TRAs apparently cancelled GoFundMe for Vancouver Rape Relief

[WoolOfBat]

archive.ph/6KCGN

They allegedly didn’t like the fact that someone from Super Straight tried to raise money for a charity that only focused on biological women.

Please help me remember.... Didn’t the TRAs

1. get a trans only rape relief centre?

2. nail dead animals to the door to show those stupid women that it is unacceptable to focus on biological women only?

I really hope that I have got this wrong. If not, I have to conclude that I find it evil.

Wow. Yes, your memory's correct.

And checking the discussion on Ovarit, apparently the money probably won't reach them - payments weren't immediate, so all the pending money is going to be refunded to donors.

As I understand it, there's no possibility of wrongdoing in the GoFundMe itself - the site is set up to directly let A fundraise for B - the organiser isn't profiting.

That's disgusting. What awful, awful people.

On what grounds have GoFundMe shut down the fundraiser?

TRAs complaining about women getting private funding is one thing, and entirely unsurprising given track record of abuse, harassment and intimidation from TRAs - but why have GoFundMe capitulated?

I am genuinely interested in what the TRA supporters here think about this. I just cannot understand how they think. In my mind there must be something wrong in people so utterly selfish that they, in order to force their belief system upon the world, try to deprive vulnerable rape victims of help.

I really want them to come here and explain why (since trans people have their own rape relief centre) biological women aren’t even allowed to fund raise for a centre of their own. Given that...you know... a biological women who has been raped may want to stay away from penis.

I am actually horrified. I hope that mainstream media will pick this up. This has to be put out there.

I honestly don't know whats wrong with people but I've put a reminder on my phone to donate as soon as payday comes round.

Theres no justification so the TRA’s on here will just spout hollow words. Or, if were lucky, remain silent.

On what grounds have GoFundMe shut down the fundraiser?

I saw someone on another site posting their ban notice from the infamous "AgainstHateSubreddits" sub. The reason for the ban given was something like

The reason for the ban is to stop you from posting or participating in the subreddit.

Increasingly they don't feel a need to actually give some sort of justification. They shut it down because they can.

Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. (O'Brien in Orwell's 1984)

So sick of this toddler like " if I cant have it no one can" attitude.

We should treat it like we would with a toddler to. Ignore it til they get bored amd find something else to do.

What you don't do is give in

I can't get my head around it. I really can't.

Obviously the reddit sub would go. But this? It's just a flex of power for the sake of it.

But Whatwouldscullydo, I think I disagree with this. I have had toddlers (they are older now).

That goes for sweets and toys, not pain and hurt.

Toddlers understand that other toddlers in pain need comfort and hugs. As long as they also get comfort and hugs they do not begrudge others comfort.

The only conclusion I can draw here is something genuinely wrong with people who try to deprive victims of comfort due to their own internal struggles. It is a complete lack of empathy, almost sociopathic.

Thing is though I is just a game to those doing it. I don't think it's even been thought of as far as what the service actually provides. It's just something that someone cabt access so decides to remove altogether. That's how you know its a game. Becuase the logical answer is to fight for a version of use to them. Publicise, fund raise, etc but someone then decides to just remove instead.

I agree it is a game, but to deprive vulnerable women of private funding for the purpose of this game shows a pathological lack of empathy.

Yes it does. All the more worrying that there are so many young women and girls behind all this too..happily cheering it all on.

It's utterly vile. Also very noticeable that other types of organisation don't get this treatment. Nobody lobbies for the RSPB to be shut down because it doesn't run any donkey sanctuaries. The RNLI is allowed to focus on lifeboats and leave the National Trust to preserve historical buildings. Help the Aged isn't taken to task for not working with children. Macmillan isn't pilloried for not providing nurses for heart patients.

Charities and institutions that work exclusively with men are fine. Nobody is picketing the Masons' HQ or Eton, or getting up a petition to force the Premier League to include female players, or getting charities shut down for talking about men's health, testicular cancer etc.

But as soon as you try to focus exclusively on biological women, off they go. Campaigners against FGM - transexclusionary. Cancer charities focusing on ovarian/breast/womb cancer - transexclusionary. Refuges/rape counselling services providing female-only services (staff and volunteers as well as service users) - transexclusionary. Sports teams for women only - transexclusionary. Women's prisons that only take biological women - transexclusionary. Menstruation products that say they are for women - transexclusionary. Breastfeeding support groups that talk about mothers or use the word breast (which is anatomically correct for males too ) - transexclusionary. Participants on the Women's March who might have wanted to take a sign making some reference to the female body - transexclusionary. Political activists who want Women's Officer posts, All Women's Shortlists and Women's Leadership Programmes to continue to be for biological women only - transexclusionary.

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g

It's utterly vile. Also very noticeable that other types of organisation don't get this treatment. Nobody lobbies for the RSPB to be shut down because it doesn't run any donkey sanctuaries. The RNLI is allowed to focus on lifeboats and leave the National Trust to preserve historical buildings. Help the Aged isn't taken to task for not working with children. Macmillan isn't pilloried for not providing nurses for heart patients.

Charities and institutions that work exclusively with men are fine. Nobody is picketing the Masons' HQ or Eton, or getting up a petition to force the Premier League to include female players, or getting charities shut down for talking about men's health, testicular cancer etc.

But as soon as you try to focus exclusively on biological women, off they go. Campaigners against FGM - transexclusionary. Cancer charities focusing on ovarian/breast/womb cancer - transexclusionary. Refuges/rape counselling services providing female-only services (staff and volunteers as well as service users) - transexclusionary. Sports teams for women only - transexclusionary. Women's prisons that only take biological women - transexclusionary. Menstruation products that say they are for women - transexclusionary. Breastfeeding support groups that talk about mothers or use the word breast (which is anatomically correct for males too ) - transexclusionary. Participants on the Women's March who might have wanted to take a sign making some reference to the female body - transexclusionary. Political activists who want Women's Officer posts, All Women's Shortlists and Women's Leadership Programmes to continue to be for biological women only - transexclusionary.

So true! And ‘Women’s Prize for Fiction’ - here you go, yes you’re allowed to enter if you’re a man...

I knew there'd be plenty more I'd forgotten!

m.imgur.com/a/v9iLcyl

This is a research study called Transvestic Fetishism in the General Public: Prevalance and Correlates.

I found it interesting. Please keep comments careful so the post can remain up. It has implications for shelters.

I'm really, really sick of these assholes. How much of a misogynist do you have to be to shut down a fundraiser for a rape shelter? I really hope this is publicised far and wide, though I bet it won't be.

Perhaps there is scope for legal action.

The removal of a crowd funder gives credence to the idea that a group is a hate group. Surely that is defamatory?

There is plenty of evidence such cancellations are treated as evidence of hate: thousands of TRA posts saying so. There is plenty of evidence of material harm being done given the donations are lost. It feels like sex discrimination too given it women's rights/needs groups are treated differently to others.

I would LOVE to see the funding marketplaces having to explain their decisions in court.

I was just about to post about this. I donated to the Superstraight page as a small thank you for the light it shone on the whole debate.

That was refunded so I donated to the Vancouver rape crisis page instead. That’s also just been refunded.

The research article is interesting and disturbing WoolofBat. Thank you for the link.

When we donate money to crowd funders for judicial reviews, we're sneered at by some because ''you could be spending your money on something good like women's refuges, etc''.

So now a funder is set up that made $7,000 in a few days, and it's taken down...

:( Appalling. I hope the people who are refunded donate directly to VRR, they really deserve the money.

Every time I think 'maybe it's not a misogynist movement, maybe I'm overreacting', shit like this happens.

Not really surprising as Gofundme have form here - taking down fundraiser like that for Abigail Shriver while allowing thousands for girls to get 'top surgery '. I donated expecting it to get taken down (although I was really hoping the money would make its way to the shelter), but thought it was important to send a message to show the lie in TRA rhetoric about the Superstraight movement.
Now I have my money back I'll be donating a larger sum directly to the shelter.

*Abigail Shrier, sorry