I_cant_even_like

If more people would prioritize and donate to what is most effective, we would help all the people who die from malaria sooner and could move on to fistula and then sexual slavery.

In general, we should convince people to give to the most effective charities possible, because in many cases people do not have a very good reason for picking their cause. I think in this case, Peter already made a concession and suggested a charity that was addressing the cause that was close to OP's heart (women's suffering) and just made a constructive suggestion of how one could help women most effectively. But let's say someone would not give to the most effective charity for some reason. Then, yes, one should suggest the most effective charity that they would donate to.

https://www.givingwhatwecan.org/get-involved/chapters

Animal Charity Evaluators is Givewell for Animal charities:

www.animalcharityevaluators.com

There are EA groups all over the world now:

http://effectivealtruismhub.com/map

Just this week they announced a new meetup in Moscow (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rationality-in-moscow/TSYJ_Z307aU)

People in South Korea are really into ethics. Michael Sandel, an ethicist at Harvard, filled football stadiums with his 'Justice' lecture series there:

http://www.justiceharvard.org/2012/06/the-korea-times-sandel-calls-for-education-for-all/