It WOULD be considered sexist if you put "boy" in place of "girl", RP. But that's because males and females have very different stations in life throughout the world. Boys already have the best opportunities that their respective countries have to offer (which isn't necessarily saying much for some countries, but still...). Girls don't. The Girl Effect isn't about putting boys down or giving girls a leg up over boys. It's about finally allowing the other half of the population to stop being disenfranchised, and finally giving them an opportunity to be active participants in the leadership and improvement of their communities (rather than just being obedient baby makers). These are opportunities that boys have ALWAYS had, even in the poorest of places. It's time to give girls a chance too.

And when the world finally recognizes that girls have just as much to offer their communities and countries as boys do, the planet's intellectual ability, talent, leadership skills, compassion, etc., will all basically double, because at last girls will have an opportunity to be USEFUL to their countries and communities on a large scale, and as leaders...rather than just having babies.

In short, it's not sexist when they use "girl" because GIRLS are the ones who are disenfranchised, devalued, and held down. Boys aren't...at least never to the extent that girls are.

It's a good idea, but I can't help but think if you switch "boy" for "girl" in this video it would be considered sexist.

Nice as an introduction toW#2

I love the information on this video about web2.0, I would like to learn more about web2.0.

Rigor, Relevance, & Relationships...

Fantastic

The conversation without voices.

A truly inspiration story of overcoming obstacles, dreaming and creating legacies in community