To think Children In Need was wrong to withdraw funding for rape crisis services for teenage girls?

[SanctimoniousMorph]

Children In Need have decided to stop funding rape crisis services for young women and girls because they don't include men and boys. This means that the service will have to turn away any new 'cases'. ("Cases" meaning young women who have suffered horrendous abuse and are at risk of self-harm and suicide):

www.thenational.scot/news/16406240.glasgow-and-clyde-rape-crisis-funding-cut-for-not-doing-enough-for-men/

AIBU to think that it is entirely appropriate that rape crisis services are single sex and that Children In Need should not withdraw funding from a valuable service that supports vulnerable young women?

Of course, you can provide men-only services without ever being challenged:

twitter.com/Jessicae13Eaton/status/1027194565328084992

Although I have no problem with single sex services at all, Children In Need may well have had to make a difficult decision in terms of funding allocation, and put their money where it helps the most people. I can also see that as reasonable.

This does seem problematic - surely the best solution would be to increase funding to centres for male rape victims without reducing it here?

The only thing I can think is that CIN have perhaps decided to fund rape charities who support both men and women. That might be seen as a more efficient use of funding (as there will always be limited funds for almost limitless need). But it does seem wrong not to be funding a charity which is clearly doing good and effective work.

Also - I used to work for a charity which was supported by CIN and CIN have quite strict rules about funding. They will only fund specific projects (not just general running costs) and you have to be able to show that the charity is generally sustainable even without CIN (I.e. that it won’t collapse when CIN funding comes to and end). I wonder if there are other factors such as these at play here. A response from CIN might clarify this.