also what should be the role of men or women as seen by the society (here you can choose in which change-agent to focus and also note the cultural impact). Using this theory will enable you to analyze what the society thinks about philanthropy and how it adjusts to the roles of men and women.

Tarynn the point you are making is in may opinion what makes intersectionality approach interesting and useful. It allows for the broader /deeper interactionism you are seeking. From a gender perspective, I don't think Judith Butler would have serious issues with the approach. Theoretically, it remains fairly under-theorised but there is some good work out there. A couple of useful article: Anthias F. (2013). Intersectional what? Social divisions, intersectionality and levels of analysis. Ethnicities, 13(3), 3-19 or see Mahalingham R. (2007). Culture, power and psychology of marginality. In Fuligini A. (ed.) Contesting Stereotypes and Creating Identities: Social categories, social identities and educational participation, 42-65. New York: Sage.

I agree with you, let's keep the debate going!

I agree with Tarynn, the gender issue is no longer a polar question, but a question where there is context and mostly perception. I also agree with Linda, who has an interesting synthesis.

Linda, I will definitely try to get those articles. Thanks for the references. We are dealing with a complex problem of the slipperiness of identity and how that affects philanthropy both from the giving and the getting perspective. There is the title of our first paper together: "The slipperiness of identity: giving and getting in philanthropy" I love it.

One of the challenges in this and other questions that involve the interplay of gender (interpreted broadly) and natal sex/birth sex with other factors of interest is that the linguistic topology or landscape that we currently have available for use simply does not allow us to deal with non-heteronormative constructs. I am attaching a new paper that I think people might enjoy. And I hope it creates even more arguments. This paper is in press.

Thanks to everyone for your suggestions and feedbacks. Kali, some of my specific questions are - What are the different patterns of ‘giving’ between men and women? Is the feminist philanthropy prevalent among the Indian Asian diaspora in US? Do Diaspora philanthropy creates any conflict of interest between the donors and beneficiaries? Do the diaspora women hold leadership positions in the NGOs? What are the strategies that they used to generate philanthropy in public health effectively? Why do the Indian American Diaspora practice philanthropy vigorously and emerge as a model minority overseas? These questions loomed largely in my mind when I began this study.

In terms of the roles that women play in NGOs, and volunteering more generally, the work of Rebecca Taylor (2004 and 2005) is worth looking at. In her work, Rebecca takes a feminist approach to the study of work to extent its conceptual boundaries to include unpaid work in the public sphere. It seeks to address the pre-existing distinction between (men's) paid work and (women's) unpaid work by borrowing from Glucksmann (1995 and 2000) to argue that volunteering is part of a wider framework of interdependent work relations. I have found this a very useful approach to studying volunteering and paid work in the voluntary sector.

In terms of the giving of money, I would suggest you look at the Women's Philanthropy Initiative at the U of Indiana School of Philanthropy, in particular the work of Debra Mesch and Martha A. Taylor.

Thank you, Eddy. I appreciate your feedback and valuable suggestions. I like the "Private and Public dichotomy" as it is one the critical concepts of Women's Studies. I wrote to the Lilly School of Philanthropy a couple of times but none responded to me, unfortunately. I truly wish to visit them but helpless.

I support Zychlinski point of view= I think that social learning theory give a good starting framework for the study of gender and philanthropy

There is an abundance of work out there on gender and philanthropy, as there is on gender and social capital since women still make up the majority of volunteers in NGO’s and diverse social movements. For example, many studies examine effects of race and gender on philanthropy. Other studies examine gender and philanthropy in the 18th and 19th centuries, when western women required a culturally legitimate excuse for their journey to the Orient. Travel, an interest in the foreign or the exotic was condemned in females but tolerated in the context of the vocational duty or volunteerism, which provided women with an escape from family constraints and social barriers, as well as an alternative to domesticity, especially for single [unmarried] women (see: Kamberidou 2012, 2013)

Thank you, Irene. I appreciate your suggestions.