There are days in animal welfare when you think you’ve encountered just about everything. And then somebody takes issue with your mannequin.
Meet Betty.
Betty is a longstanding and much valued member of the Dog Desk Animal Action fundraising team. She came to us as a donation, has helped sell hundreds of hats and has generated much needed income for animals in our care.
She’s never once claimed expenses. She’s never taken a day off sick, never asked for a pay rise and not a cross word has ever passed her lips. Frankly, we couldn’t ask for a more reliable colleague.
But Betty’s position has recently come under scrutiny.
Apparently, she looks more suited to modelling adult products than vegan winter hats. Her glamorous appearance has been described as a bad look for our organisation, and the suggestion is that we should stop using her.
We were rather taken aback.
After all, Betty has an outstanding record of service. Her contribution to animal welfare is measurable, and until now, nobody has raised any concerns about her conduct.
Nevertheless, it seems that her lipstick, makeup and general appearance may be enough to disqualify her from a career in charitable fundraising.
A question of appearances
Of course, Betty is plastic. She has no feelings to hurt, no reputation to defend and, as far as we’re aware, no ambitions beyond modelling our latest collection of hats.
But the assumptions behind the criticism are rather more interesting than the criticism itself. Why should a glamorous appearance be considered inappropriate for an organisation doing serious work?
Women have spent generations being judged by how they look rather than what they achieve. Too much makeup, too little makeup, too glamorous, too plain, too old, too fat, too thin. The list of supposed shortcomings is endless.
Some of the world’s most accomplished women have faced criticism over their appearance while doing extraordinary things.
Dolly Parton, whose glamorous image has been part of her identity for decades, has also helped put hundreds of millions of books into children’s hands through her Imagination Library.
Her lipstick has never prevented her from changing lives.
And while Betty is hardly in Dolly’s league, we would argue that the principle remains the same. An individual’s appearance tells you remarkably little about the good they can do.
The reality behind Betty’s working day
There is another reason this particular criticism struck a nerve.
On the morning Betty’s appearance became a matter of public discussion, our team was dealing with three puppies suffering from parvovirus, another failed skin graft, a community carer facing eviction and struggling to find accommodation that would accept her animals, and another carer in a mental health crisis who needed a safe place to stay while temporary arrangements were made for her dogs.
We also learned that a dog due to leave a municipal pound for adoption had been euthanised on the very morning his adopter went to collect him.
That is what an ordinary working day can look like behind the social media account of a small animal welfare organisation. There are animals to treat, emergencies to manage, frightened people to support, bills to pay and, sometimes, devastating news to absorb.
Somewhere amongst all of that, we also have to raise the money that makes our work possible. Which brings us back to Betty.
She was donated by someone who wanted to help. We put her to work modelling products in our shop. People bought those products, and the proceeds helped us continue caring for animals. It’s a simple arrangement, but a very successful one.
We don’t have a commercial advertising budget, professional models or a glamorous photography studio. We work with what we have, and we’re grateful for every donated item and every person who supports us.
Betty has done her job exceptionally well.
Does every opinion need to be expressed?
Everyone is entitled to an opinion. Nobody is obliged to like Betty’s face, her makeup or whatever wig she is wearing on that particular day. But being entitled to an opinion doesn’t necessarily mean that expressing it serves any useful purpose.
There is a difference between constructive feedback and unnecessary criticism.
It’s particularly disheartening when that criticism comes from someone who understands, or ought to understand, the challenges faced by animal rescue organisations.
Behind every fundraising photograph is somebody trying to make something work. Sometimes with donated equipment, limited resources and very little time.
And behind every organisation is a group of human beings who may already be carrying considerably more than the public ever sees.
A little kindness costs nothing.
Betty’s future at Dog Desk Animal Action
Following an entirely unofficial internal review, we are delighted to announce that Betty will be retaining her position.
Her performance remains exemplary. Her attendance record is faultless. Her fundraising contribution speaks for itself.
We have no intention of replacing a successful and much loved member of our team simply because somebody disapproves of her appearance.
Indeed, we think Betty deserves recognition for her years of loyal service.
Betty’s going nowhere. And if she helps us sell another few hundred hats, we might even consider promoting her.