Cambridge rape centre response help needed

Bloody hell Charlie

That's appalling. Utterly appalling, I am so sorry that happened to you.

One of the worst parts of this is the stepping over nasty bits of reality that don't fit, the endless pretence that only the bits that serve the agenda exist. This agenda treats females in a way that is truly abhorrent, the lack of care or interest for others is abhorrent, the hypocrisy of the values that only apply to males who identify in a way that fits the agenda is abhorrent.

This should be in the papers. The reality of this cannot be covered up. Females are not props in male lives. I am so sorry you were let down by people who purport to be caring and inclusive and morally superior. I have serious concerns for the morals of anyone who think treating anyone like this is ever something that can be tolerated in a civilised society. Those who stand behind these politics are lying to themselves and enabling these behaviours, they need to own it.

CharlieParley

Charlie - several good points to raise.

I just still cannot believe it. Even though I was there and they looked me in the face and spouted this shite. I still can't believe that happened.

Wow. I'm crying just typing that and I fucking hate crying.

P.S. I don't want to upset you any more than you already are, but please be prepared to be met with indifference to any concerns you raise.

I am part of a group of survivors who are or were self-excluding from Rape Crisis Services who met with management to share our concerns and suggest solutions in service delivery that would meet the needs of both female survivors and male survivors who identify as trans. They couldn't have cared less if they tried. One of the most upsetting meetings of my life. The aftermath was bad enough, but what hurt even more was that they are continuing to claim on social media and in the press that there are no issues whatsoever with including males who identify as trans in their service. As if our meeting had never happened.

We found out later btw that we weren't even the first survivors to raise the issue with them.

They are more interested in endorsing and promoting transgender ideology and legislation than meeting the needs of female survivors. In my experience, any service that sends out emails like the one you received is firmly on that path, the consequences to female survivors be damned.

Charlie wow. ALL of that. All of it. Every word.

Here are a few questions you could ask. I'd certainly love to see an answer to even just one of them:

If a female survivor asks for a female-only therapeutic environment, is this available at your centre?

Does she have to specifically ask for a female-only therapeutic environment or is this offered as standard?

Do you acknowledge that perception is subjective and that unlike you, a female survivor may perceive males as male regardless of their identity?

Do you accept that involuntary trauma responses to males, of any identity, are not rooted in the survivor's prejudice against males who identify as trans, but in her experience of male violence?

Given that female survivors typically only approach your service when they are in crisis and vulnerable, do you understand that they may feel unable to raise concerns with you about the presence of males in what they expect (and you advertise) to be a female-only therapeutic environment?

The Rape Crisis National Service Standards state that

Underpinning the approach of all specialist Rape Crisis Centres is an evidence-based understanding of how experiences of sexual violence and sexual abuse can impact individual survivors. Rape Crisis Centres provide a trauma informed approach to practice and delivery that is both appropriate to and effective when supporting survivors of all forms of sexual violence.

Can you explain how your centre can meet this high standard of service delivery in a mixed-sex therapeutic environment, given the strength of the evidence on the needs of female survivors to recover in a female-only therapeutic environment?

Can you explain how a mixed-sex therapeutic environment is appropriate and effective in delivering your service to female survivors of male sexual violence, especially given that most if not all female survivors can only recover in a female-only therapeutic environment?

Are you aware that your stated refusal to cater to female survivors who identify as trans is unlawful discrimination on the basis of sex if these females remain legally female (that is if they are not in possession of a Gender Recognition Certificate?)

Are you aware that if you are catering to male survivors who identify as trans who remain legally male while refusing to cater to all other legal males, you are also unlawfully discriminating against the latter group?

A service can only legally exclude males if it applies a sex-based exemption, which applies differently to males who identify as trans with a GRC and those without a GRC.

How are you ensuring that you deliver a lawful service given your stated ideological position on including all males who identify as trans, regardless of their legal sex, and excluding all females who identify as trans, regardless of their legal sex?

Are you seeking feedback from your service users on providing a mixed-sex therapeutic environment? And if you do so, are you seeking this feedback in a way that allows female survivors to raise any concerns they may have without fear of reprisals or loss of access to your service?

What processes do you have in place to deal with a female survivor who raises concerns with you directly? Do these processes align with the National Service Standards?

I'd be devastated if I sought email support, too, and found someone born male might be providing it. There's no compelling evidence that brain sex is a real thing. A sincere belief doesn't change a fact, which is biology exists, it's real, and it's why women are overwhelmingly the people raped, and men the ones who rape. It's completely wrong to tell vulnerable, traumatised women that they are accessing a single sex space, and then exposing them to the risk of a male person being their counsellor.

They are not centring their client group with this at all.

My one reservation would be if they are seeking trans women to support other trans women. That would be completely legitimate and understandable, and wouldn't in any way risk the wellbeing of the women and girls they seek to support. But that's not what they are saying in their response, is it.

Would it be useful to pose the question that if a TW victim of sexual violence rang and perceived the voice at the end of the line to be male (however the owner of that voice identified) then the service is not suitable for them, either?

Notes on exemptions here:

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmwomeq/1470/147010.htm

I know this isn't helpful, but this has been covered in two other threads on mumsnet.

They are saying that because they believe self identifying women are women this is how they will operate the service. They aren't bothered by the law.

I would ask them that in advertising the service as being for women and girls 99.9% of the population would take that to mean biological females. Despite twitter (and mumsnet!) many, may people are not aware of the trans issue.

So in fact it is a cruel joke to advertise as being for women and girls and then expect a woman or girl phoning them to just accept that the male voice answering them is actually female because inside the cult that is now running the service they say it is "true".

It is as insulting and disturbing as someone from the BAME community ringing a support line for victims of racism and having Rachel Dolezal answer the phone saying its okay you can talk to me I may be white but I "identify" as black.

What they are saying is not covered by law (and if newspaper articles are true) not likely to be in the near future. ie Truss is expected to say no to self id.

So this is basically misleading advertising.

They should not be abusing their postion as those currently running the service to impose their beliefs on those who phone.

And I think Rape Crisis England and Wales whose logo they used should be asked to make it clear that their members should not mis-advertise.

So either ask they to withdraw their misleading advertising or you will go to the ASA.

Or ask that they make it clear on the pages describing the actual services that women phoning for support may get a male person who identifies as a woman.

Sorry if this comes over a bit terse but short on time.

They are entitle to their set of beliefs, but they cannot through deception enforce them on others - let alone those in a vulnerable state.

Not what you’re looking for, but the arrogance of a man thinking he has any place answering calls at a rape crisis centre never ceases to amaze me.

Quite. It always puzzled me, as you would expect anyone sincerely interested in working in this very challenging field to (obviously) be deeply compassionate to and aware of the very particular needs of females who have experienced rape, and to be the first to advocate for their needs to be met.

Then I read information from a TW leader of a women's mixed sex refuge, who just plain won't acknowledge the reality existing that there is a problem for some female people, blanks anyone saying or evidencing anything to the contrary and has no problem with them not receiving any services.

The only important thing about female trauma is how it affects men, either in benefitting or hindering themselves.

I'm disabled (and a victim of DV including rape). I find services often don't understand specific disability related issues. Specialist services aimed at helping disabled victims would help me so much. Wouldn't trans people like the same? Services that understand their specific circumstances, and life experience (and struggles). DV and rape charities already recognise the need for BAME specialist services. There are refuges and support services specifically for BAME people only. Now we need to do the same for disabled victims and trans victims.

Traumatised victims should be able to ask to speak to a different worker if they feel uncomfortable, re-traumatised, or scared without being made to feel bad. It doesn't always have to be about whether the person is male or female. I experienced an awful DV charity worker. Biological female. Deeply unpleasant person who shouldn't have been in the job. Anyone, male or female, working in the area of abuse or sexual assault should have enough empathy to understand if a victim needs to speak to a different worker - for whatever reason.

it's very striking that the response completely ignores that OP states she is a survivor of sexual violence.
I would expect any decent, person centred (sic) service to acknowledge this and respond directly to it rather than getting into an argument and trying to correct the OP's feelings
She is giving them very useful feedback on their service, ie that she would not use it! What's the bloody point of a service if the people it's aimed at can't or won't use it?

If the rape centre uses male volunteers, that would possibly be fine, if they acknowledge they are male, and gives you the option of a female, if you prefer. Many males are good counsellors. In the same way that you can opt for a female gp at a doctors surgery, for example.

Not what you’re looking for, but the arrogance of a man thinking he has any place answering calls at a rape crisis centre never ceases to amaze me. That trans identified man who wanted to push into the Vancouver Rape Crisis Centre ... just astounding. Women’s crisis services should centre women, trans identified men can do their own fundraising and open their own centres, I do not see why we have to (especially in times of trauma) budge over for male feelings.

Just looked at the ‘Volunteer with us’ page and any ‘self-identifying woman’ can volunteer and yet they “ offers support to women and girls ”.. No mention of self-identifying in their main blurb. Make up your mind.! Is the Cambridge Rape crisis for woman, or self-identifying woman!

At Cambridge Rape Crisis Centre the safety of women and girls who use our services is paramount. We have many years of experience in safe and robust volunteer recruitment practices for all women who express interest in providing helpline and email support, and we deliver extensive training to all suitable applicants.

How dare they write this after all the waffle beforehand..the safety of women and girls is clearly not priority, given the rest of the email..the priority is validation for male people, whilst gaslighting victims to tell then that men are women. No doubt with added kicking out of any woman who refuses to be re-educated. Fantastic.

They have also assumed ‘trans’ = ‘transwomen’. Their statement that they do not treat transmen or boys means that they would refuse to treat the majority of participants in the study they quote as evidence of sexual violence suffered by transgender individuals.

Good point. Someone should point this out to them, I assume this is their copy and paste response.

It might be that they actually operate two services, one for women (using sex based exemption) and one for self-ID trans women (presumably using the sex based exemption - for men - and/or the ability to have a special interest group for those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. I haven’t looked at the part of the law Relating to gender reassignment recently and cannot remember how that might work.)

YY. I think that would be allowed under "positive action".

They have also assumed ‘trans’ = ‘transwomen’. Their statement that they do not treat transmen or boys means that they would refuse to treat the majority of participants in the study they quote as evidence of sexual violence suffered by transgender individuals.

Whichever, the point I am trying to make is that it is possible for the rape crisis shelter to use the single sex exemption and create a service that discriminates against men by being for women only. In using that exemption they must include men with a GRC unless they decide they have a good enough reason not to include then. Therefore using the single sex exemption the crisis centre can create a service that caters for, and employ people who are, women and men with a GRC. However, if they are using the single sex exemption they cannot extend single services beyond Women and men with a GRC to include other men who do not have a GRC, unless they are offering the service to all men. To do otherwise would be discriminatory against men based on their sex.

It might be that they actually operate two services, one for women (using sex based exemption) and one for self-ID trans women (presumably using the sex based exemption - for men - and/or the ability to have a special interest group for those with the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. I haven’t looked at the part of the law Relating to gender reassignment recently and cannot remember how that might work.)

I would be really interested to know what their analysis of the law is and the legal basis on which they have created their service.

Trans women are subject to the gender inequalities that all women experience on a daily basis

However there is a great deal of gender inequality demonstrated within this statement from the service itself. It's right there in their keenness to listen to and support and meet all the needs of TW, and their handwaving and dismissing of the needs of females.

The service is in fact demonstrating that they perceive it as normal and right that female people should be considered of less importance and given less consideration than males who identify as women. In fact they make it very clear in their actions: they do not perceive TW as women.

It sounds like they are deliberately confusing the separate issue of transwomen sexual assault victims needing specialist support with this. If transwomen volunteers were just kept for peer support for transwomen victims that would be different

Trans women are subject to the gender inequalities that all women experience on a daily basis, and are subjected to disproportionately high levels of sexual violence*
*The Trans Sexual Violence Project in Wisconsin (USA), 2004, found that 45% of participants were survivors of sexual violence.

This is discussed on the other thread. It is a study of 32 people who are trans who have experienced sexual violence - you need to have experienced sexual violence to be part of the study. 45% had experience directly, the rest had experienced it either both directly and indirectly or just indirectly. 69% of the participants were female and in examples given of sexual violence the perpetrators were male.