My introduction to philanthropy led me to dive down the path of its connections to conceptions of saviorism and innocence. To do this, I examine larger philanthropists such as Andrew Carnegie and foundations such as The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Through these investigations, I find that these philanthropists create the dominant conception of philanthropy I and many of my family members and peers work within. I argue that saviorism and innocence are embedded in this conception, and because of this approach the nuance surrounding giving is lost. More specifically, I examine the ways dominant philanthropists routinely position themselves as saviors and the recipient as the victim, which has the effect of absolving them of being more critical about and attentive to the problems they purport to address, such as worker’s rights or school systems in the United States. By examining philanthropists’ reputations as benevolent givers, I demonstrate the broad impact and limitations of this particular approach. For example, many of their failed attempts at philanthropy are swept under the rug by their humane reputations, and they continue to hoard wealth under the tax loopholes large philanthropic foundations allow. To bolster these arguments, I converse with transnational feminist scholarship and sociological theories focused on saviorism and innocence. I conclude by examining decolonial philanthropy and mutual aid to illustrate two forms of giving that reject notions of saviorism and innocence. In doing so, I do not aim to provide concrete answers or solutions to the issues inherent in traditional philanthropy. Rather, I aim to highlight possibilities that are more attentive to the needs of the recipient and that do not serve to uplift the innocence of the giver, and argue that saviorism and innocence are inextricably intertwined in the ways in which we give and the reasons why we give. I call to examine and think critically about our relationship to wealth, power relations, giving, and innocence in these actions.