I would rather donate the cost of a case of cookies to the Guides than support the free labour, but of course the policy forbids such donations. I would think many other people would be happy to offer a 5$ donation direct to the Guides rather than line the pockets of a corporate parasite.
I mean, it’s voluntary and frankly not exactly torture. I understand how it could be considered somewhat exploitative if you look at it from a business standpoint but it seems like a fun and friendly competition which tons of people like to support and indulge. They aren’t selling life insurance. I guess I get where youre coming from but that statement seems a bit hyperbolic.
Is that not the case where you are? Or is the problem that you're trying to support a specific troop or want to support a specific individual, and that's forbidden?
Do you have a link to something documenting the prohibition you've encountered?
It is also quite shameful that the distribution of funds isn't clearly indicated when the girls are funding. I suspect more people would donate directly instead of the cookies if they saw the distribution ratios.
Here, I believe the Guides take 3.00$ of the 5.00$, with a mere 1.00$ going to the girl in question. I would prefer to simply give 100% of the 5.00$ to the local troop that the girl is supporting, and in turn support five girls in her troop for the same donation amount.
I'm pretty sure that's not the case, at least here, as I've been personally present when a friend did exactly that.
Again, I question that what you're describing is a matter of any explicit prohibition due to policy, rather than your conclusion based on observed behavior (which, itself, can be explained by optimizing for maximum overall revenue, rather than maximum revenue to any particular participant).
To me, the split between the individual girl and the scouting organization (at troop, regional, national, or whatever level) is immaterial, because, at least here [1], the scouting organizations have routinely been in the news for their inclusive policies, even of otherwise politically marginalized girls, including putting their money behind such policies.
[1] Again, the US. Other countries may well be different.