AIBU to be asked to reframe my trauma by the trans CEO of Scottish Rape Crisis?

[herewegogc]

The CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis has said "Sexual violence happens to bigoted people too. But if you bring beliefs that are discriminatory, expect to be challenged on your prejudice. Reframe your trauma"

Apparently, survivors are to be "educated" in this service.

forwomen.scot/10/08/2021/the-real-crisis-at-rape-crisis-scotland/

Tonight is a really tough one. Women who have been raped or sexually assaulted need females to listen to them. Rape Crisis was that service and used to offer trauma based therapy.

I don't need educating - I know that detailing my experience to a man, or a transwomen is NEVER something I will do.

This is too much.

@TatoAndBeans I agree it's a safeguarding issue. I support transwomen (I've had a couple of friends who are trans) and I think they also need protection from domestic violence and I 100% support refuges for transwomen, but I don't think it should be at the same place as women. There should be a dialogue about this without it turning into a polarised debate on not being inclusive. Women's rights need to be respected too. The CEO is not focusing on the right thing at all, she is supposed to support those who are most vulnerable, not turn into something political. Talking about inclusivity as the most important thing when many women (and probably transwomen too) have suffered increased violence in lockdown doesn't seem right.

This is what we've been talking about for all these years on the Feminism boards. We've been called bigots and transphobes, censored and deleted.

But it's this.

And I fear it's too late now to change anything.

It's a fucking dystopian nightmare.

Further, I really don't think the quote is saying that women shouldn't be able to ask to work with a woman to deal with their trauma. It's saying they should do so in a way that's respectful to others

Really? Someone who has been through a traumatic experience must first and foremost prioritise the sensitivities of their counselor even if they belong to the same group of people who assaulted her?

She must "reframe her trauma" and be the right kind of victim to be treated and helped as a victim?

Sod that. Women created rape crisis centres in response to trauma created by men. The roles in them are protected under the act because of the nature of the trauma. Its irrelevant what you personally chose or found acceptable, what matters here is the needs of the victims and not the feelings of the would be counselors - even if they are men.

She must "reframe her trauma" and be the right kind of victim to be treated and helped as a victim?

It's this isn't it. 100%.

She must "reframe her trauma" and be the right kind of victim to be treated and helped as a victim?

That’s exactly what the quote is saying. That “bigots” are undeserving of treatment. And who gets to do the bigotry test on the victim? This is Orwellian in nature. And what happens when an activist with zero medical training and zero real skills clumsily strings together buzz words they don’t understand to try and appear edgy and oh so progressive.

[quote HouseOfGoldandBones]@gimmenachos

*I agree with this completely as a survivor of rape, sexual assault and domestic abuse. I attend a support group for women that is co-led by a man. It doesn't impact on how safe I feel there and this person is very good at his job. I don't think it's fair to judge people's qualities based on how they identify.

OP, YABU to believe that all women should agree that transwomen shouldn't be allowed into safe spaces and to assume that all women who have been assaulted need a female to talk to. I don't. I need someone compassionate and who can listen.

I agree that everyone should be able to ask for treatment/support from someone they feel comfortable with but, frankly, I find the whole notion that every transwoman trying to enter women's spaces has nefarious intentions incredibly offensive.

Also, there's a whole board devoted to this topic so YABU for discussing this here.

Awaiting the flaming...*

You seem to have missed the point, quite spectacularly.

I'm really pleased that you found a support group that is safe for you, free of judgement.

But, surely you're not suggesting that just because you are comfortable in a group with a man, you seem to be suggesting that every person should also be comfortable, when at their most vulnerable, being offered care by someone of the opposite sex. I'm sure you're not suggesting that everyone should think the same as you do, are you?

Nobody has suggested that every transwoman entering a woman's space does so for nefarious reasons.

What has been said is that a male applied for 2 jobs working with vulnerable, traumatised women. A job which the employer understood needed a female worker for (hence their advert restricting applications to females only). This male applied for the 1st job. This male lied on the application form, and was interviewed & offered the job.
This same male, took to Social Media to complain that a law had been passed to allow rape victims to specify that their FME was of the same sex as them.
This same male asked to be included on a Woman's Shortlist for election to parliament, thereby removing a place for a woman.

Nobody is suggesting that all transwomen are predators, but are stating that this person is not a suitable person for the job they hold, for the many reasons above[/quote]
It's quite ironic that you suggest I've missed the point 'quite spectacularly' and then go on to imply I'm suggesting everyone should feel the same as me. I'm well aware that people won't, hence me clearly saying everyone should be able to ask to work with someone they're comfortable with.

You're right, on this particular thread nobody has expressly said that all transwomen have nefarious purposes. But it's a pretty common theme on the Sex and Gender board, and the undertones of that view are coming through here too. I don't agree with that viewpoint and I wanted to express that.

The issue being discussed here is about whether it's appropriate for discriminatory views to be challenged in a therapy environment, not how this woman applied for her job. I've set out why I don't think that's an issue for me personally because it's important we don't assume it's an issue for everyone.

MW left a political party because they voted for an amendment to a bill that would allow a woman to specify the SEX of the person who would examine them after a rape or sexual assault. ME wanted the clause to read that a woman could specify the GENDER of the person to examine them.

I really don’t think the comment ‘refrain their trauma’ can be read to mean that a woman can ‘respectively’ ask for a female counsellor. FFS

How is anyone so utterly self centred that they make someone else’s sexual assault therapy about themselves?

Good therapy is focused on the victim. I have never been encouraged to ‘reframe my trauma’ so I can ‘move on and do more beautiful things with my life.’ A huge part of my therapy was learning that I am worth the space I take up in the world and learning to prioritise myself over others, and that I have the right to be angry about what had happened to me.

Harassment women ‘might get’ when out alone at night is nothing compared to the ‘very structurally violent constant flicks of eyes, and I don’t know, oh, God, and aggressive glares.’ Flicks of eyes. I totally despair at the state of things, really.

This blog at least shows that there are still people out there who think like me. It’s affirming that others believe this is wrong as well.

Nobody should be told they are 'bigoted' for not agreeing wtih the political position of the CEO of a Rape Crisis Centre.

Nobody should be 'challenged' on their political views when they are seeking counselling for rape.

No male should be in a position explicitly reserved for a female.

No woman should be made to feel that her instinctive and possibly trauma-based response to a male is in any way 'wrong', or 'bigoted' or something she has to be educated out of.

if a counsellor feels uncomfortable working with someone who shares bigoted views, should they be obliged to carry on?

Um, yes.

The same as doctors or nurses are still to carry on treating people who have bigoted views, even ones they have expressed directly. How many GPs do you think have had patients express something they find morally objectionable to them? Be it bigotry, sexism, being swingers, a political affiliation, being Catholic, being a member of an Orange lodge, whatever.

In some cases it might be that an individual finds they can't offer proper care to a patient they have a problem with, but in that case they are obligated to try and find them someone else. And it's not supposed to be done lightly. Nor are they meant to challenge or reeducate them.

It was not that long ago that liberals would complain about, for example, church groups that would insist that those using their soup kitchen listen to religious instruction. It's odd to see how things have turned around.

And if this person really believes someone flicking their eyes is violence tantamount and more than the harassment lone women face alone, they aren’t the right person to be working with rape victims. They simply do not possess the empathy and understanding to do this.

The issue being discussed here is about whether it's appropriate for discriminatory views to be challenged in a therapy environment

It isn't 'discriminatory' for a woman who is a victim of rape to require a woman counsellor and anyone who thinks it is needs to reframe their bigotry.

@EishetChayil

This is what we've been talking about for all these years on the Feminism boards. We've been called bigots and transphobes, censored and deleted.

But it's this.

And I fear it's too late now to change anything.

It's a fucking dystopian nightmare.

Yep.

Couldn't agree with @TatoAndBeans more. That CEO is a true narcissist. The way they invaded a woman only position by lying, then dismisses rape survivors as bigots who need to be re educated, with a nice healthy dose of playing "I'm the real victim here," topped off with "it's all about us transpersons, rape victims who?"

OP, YANBU.

If I spoke my mind properly, I know my comment would be deleted. Consider this to be the sanitised version.

Tuscancat , and to all women who have direct experience of this.

That a supposed CEO of a rape crisis centre doesn't realise just how much more trauma it can cause to have to relive your experience in front of a man - any man - says everything. I had to do it because I had to give details of how serious my DA was. I had my (female) IDVA sitting next to me, the man was behind a perspex screen. But I walked away from that DA charity & their support because I just couldn't put myself through that type of interview again.

To be absolutely clear, it wasn't the fault of the charity. But I was deeply traumatised already, and they couldn't protect me. I lost all trust in everyone from that moment.

I am not a bigot or a transphobe if I say I don't feel comfortable being around men. And I am definitely not a bigot or a transphobe if I say that someone with no lived experience of being a woman does not get to dictate to women how to react when they feel uncomfortable. It's almost a very male reaction to women, isn't it?

Pressed post by mistake! The problem here is we're accepting that the potential client really is a bigot when Wadhwa's actual complaint was that they may not be accepted as a woman. The client would not be bigoted in refusing Wadhwa, who is male. On the contrary, Wadhwa is bigoted for demanding the client ignores reality because their role seems to be no more than a validation tool. Which may be easier to enforce when the client is in such a vulnerable position.

The world has literally gone mad 😡

I really don't think the quote is saying that women shouldn't be able to ask to work with a woman to deal with their trauma. It's saying they should do so in a way that's respectful to others.

That's charitable of you. Unfortunately, the individual who said it also expressed outrage over a law that allows survivors to request someone of their own sex to perform an intimate forensic exam, instead of their vehemently preferred version: that right being solely based on gender identity, and not biological sex. In other words, a male who said they identified as a woman could arrive to perform such an examination, when a woman had just been raped, despite her asking for someone of her own sex. And that was preferable to her being guaranteed, as she asked, someone who shared her biology, and not the biology of her rapist.

This person therefore has a history of regarding rape services' paramount duty as being validation of their own gender identity, and not to offer the very best support for women who have been raped.

I can see why you read it differently, absolutely. It's hard to grasp that anyone could say such things, and still be seen as suitable for the sector. But here we are.

This is a f*cking horrendous abuse of already traumatised women. ERC should hang their heads in shame that this is even considered an acceptable point of view

Agreed, @Alltheprettyseahorses

We need to do something.

This person is not suitable for this role at all.

How are you supposed to ask in a way this individual will consider respectful? They think someone flicking their eyes is ‘structural violence,’ how do you think they will react to a woman saying ‘I would like to talk to a woman about my issues please not you.’ They would want to ‘re-educate’ and call you a bigot. The only way to be respectful to this person is nod along with everything they say no matter how uncomfortable it makes you.