Ben has a good idea here. More about the American Jewish World Service campaign that he's supporting:<p><a href="http://webelieve.ajws.org" rel="nofollow">http://webelieve.ajws.org</a><p>...and the related International Violence Against Women Act, currently introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives:<p><a href="http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c113:1:./temp/~c113A4QoxH:e1300" rel="nofollow">http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c113:1:./temp/~c113A4Q...</a>
I would suggest finding "pro" organizations to support as well, not just "anti" organizations. Pro-education is a good one. Pro birth control is another good one. At the moment, I don't recall the short list, but supporting certain things that benefit "women" tends to a great deal for society as a whole.
It's funny how you stated that you were so shocked and repulsed by slavery in the 1600s that you started to <i>study</i> it deeply.<p>Little that you know that now, in the 2010's there are more slaves than in 1600s. Also, you state that slavery is happening now and the victims are women. I highly doubt that slaves in Pakistan, North Korea, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Russia, Thailand, Congo, Myanmar, Bangladesh, ... are exclusively women.<p>Look, you did a good thing, but I'm just sayin'. If you do something good, why not do it for all people irregardless of gender?
As long as you (general you) aren't giving money to things that are actively harmful, you don't have to 'justify'[] what you give your money to. Sure, it can be constructive to discuss what things should be focused on compared to others. But I think it's silly when people judge others for trying to make a positive impact in one area because they think that there are more pressing issues.<p>[] Yeah, that was probably not the main intent in this case. You know what I mean.