Big update on Rape Crisis legal challenge

[IamSarah]

I know many of you have been waiting for an update so first of all thank you for your patience and the many messages of support.

I am suing Survivors Network, the Sussex Rape Crisis service, as it refused to offer a single sex women’s group in addition to the mixed sex women’s groups. By mixed sex I mean inclusive of any males who identify as women.

I’ve been granted anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case and it was submitted to Brighton County Court today.

I am being represented by law firm Didlaw and my Barrister is Naomi Cunningham (Chair of Sex Matters). So far they have acted pro bono which I am incredibly grateful for as it has taken a lot of time. The team are confident I have a good case but this is unchartered territory for women’s rights.

Many of you have very kindly offered to be involved and help with gardening. I don’t think I’m allowed to share details on here so please go to my Twitter page http://twitter.com/SarahSurviving/ which has all the info in a pinned post.

Of you’re not on Twitter feel free to send me a DM for more information on how you can help the case. Any publicity you can give the crowd funder would really help.

Thank you everyone.

Sarah x

This is an important question.

I think it is going to be a tricky one but from reading the details, I think it is a bit more positive than that. The claim is that their policies are discriminatory towards women, which I think they are.
I suspect it may depend a lot on the judge, but even if the case fails, I think it'll bring more sunlight and that'll be hugely valuable.
Maya Forstater lost her first case and look what happened.

Maya Forstater lost her first case and look what happened.

I don't think that's a principal we can carry forward TBH

@Rainbowshit I think that this case is quite simple because they have mens single sex group a trans group and a mixed sex "womens " group so men who self id as women can attend all 3 men who id as men have a single sex group its only women who are being denied a single sex group that is direct sex discrimination especially as women are disproportionately the victims of sexual assaults and rape

That is a perfect explanation . Thank you.

Also worth keeping in mind: if a group are receiving local authority taxpayer funding to provide the area's rape crisis services (to cover the whole population) then they can't decide to just not cover one of those groups.

Which means that either LAs need to insist that all groups are catered for under their funding (after all, women's services have been lost directly through LA funding requirements insisting that other groups must be incorporated too for inclusion), or if a group decides that they don't do single sex services, the LA then needs to ensure funding for a separate single sex service to be set up in addition. And then to defend it robustly from TQ+ groups attacking and trying to destroy it because they won't tolerate its existence.

Frankly I think this is the way to go. Those providing TQ+ services are increasingly demonstrating that they do not want to provide single sex female services, and not only have no interest in that group or committment to them, or even a basic understanding or compassion for their particular needs, but are actively prejudiced against that group receiving a service anyway.

Yet again proving that women's services and TQ+ services cannot be provided for as a combined group. They're not the same thing, they don't have the same needs or focus, and they cannot be combined without female people suffering and losing equality of provision.

Thank you. That makes it so much clearer. But are transmen actually excluded from the men's only group?

Thanks for raising this and yes you are right the current law give providers the permission to run single sex groups rather than an obligation.

My lawyers are arguing this is discriminatory, particularly for GC women.

Lots of service providers want to run single sex groups but they're afraid of the backlash from TRAs.

If I win this case, my lawyers believe it will set a precedent.

Also a big hello and massive thank you to all the weekend gardeners 👋

Bump 🥕

I just created a thread in AIBU to reach a wider audience. Please bump in that thread if you can

Above all, it is going to drain resources from the rape crisis centre that would have otherwise supported victims of sexual assault, so it is a very very slow clap from me.

Will do, Sarah.

Women are excluded from mixed sex services so your objection doesnt stand up to scrutiny, CatherinaJTV
Its especially obnoxious, since women are the ones that set up those services in the first place.

But I think you know that.

@CatherinaJTV this service is not serving the largest section of sexual assault victims (biological women) instead it is actively discriminating against them by refusing to give them a single sex group just to allow men who self id as women the choice of 3 groups. So please explain to me how this case is harming the victims of sexual abuse who are predominantly women when this case is to stop them being discriminated against and ensuring that they get the service they need.

Sarah, that doesn't mean that financial costs are not incurred (even if indirectly through the time spent on this).

Bystander intervention can prevent assault. Training emboldens the trainees. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that and this is directly connected to their mission.

@CatherinaJTV so every woman in Sussex who has been raped or sexually abused and has a trauma response to males should just get on with it with zero support?

I see some TRAS on Twitter are interpreting this case as “an attempt to exclude trans women even more from public life.” They really don’t think that women deserve single sex spaces, do they? How are trans women being excluded when they can already attend multiple groups?

As I understand it, they offered you 1 on 1 support? Is that incorrect? They have also not stopped providing services to all women, as your phrasing suggests.

If you understood that kind of therapy, you'd know it may start 1 to 1 but at the right point in your recovery, you move to group. Group therapy has benefits to recovery that you dont get in 1 to 1.

The waiting list for 1:1 support is two years and there are hundreds of women who self exclude from the service because it's mixed sex.

There is absolutely no provision for Muslim women for example.

Oh, so women should just forgo group therapy, with all its benefits, if they can't cope with taking about their rape, by a male, with a male present?

And please don't start 'women do it too'.

And ALL women does include those who can't talk about their rape with males.

So yes, they have stopped providing this service to ALL women, and now only provide it to SOME women, specifically ideologically compliant ones. This is a direct discrimination due to belief, if nothing else, whichever way you look at it.

I'm sorry, I didn't realise their remit was now preventing rape. Perhaps they should consider changing their name?