Cambridge rape centre response help needed

[Newwayofthinking]

My post was lost on the other thread and I would like some help to draft a response back to them please....

I have had a response:

This was my email - As a rape survivor, the very last person I would want to speak to after being violated by a man. Is a man who identifies as a woman

Response

We write to respond to your email from 9th July.

Cambridge Rape Crisis Centre (CRCC) is an Equal Opportunities service in terms of both service provision and recruitment, and our services are run by women for women. CRCC’s phone and email support services are open to all who self-define as women, including (if they wish) those with complex gender identities which include ‘woman’, and those who experience oppression as women. CRCC affirms that self-definition is at the sole discretion of the individual in question. We also seek a diversity of volunteers who reflect the variety of women that we support, and this includes trans women.

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*. Trans survivors experience significant barriers when trying to seek support for the rape, sexual assault and/or sexual abuse they have been subjected to.

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.

Kind regards,

The CRCC Team

*The Trans Sexual Violence Project in Wisconsin (USA), 2004, found that 45% of participants were survivors of sexual violence.

They never answered your question so I assume transwomen aren't just for transwomen but will be answering the phone to women.

Have you got a contact email to write to?

Thank you for your response. I obviously support trans victims of sexual assault receiving support. However, you have not addressed my concern that women seeking support may be answered by a male voice. Can you tell me how you address this and how you also provide for women in your planning"

Etc etc. Worth going back.

@msmarvellous - good response email.

Sorry this has / is happening to you

This blog from Karen Ingala Smith might help https://kareningalasmith.com/2020/07/08/trauma-informed-services-for-women-subjected-to-mens-violence-must-be-single-sex-services/amp/?twitterr_impression=true

They really don't seem to understand the nature of trauma, which is worrying. When I was younger I couldn't even sit next to an unknown man on a bus or at the cinema etc. let alone talk about sexual violence.

Even if trans women experience a higher rate of sexual assault, it is not clear to me why the support to them has to be at the expense of female-only space, many LGBT services also provide, or could provide, this sort of support. Excluding some of the most vulnerable women in society who will not get support from organisations with male staff / volunteers / clients seems a high price to pay.

@Standrewsschool you almost always get a better response if you start trying to show understanding of their position.

It really boils my piss that no one is get the hang of the fact there's no reason we can't provide for both trans people and women.

Eg - rape crisis - women triage all calls as I assume women sex assaulting trans people is an almost zero number, but have a male or trans female voice available for trans people and female for the women.

When discussing medical stuff etc "this service is for women and anyone with a (insert female body part)

We can include everyone.

If that started I think it'd be easier to navigate appropriately the pinch points of sport, female changing and loos, and criminal justice and prison.

Instead the world has chosen to steamroller women.

Sorry, that's long, I'm angry about it all again today, as I am most days!

I was going to suggest Karen Ingala Smith.

If it were me I wouldn’t be able to help getting into the legalities. The legal and biological definitions of woman and wonder on what legal basis they are restricting applicants to women and self-selected groups of men - it either needs to be open to all qualified women (including men with a GRC) or any qualified person of either sex. The same applies when using the Equality Act to allow the service to be restricted to women only. I would genuinely like to understand the legal analysis they have relied on which allow them to include some but not all men. I can’t see how they are relying on the sex based exemption, so what are thsome but not all men. to understand the legal advice they have had which allows them to include some men but does not require the

However, might not be the best angle.

Sorry, pressed post before finishing.

Should have said to the end of the lengthy paragraph that I can’t see how they are relying on the sex based exemption, so what are they relying on that allo them to discriminate against some but not all men (like to they have had .

Agh, and again! Never mind. Hopefully you get my drift.

If you call the service and someone answers who identifies themselves as a male or sounds male are you able to access a different person? Will they pass you to a woman?

[email protected]

I am so angry, more so each day and being very new to the whole GC thing, I just can't articulate my answers very well. It's all ranty and that helps no one

Brilliant. So they take their figures from another country. I really wish they would stop with that. The research and figures need to come from here, otherwise you will never understand the true nature of the problem. Whether or not one agrees with trans inclusion, this needs to be addressed otherwise it puts them in a weak position.

Also, have a look where those figures come from in the study because that's important too. If those individuals are subjected to violence because the disproportionately work in the sex industry, then no, the absolutely do not suffer from sexual assault or harassment at the same rate as women, so that would be making service changes based on an inaccurate claim.

If they want to offer help and services to trans people, that's up to them. What you need to ask them is given that women suffer disproportionately higher rates of sexual violence, and will represent the vast majority of service users, how do they cater to that need? Are they willing to accept the idea that some women will not use their service if the voice they hear on the other end is not female?

I really don't understand this justification:
Trans women...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.
Is that not like saying 90% of participants in a Lego competition like Lego?
Also, if trans women are women, why do they still get separate statistics?

Like PaleBlueMoonlight said, it seems they are discriminating against men (the regular kind )

I know this is a bit off message but am not qualified to give you advice on the response except 'go to it gal'

However, the press are very interested at the moment, so I wonder if it wouldn't be an idea to let your local paper have details. Also MP? any help?

I suppose the key question for me would be how do they intend to deal with potentially excluding females from their service who are not able to engage with a worker they perceive as male? Particularly since many of those females will be from vulnerable groups, including disabled (MNetters with Autism have posted about their difficulties here), those with race, culture and faith as barriers in having intimate and difficult personal interactions with those they perceive as male, not to mention females who would feel safe and willing to engage only when talking to a same sex professional.

Do they intend to offer this as an option? Because while it is lovely that they have a diverse workforce able to meet all needs, do they include in that diversity a response for females requiring same sex provision?

There is a thread in the past few months of a MNetter who was in a dangerous home situation during lockdown and was given a support agency to ring to start planning escape. She was given a female name to ask for with the phone number. When the phone was answered by a male voice, she asked for the person with the female name, and the male voice said they were that person. The MNetter hung up, unable to talk about what had happened to them with someone they perceived as male. They didn't access that service.

How are they going to measure the female people who just end up not getting any help because they can't use mixed sex provision - particularly when be asked to pretend, in the height of their crisis and distress, that they should pretend that someone they perceive as male is a woman against all their needs, instincts and feelings. Why is a service providers needs from their client more important than meeting the client's needs? Why can't diversity include that some females need this particular kind of provision? Where is the impact assessment, what is going to happen to these females whose needs are no longer being met?

I've tried a few times to formulate a response but their reply is so nonsensical it becomes impossible to argue with.

What is the relevance of stats from Wisconsin about trans people experiencing sexual violence? What do they mean by "the gender inequalities experienced by all women on a daily basis"?

Unfortunately I'm not sure you're going to get very far with these people over email. Logic and reason appear to be in short supply.

it either needs to be open to all qualified women (including men with a GRC)

Rape crisis support is are explicitly mentioned within the Act as where you are also allowed to exclude men with a GRC

Well I'm happy for any paper to pick it up and run with the email I have recieved..

I also posted on glindr

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.

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

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.

@Aesopfable

it either needs to be open to all qualified women (including men with a GRC)

Rape crisis support is are explicitly mentioned within the Act as where you are also allowed to exclude men with a GRC

That’s in the guidance rather than the legislation, I think - it is why the law needs clarification?

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.

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.

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".