Thursday, 10 January 2013

Greta Thanks Her Readers For Their Generosity

The dates listed on this timeline are as accurate as the publications on Greta Christina’s Blog Timeline.

Greta Christina (GC) was diagnosed with endometrial cancer and subsequently informed her online community. 

GC put out a heartfelt plea for donations.

“The bad news again, and the part where I’m going to ask for help: This situation is going to seriously interfere with my ability to work for a little while. I’m going to be weak and doped up on pain meds for at least a couple of weeks after the surgery — possibly longer — and travel will be inadvisable for six weeks after the surgery. And all that’s assuming the best-case scenario of “no chemo or radiation”… which, again, is the most likely scenario, but not the only one.”

Speaking gigs are a significant part of my income, both for the honoraria and the book sales.”

“If I could not worry about money for the weeks while I’m recovering, it would take a big, big load off my mind. So I’m swallowing my pride, and am doing a fundraiser/ pledge drive.”  

The [bold] statement above is in essence, the plea to the community for cash/donations to alleviate her worries related to financial commitments during her recovery time.

As I understand it, this is the nature of the cause.

Greta in no way, shape or form worded her appeal to the community for funds to be sent as gifts for the sake of “Gifting” a sum of money. That would be outright begging IMO, and would be viewed as such. 

Greta has “donate” and “subscribe” buttons as a permanent fixture on the side bar of her blog page/s. This is clearly understood by the reader as a suggestion by the author to donate or subscribe to her blog if the audience sees some value in her writings.

You will also notice two  more buttons located on the sidebar of each page directing the reader to make either a donation or recurring subscription payments to” Free Thought Blogs” if they so wish.

This particular blog has an additional two buttons embedded at the bottom of the post, which can be generally assumed to be a utility provided by the author to allow her readers/donators  to make donations or subscription payments in relation to her panhandling.

The donation drive commenced October 18th 2012 9:47am.

Greta Christina posted a new blog entry aptly titled:  “Wow, wow, wow, – and thanks”

Greta expressed her gratitude to her readership for which she described as “a thumping success.”

She further wrote:

 “It has exceeded all my expectations. I will be able to comfortably cover my mortgage and other expenses for a few months, while I recover my health and get my writing and speaking career revved up again afterwards. No further donations or spreading of the word are necessary: I’ve actually gotten somewhat [definition: adverb- To a moderate extent or by a moderate amount] more than I really need, and I’m seriously contemplating donating the overflow — probably to the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Light the Night Walk via the Foundation Beyond Belief, and/or to Camp Quest. (I feel okay about asking my readers for financial help, but I feel weird taking more than I really need.)”

This concluded the charity drive. (Ending at approximately 2:42pm, October 19th 2012, based on the time of first comment posted thereafter)

Upon reading this post^ I noticed some inconsistencies relating to the original request for donations.

GC explicitly states in her pre-donation post dated December 18th 2012, she is in need of donations to cover expenses for the weeks whilst recovering.

At the conclusion of the charity drive Greta states clearly that she intends to use the donations to cover mortgage and other expenses for a few months.

This has since been trumped with a new statement published January 6th 2013.

“I spent the overwhelming majority of the donations from that fundraiser paying my mortgage several months in advance.”

This statement implies the recipient has received donations which exceeded the target. (overflow)

Greta Christina made a call to end the fundraiser just 29 hours after its commencement. The recipient then directs any further donations to be forwarded directly to the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society Light the Night Walk via the Foundation Beyond Belief, or to Camp Quest. GC however, merely contemplates, albeit seriously, donating the overflow- “probably” to the above mentioned charity organisations. 

Greta publishes a post asking her followers to once again contribute to another cause. Skepticon, an event on the atheist/sceptical calendar were experiencing financial difficulty due to low funding.  This conference is listed on Greta’s calendar, as she is a nominated speaker for the event.

I was supposed to speak at Skepticon 5. My cancer surgery threw a monkey wrench into that plan, although we’re hoping that I’m well enough by November 9 to get me Skyped in.”


“Now, as many of my readers know, I recently did a fundraiser here on this blog, to help cover my expenses while I recover from cancer surgery. As readers also may know, I stopped that fundraiser about a day after it started, even though word about the fundraiser was still being spread and donations were still coming in, since I’d already raised all the money I needed and then some.”

At this point in time GC seems to be relying on the donations received (for living expenses) but sets an example for her followers by stating “Ingrid and I just donated $100.00 to keep Skepticon going. Please chip in what you can. Thanks.”

This may simply be Greta’s preferred choice of charities for at least part of her overflow contribution. There is yet to be any publication by GC, or the interwebz, or any single charity organization expressing thanks for receipt for any other (overflow) donations.

Greta has now returned to work in some capacity and creates a blog

“It’s a Friday evening, and there’s a party Ingrid and I said we’d go to. It’s a Friday evening, which all too often means Ingrid and I are exhausted by our work weeks.”

This statement suggests Greta has resumed work duties.


“I’m at a conference. Or rather, I’m in a hotel room at some un-fucking-godly hour in the morning, getting ready for a conference. I am not by any stretch of the imagination a morning person, and I am fighting the urge to say “Fuck it,” to return to the big comfy hotel bed and sleep for six more hours, to stay in the big bed all day watching TV and masturbating and ordering room service. But I remember, vaguely and distantly through my groggy haze, that I actually do like this work, that I am wildly fortunate to be able to do this work, that once I’m at the conference I will want to be there doing this work. Also, I remember that the conference organizers are paying me to be there, and if I don’t show up they’ll want their money back.”

It’s now just under two months after surgery and GC is attending a conference and participating in paid speaking engagements.

 Greta often blogs about current fashion, and in her latest installment was discussing dressy, comfortable shoes. Several references were made to a pair of upmarket shoes designed and manufactured by John Fluevog. 

It seems that Greta’s blog has now been edited and the cost and purchase of these shoes at $200+ is now edited out of the blog post.

A portion of the online community expressed outrage over the purchase of said shoes, claiming the panhandle recipient is spending charitable donations earmarked for essential living expenses on luxuries.

This behaviour initiated discourse on the blogosphere from both sides of the camp. Those in support of Greta, and those with opposing views.

The three main topics of discussion are as follows:

  • 1.      Is the purchase of upmarket shoes a necessity or a frivolous luxury afforded by donations pledged?

  • 2.      Did the panhandling recipient take advantage of the overflow of charitable donations and prepay months of living expenses, as opposed to weeks, as was stated in the first post?

  • 3.      Has the recipient followed the direction she gave her readers and pledged her overflow of funds to a worthwhile charity organization?

There seems to be some discussion on the blogosphere defending Greta’s receipt of some monies as “gifts”.

GC attempts to defend her use of funds by changing her mission statement to this:

“I spent the overwhelming majority of the donations from that fundraiser paying my mortgage several months in advance”

“several” definition [adjective- more than a few, an indefinite small number]

“few” definition [adjective- not many but more than one. Two or more]

Realising the true definition of Greta’s post-donation statement it can be assumed the donations GC received, adequately covered the costing for living expenses and mortgage payments, not only for a number of weeks as first published in her campaign, but now carries her expenses for several months. 

Greta’s followers made several claims of explicitly stating that their donation is/was intended as a gift, therefore can be spent on items other than those expressed in the charity drive. This conversation did not start until her panhandling exercise concluded, and only by a handful of commenters on her blog.

Over 170 commenters responded to Greta’s plea and expressed their support, both emotional and monetary.  I was unable to find a single entry in the comment section specifically stating the pledged contribution can be used for something other than what was described as “living expenses”.

Greta’s followers challenged the idea of unethical use of the proceeds and made several claims, whilst pointing to comments (post charity drive) approving of her use of the funds by any means she sees fit, which includes luxuries.

Several supportive commenters who did NOT contribute to the fundraising expressly advised Greta to either “spend on whatever she likes”, or “Keep the overflow for herself”.

  • ·         9 commenters approving the “keep the overflow cash” idea, by self admission, did not donate.

  • ·         11 commenters approving the “keep the overflow cash” idea, made no admissions to donating.

  • ·         4 commenters approving the “keep the overflow cash” idea, actually made a contribution, although, one contributor, by admission, only donated pennies.

Finally, if Greta was serious about ceasing the influx of “Donations”, she’d remove the “Donate” and “Subscription” buttons located beneath her heart felt plea. 

At the time of writing this article, no such attempts were made to cease receiving it would take a big, big load off my mind” donations.

It’s been stated several times throughout this article that the fundraising target has been reached and no further assistance is needed. The donation drive has ceased. An overwhelming amount of money raised. An overflow of donations may or may not be pledged to a worthy charity organization, based on an ambiguous statement made by GC.

Pushing the goal posts.

Appeal to pity.

Luxury items.

Dishonest defense by commenters.

Nil pledge of the overflow.

Double income.
Challenged ethics.




  1. You are a sad sick motherfucker. Please get yourself help.

  2. Well, to be fair Physioprof, I don't know who this guy is but at least he can string a sentence together. You should at least attempt it sometime.

    As for the content of the post - Well, that's fair enough too. He see's Greta Christina for the money grabbing hypocrite she is.

  3. SAD
    Feeling or showing sorrow; unhappy: "I was sad and subdued".
    Causing or characterized by sorrow or regret.
    Affected by physical or mental illness: "we were sick with bronchitis"; "visiting the sick and the elderly".
    Bring something up by vomiting.
    -adjective. ill - diseased - unwell - sickly - ailing - morbid
    -noun. vomit
    -verb. hound
    -Noun vulgar. A despicable or very unpleasant person or thing.

    Physioprof, you have used three descriptive words without justification.
    I am neither sad, nor sick nor a motherfucker. Therefore no help is needed, but thanks for your concern.

    On a lighter note, i'd like to direct you back to the article.
    60% of it is directly quoted from Greta's writings and the remainder of the commentary is noted as observations.
    Your argument is not with me sir.
    I suggest you look for justification on this data directly with Greta Christina.
    Steve the unmotherfucker.

  4. Physioprof, with all due respect, but don't you mean he's a,

    sadde sicke motherfuckere? and that he should pleasee gette helpe?

  5. Yea, what is up with all those extra letters added on? Must be a riot at parties talking like that.Should've asked for help in English class maybe

  6. Mr physioprof is a FreeThoughtBlogs writer. Some of his writings are entertaining, especially when he writes like a character from Mario Bros.

  7. There is no difference between a gift and a donation. It may be different in the US but from the australian law a gift is defined as follows.

    * there is a transfer of money or property
    * the transfer is made voluntarily
    * the transfer arises by way of benefaction
    * no material benefit or advantage is received by the donor.

    All four of these were fulfilled so it is a gift. See also the definition of donation here

  8. There is indeed some differences.
    A donation is a voluntary gift (as of money or service or ideas) made to some worthwhile cause.
    A donation is an act of giving in common with others for a common purpose especially to a charity.

    Greta e-begged for the sake of charity. Her charity. A worthwhile cause being her hip pocket no matter how you look at it.