GC, so sorry, would you mind resending me the link, please. I forgot to bookmark it.
My issue wasn't with single-sex spaces being inclusive - hell, during my own time in a refuge, there were risk assessments done around teenage sons whose mothers were in a refuge, and IIRC, one of them had a strict No-Boys-Over-The-Age-Of-Twelve policy.
Women's refuges are already so overstretched on funding. Horrifically so. With the amount of funding LGBT charities receive, they should have no issue with setting up LGBT specific spaces, with women entering these spaces being given the option to be referred to a woman-only space if that suits their needs. This needs to be done without judgement, with full acceptance of the woman's needs
When it comes to rape centres, there are, or should be, measures put in place to ensure that women have access to women-only spaces. The charity I plan on doing my placement with runs sessions in a way that should, in theory, ensure clients are granted complete anonymity. Although trans/non-binary people and men are counselled by the service, the appointments are, from what I've understood, staggered to minimise the risk of clients crossing paths. (Furthermore, most counsellors are discouraged from taking back-to-back appointments for ethical reasons, so running into another client shouldn't happen) However, I know for some women this isn't security enough, as there is still a small risk regarding crossing paths with men within the centre.
There are ways to minimise this risk further, but this feels like an essay already.
So, besides ensuring that no "women rape too" comments are allowed on IBH, alongside the namecalling, derailing and otherwise obviously banned comments, if there is anything you feel I could do to make the page safer, please please comment. I have updated the about page, which reinforces the focus on female survivors of rape. I know my posts over the weekend caused quite some damage, and for that I do apologise.
The page has always been accessed by men and transwomen, and most of the time the comments have been entirely supportive. Where there have been issues, I've worked on a case by case basis on whether an individual should be banned - some people do take note after explanations, but it quickly becomes apparent when someone won't listen or understand.
But any feedback is further welcomed. Thanks.
(So, was that 8,000 words? If so, reckon I could just submit this as my dissertation? I kid, I haven't Harvard referenced this)