This article invites you into a space of reflection rather than prescription. We explore how philanthropy intersects with the social construction of the feminine—not to offer neat conclusions, but to hold complexity with care. For some readers, the questions we raise may feel abstract or uncomfortable. That’s intentional. In these tensions, we find the possibility of deeper transformation.
Philanthropy is in a moment of questioning. The field has increasingly embraced calls to shift power, center lived experience, and prioritize relational ways of working—qualities often associated with the feminine. Some people have described this as the rise of feminist philanthropy.
This might seem like an obvious sign of progress. But let’s examine that more closely. On the one hand, these qualities offer alternatives to dominant, extractive modes of giving and organizing. On the other hand, the dialogue around these ‘feminist’ values can also reproduce gendered (and racialized) expectations that cast women, particularly women of color, as natural caregivers, healers, and moral beacons, without transforming the deeper logics of patriarchy or coloniality.
We are not here to reject the turn toward care and relationality. Instead, we ask a deeper question: Who gets to be seen as a legitimate giver in philanthropic contexts? What kinds of labor and value are made visible—and what remains invisible?
When we celebrate the rise of women in philanthropy, are we amplifying their agency—or reinforcing familiar roles with a new gloss? Gloss can celebrate representation without redistributing power, and embrace the language of empathy without challenging the structures of inequality. In a field shaped by centuries of extraction and hierarchy, transformation cannot be merely decorative.
Expression or Imposition? Revisiting the Feminine in Philanthropy
Philanthropy—understood as the act of nurturing collective well-being through the sharing of resources, time, or energy—has historically been framed as an extension of women's social role in patriarchal societies. This framing positions care and generosity as "natural" traits of femininity.
Indeed, from the charity circles of the 19th century to today’s transformative donors, women have long played a vital role in building support networks and advancing social change. And many of the values traditionally associated with femininity have shaped philanthropic efforts. Figures like Jane Addams and Madam C.J. Walker in the U.S., and Bertha Lutz and Ruth Cardoso in Brazil, pioneered philanthropic work grounded in rights advocacy. Today, women such as Melinda Gates, Oprah Winfrey, Mackenzie Scott, Sueli Carneiro, Célia Xakriabá, and Neca Setúbal carry forward this legacy through activism and philanthropic leadership.
Often, their philanthropy has been more than a gesture of generosity. It has been a practice of resistance, a way to reclaim power, and a strategy for reimagining systems.
Still, we must ask: Is women’s participation in philanthropy a genuine expression of being or a continuation of imposed gender roles?
The answer lies in a deeper examination of women’s philanthropic work. For many women, philanthropy becomes a way to consolidate their influence within existing systems. For others, it becomes a vehicle for the structural change they want to see in the world. Either way, women’s philanthropy is not merely charitable; it often reflects political commitments, visions for justice, and a redefinition of public action.
So a challenge arises when we try to articulate the connection between philanthropy and the feminine.
Social and economic systems have long defined the feminine as belonging to women, assigning it a specific set of values: empathy, collaboration, intuition, care, and receptivity, and often viewed as secondary or in need of management. The masculine is tied to rationality, science, and leadership. We must deconstruct those universal ideas.
Yet, as philanthropy becomes more strategic, it is also increasingly shaped by sexist assumptions by continuing to undervalue traits associated with femininity —suggesting that emotion and relationship are liabilities rather than assets in decision-making.
Even within a sector where women are highly present, they often face barriers to influence. Gender parity is still far off. In Brazil, boards remain predominantly male, controlling over 88% of financial resources. Racial disparities are even more stark.
Thus, the struggle for equity in philanthropy is not only about who benefits from it—but also about who shapes its vision. Inclusion is not enough. Without structural transformation, representation risks reinforcing existing hierarchies under the guise of progress.
Feminist Philanthropy: Practices and Possibilities
Feminist philanthropy, still emerging in Brazil, doesn’t simply invite more women into existing systems. It seeks to reconfigure those systems entirely. It critiques the patriarchal, extractive foundations of capitalism and aims to redistribute power.
International initiatives like Frida Fund, Mama Cash, and AWID support not just donations, but transformation—funding public policy shifts and social movements that defend women's rights. In Brazil, the ELAS+ Fund, the Marielle Franco Institute, and the Agbara Fund channel resources to Black, Indigenous, and LGBTQIA+ women, expanding not just access but the very definition of what philanthropy can be.
Yet no organization is immune to the systems it seeks to disrupt. A feminist lens does not automatically translate into feminist practice. As with anti-racist efforts, without deep reflexivity, good intentions can still reproduce harmful patterns.
Transformation requires inner and outer work. It demands that we notice how modern thinking has shaped both how we give and how we govern. And it calls for new forms of leadership that weave together love and strategy, intuition and effectiveness—not as opposites, but as necessary companions.
A Future of Generous Reimagining
In the coming years, an estimated 30 trillion U.S. dollars will pass into the hands of women. This transition holds profound potential.
But for it to bring real change, we need more than redistribution. We need reimagination. A philanthropic field that honors complexity. That embraces care and logic, strategy and tenderness. That refuses to reduce generosity to charity or women’s value to how well they perform masculine norms.
From this ground, giving can become not just an act of sharing resources, but a collective commitment to live, relate, and co-flourish in different ways.
.webp)
.webp)
.webp)
