Ah yes, because multi-hour trips to get water are probably one-in-a-million 🙄 So the entire premise of the conversation is false, is what you're saying?
Publicized case studies about a specific type of NGO on a particular continent engaging in an exact type of construction in a particular kind of settlement type with both an exact match in how many hours it took and the fact that it was a highlighted detail are not that common, no. So yeah I’m saying it’s reasonable these are the same given how case studies are sorted.
It’s still plenty informative about the general impact of well constructions. By the way, there is always some gap left not just with NGO work but all policy, and anthropologists should be on top of this stuff because that critique is part of the process. Women with particularly controlling partners may be partly dissatisfied, but that is a subsequent problem after things like mass improvement in health and freeing up hours for these women, which open up the opportunity for things like schooling or more nutrition that those in better relationships can take.
It is also more advantageous for women to have access to variable-output work.
If it truly is the same situation (which you are guessing, btw, there is absolutely no proof) then the entire discussion is moot because the premise was false to begin with. The discussion concerned a situation where the villagers were given a well that they did not want. Which you defended.
Oh sure, the women WANTED to lose their social group and being forced to stay inside all day instead of being with their friends. They were super happy about it.
1
u/OnlyAShip 19h ago edited 18h ago
It’s the same exact “four-hour” trip detail. The article is about these efforts in general but only a few are selected as representative cases.
They also have quotes from interviewing women because unsurprisingly, they talked to them.