A woman driven out of her therapy group by a trans woman's presence

[PostingForTheFirstTime]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10249633/Rape-victim-forced-quit-therapy-sessions-feels-threatened-6ft-trans-woman.html

I was in hospital with a male sex addict who'd raped his own sister. He told us he planned to get a job in a refuge. We were reprimanded for ostracising him, and told we were bullies.

I agree Hermione. They are beneath contempt.

I'm surprised by what a PP says above about a freedom programme group being for self identifying women, with nothing available that's female only. Freedom programme are a signatory to whrc declaration. Maybe I haven't understood what freedom programme actually is?

I posted this on the other thread:
Julie bindel on twitter
"1/2 Been getting loads of messages from women in the Brighton area that have also been refused female-only services in sexual assault centres/DV refuges and told that they are open to anyone that ID's as a woman. I think we might be looking at a legal challenge here, and also
the beginnings of a plan to set up an ACTUAL women-only facility. You know how to contact me. Let's do it!"

I wonder who the legal challenge would be against. If the service is commissioned by the council then maybe them? They've commissioned a service, but the way it's provided discriminates against some women, and it's predictable that they would self exclude. They could stipulate that there has to be some female only service provision, but obviously don't. I expect they stipulate the opposite, but it would be interesting to know the service agreement.

The charity's statement is pathetic in that it doesn't even refer to their main user base. It talks about unrepresented service users, but not that women who need female only care are therefore under represented(because they are deliberately excluded).
The statement should be exhibit one. It shows they are viewing the p/c's in a hierarchy, with gender reassignment above sex, and looks like an act of indirect discrimination in itself if that's genuinely their response to hearing that they have caused a woman to self exclude.
IANAL though!

Thanks again iamsarah. Thank you courageous woman.

@Manderleyagain
Yes I was surprised too.Apparently individual Freedom groups can decide to treat transwomen as women, even though it excludes women. (In Bristol it may be a condition of council funding -hopefully someone with specialist knowledge can add to this).

How is offering men’s services, trans specific services, mixed services but not women only services ok?

Watermonster
Yes I guess they use the programme but run it their own way. I expect you're right about the funding.

Because men's and trans' services (which are largely used by men) are not under pressure to be "inclusive".

TRAs are a bit like toddlers: they want something if they see that someone else has it, even if they don't need it. They see themselves as the centre of the world and can't and won't accept that the world does not revolve around them and what they want.

Slow handclap for Sloane.
Please do continue - you do the GC’s job for us!

Shame Doubletoils comment was deleted (although I screenshotted it) - it captured the point perfectly.

@IamSarah

This is an outrageous situation. Illogical and potentially very harmful.

You are brave for speaking out.
I hope to God this hateful tide is turning.

Is there a fund we can contribute to to help stop this awful situation worsening?

The Guides, schools. Where is the safe space for girls and women?

Where are the other news outlets reporting on this? I’ve lost faith in the Grauniad completely. I cannot believe I’m now getting my news from the daily Mail. The most misogynistic of papers.

@Deliriumoftheendless

How is offering men’s services, trans specific services, mixed services but not women only services ok?

Surely discriminatory as one group isn't being treated the same as the others.

It was always going to end up like this though, the removal of anything woman only was always the ultimate prize and one might wonder why and who would want that.

[quote Rightsraptor]@KittenKong - you would leave anywhere that you realised your presence was causing problems because you are a good & decent person. Those that don't leave in such circumstances are either:

a) very thick-skinned and just don't notice
b) don't care
c) enjoying the reactions they get.

I know which I think predominates.[/quote]
I think there is another reason but I'd be deleted or possibly banned for suggesting it. I doubt I'm the only one thinking it.

I'm not sure where I read it but I think the person who stated that TW don't want access to women's spaces they want access to women was correct; they want to use women as unwilling props in validating their identity and in this instance for material........

I'm not sure where I read it but I think the person who stated that TW don't want access to women's spaces they want access to women was correct; they want to use women as unwilling props in validating their identity and in this instance for material........

It's all about this. Otherwise a third space would be acceptable.

@Missmissmiiiiiiiiisss

The other option would be to donate money to rape crisis but with the express permission it is only to be used to find biological women’s groups. Hopefully they will receive the money and spend it as directed. If they refuse the money that would look pretty bizarre. I’m reasonably certain that it would have to be considered restricted funds. Perhaps a charity accountant is lurking and could give more info?

There's a bequest in my will stating that it be used exclusively for the support of female victims of male violence and sexual abuse - the solicitor had to explicitly define female to mean biologically, and I had to include what was to happen to the bequest if it was refused.

However, I have no idea how it'll pan out till I actually die!

@MrsColon there's currently an ideological push to refer to transwomen (biological men) as 'transgender females'. In addition, India Willoughby refers to themselves as 'cis' despite not meeting the definition of that nonsensical, made up term.

I wouldn't bet on 'female' being that clear cut for much longer. God knows what term women will be 'allowed' to use to refer to themselves in the future.

[quote Waitwhat23]@MrsColon there's currently an ideological push to refer to transwomen (biological men) as 'transgender females'. In addition, India Willoughby refers to themselves as 'cis' despite not meeting the definition of that nonsensical, made up term.

I wouldn't bet on 'female' being that clear cut for much longer. God knows what term women will be 'allowed' to use to refer to themselves in the future.[/quote]
Yes, that's what my solicitor said - she put in a load of legal jargon (can't remember the wording) setting it out clearly that it meant those born biologically female.

Good to know as I also have this in my will, so will make the necessary changes with the solicitors.

Bit of a pain but worth it for our peace of mind.

I will also look at NIA as another poster suggested…

So sorry @IamSarah - I too am a survivor and this situation would have made me, not just psychologically, but also physically sick. This reaction is a realistic response to being in a vulnerable group setting where women are discussing men's violence against women and then this happens. These organisations KNOW THIS. I too would help fund female only spaces. Maybe we can talk to Karen at Nia and work out how to expand their model?

I too would like to offer help somehow

And it doesn’t matter why the transwoman was there, women deserve a single sex space. Even Nancy Kelly begrudgingly admitted that on WH

I think you are being generous to Nancy Kelly. I don't think that is what she was saying at all. I think Nancy Kelly was trying to say, 'Look nothing to see here! All women can choose whatever service they want, whether single sex or not. Everything's fine!'
Whereas we all know, including Stonewall, that that is not true. And that Stonewall is seeking to make it not true by encouraging organisations, and their funders, to be trans inclusive. And Nancy was saying it was harmful to TW to argue for single sex services, and you can't protect services if you cannot speak in support of them.

All Nancy was seeking to do was reassure people that its all fine and women have a choice, whilst Stonewall quietly works to remove that choice. And, as we can see, its working.

@DonnieDark

I was in hospital with a male sex addict who'd raped his own sister. He told us he planned to get a job in a refuge. We were reprimanded for ostracising him, and told we were bullies.

What the hell????!!!

@IamSarah

@EsmaCannonball

We often talk about women-only spaces in terms of male violence but what's more common is men as an inhibiting presence. It's just far easier for women to be open and honest and to connect with each other when men are not around. Women-only company isn't actually about being women, it's about being human beings, free from the male gaze or male judgement, and not always having to consider male feelings. You only have to look at how much better girls do in single-sex education to see how damaging and repressing just the presence of males can be.

There are men-only support groups or those Men in Shed-type groups that help men's mental health and provide friendship networks. I can see the value of these things and can't imagine being crass enough to destroy one by imposing myself into the company.

This is so important. We need to be very very clear that value of and need for female-only spaces is not just to avoid physical threats, because that invites “solutions” that only address the physical risk and ignore the mental weight we carry by simply existing as female in a default male world.

@Beckert

I'm not sure where I read it but I think the person who stated that TW don't want access to women's spaces they want access to women was correct; they want to use women as unwilling props in validating their identity and in this instance for material........

It's all about this. Otherwise a third space would be acceptable.

The reason as far as I understand that no female only space can be permitted is that this would limit and present boundaries to a male person's transition. There would be a space and a group of women that they could not be part of. Hence calling female people wanting spaces of their own 'transphobia' and the hyperbolic and highly inaccurate waving around of terms of 'its just like racism'.

There is no interest within this political movement for the wellbeing of female women and while they are passionate about inclusion and inclusivity, it is their own inclusion that they are passionate about; not the inclusion of all other women. The argument is that sex differences are irrelevant among women; however one group of women's needs get met at the expense of the other, and the other group of women can subordinate themselves and obey or do without services in punishment. And you can split that group of women into male and female.

It is an inability to tolerate other women having their needs met or being permitted accessibility. Even when their own accessibility and priority and greater importance has been thoroughly affirmed and provided for. It is dog in the manger. It is selfish. It is intolerant. It is discriminatory. And it's entirely sex based and sexist in its thinking, which really throws a lot of confusion on the idea of mixing sex in women's spaces because sex isn't a defining thing.

I think voyeurism sums most of this up. At the expense of women.

Its misogynistic shite.

2011, we have actively & publicly welcomed trans women into our women’s services, and people of all genders into our other services.

2011, we have actively & publicly welcomed men into our women’s services, and both sexes into our other services.

We are a feminist organisation and we support survivors of all genders.

We are a woman centred organisation and we support male and female survivors .

Trans-inclusive feminism is key to our values and central to our services as a Rape Crisis Centre.'

Men inclusive feminism is key to our values and central to our services as a Rape Crisis Centre

And yes, political inroads must be made whereby funding is allocated to women only services.