A curse on these smug types who buy you a goat in Africa for Christmas

By Virginia Ironside for MailOnline
Updated: 02:38 EDT, 16 December 2009

Miserly? Virginia Ironside objects to pseudo present-giving

Dear all, read the note in my inbox.

'Apologies for the group email, but I've decided to give to charity the money I would normally spend on your Christmas cards.

'This year, I am funding a woman's refuge in Scotland. I hope you will agree that your card money has gone to a good cause. Happy Christmas everyone!'

My blood began to simmer. And it reached boiling point when I remembered that last year someone had the cheek to send me a card informing me that my Christmas 'gift' was a goat, sent - without so much as a by-my-leave - to some village in Africa.

Now, I know there are some who will argue I am being a miserly misery-guts. In our age of excess, surely a charitable donation has to be better than spending lots of money on gifts that are destined to be stuffed in the back of a cupboard after a couple of days.

We're also in a recession and, in this season of limited financial goodwill, charities need our help more than ever. Is there a gesture more selfless than giving to a needy cause? And, of course, I would agree - if you are the person making a donation to an appeal of your own choosing.

The problem is that although the charity donation present may seem like a gift, it's not really a gift at all. It's as if the giver, instead of contributing herself directly to a charity (which is, of course, entirely reasonable, generous and kindly), involves an unwitting middleman in the trans-action - and expects gratitude for it.

Recently, I gave a talk at a very enjoyable event put on by a Jewish organisation. I was happy to do it for nothing. But then, as a 'token of our appreciation', I was handed a certificate that informed me that 'Trees had been planted in Israel in the name of Virginia Ironside'.

It was hard to know whether to laugh or cry. Maybe I don't believe that trees being planted anywhere is a good idea. Maybe I'd prefer them planted somewhere else. Maybe, before whizzing them off to Israel, it would have been polite to let me have a peep at them to decide whether I might like one or two for my own garden.

I couldn't help feeling angry that I was expected, in some way, to feel grateful for a gift that, in the end, benefited only donor and recipient.

And it's the same with these charitable gifts. It's one thing to buy a gift from an Oxfam catalogue and give it to a friend as a Christmas present. That's entirely reasonable.

But to give directly to a charity of your own choice, and then expect to be thanked for it, is, I say, ultimately self-serving.

Imposition: Last year, Virginia's gift was a goat, sent to a  village in Africa

One of the reasons I dislike this trend is that charities are not universally wonderful and good and noble - or, rather, they usually are wonderful and good and noble but only in the eyes of those who support them.

Charitable giving is a tremendously political - and fraught - arena. A charity that is one person's good cause will be another's pet hate.

You might not agree, but I would be livid, say, if any money destined for even a box of hankies for me had been diverted to an antiabortion charity.

I would also be furious if any of the money were given to medical research (a particular personal bug-bear of mine, not shared, I know, by most right-thinking people).

I wouldn't be too happy about money being given to donkey sanctuaries, either, and feel the Lifeboat people already have enough to be getting on with. In other words, we don't agree about charities, by any means.

Indeed, I was rather miffed about the Women's Aid charity to which my friend was donating my Christmas card money. Not because I have anything against Women's Aid, but because I would prefer to donate to all victims of domestic violence, not just women.

The other reason I object to this kind of pseudo present-giving is that the person who gets the warm glow is the giver, not the recipient of her 'present'.

Political: A charity that is one person's good cause will be another's pet hate

It is she who writes out the cheque and she who gets the ingratiating letters of thanks - not only from the charity, but also from us metarecipients as well, congratulating her on her appeal to our selflessness.

This charitable giving is imposed on us everywhere. I am constantly being told that money has been added to my bill - by theatre companies, museums, restaurants - in aid of some charity, money that I can only remove by making a fuss.

Even Waitrose gives me a green button every time I shop there, to put into a slot in aid of one or other charity that Waitrose (not me) has chosen, presumably to give me the illusion that I am a generous person.

A gift to a charity like this is so wretchedly patronising, too. It's saying, in effect: 'I'm sure you would prefer a box of handmade chocolates, but I am appealing to your better nature and making an unselfish decision on your behalf.'

Of course, the worst problem about these gifts is that they tell you the giver doesn't give a jot about the person they're giving to, but only, ultimately, about themselves and the charity they're enriching.

You can give goats to any old person. You don't have to stagger round the shops finding out exactly what would give your friends delight. I think a present should be tailor-made for an individual. That way, we know that the giver cares.

Anyway, for heaven's sake, it's not as if the rest of us don't give money to charity! (Hope And Homes For Children, since you ask.) But we do it privately, not wishing to trumpet our generosity to the world.

Giving to charity via friends is actually a form of advertising your own good nature. And anyway, the truth is that lots of presents do end up as charitable gifts.

My local Age Concern bulges in January with presents I've recently received with gratitude, but which I find unusable.

That way, I get the pleasure of opening a well-intentioned parcel from a friend, which is very nice and gives me a warm feeling, whatever it is, and also the pleasure, if I wish, of handing the contents on to a charity. Myself.

There is nothing wrong with asking someone what they want for Christmas and if the answer is goats to Africa, then goats it shall be. Nor is there anything wrong with giving tiny tokens to people instead of the usual overblown gifts.

But don't make your friends feel like dumb tools in a charitable process that is, in the end, designed just to make you feel good.