A deputation of women plans to call for better support for rape survivors at a Brighton and Hove City Council cabinet meeting this afternoon (Thursday 17 October).
The key points were included in agenda papers published before the cabinet meeting which is scheduled to start at Hove Town Hall at 4.30pm.
The deputation said: “For those of us who have experienced sexual violence and live with the trauma of it, single-sex counselling services are crucial.
“In learning the lessons of the recent Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre debacle … any publicly funded service here in our city must necessarily place the needs of survivors as paramount.
“In Edinburgh, we now know that female survivors, desperate for single-sex services, were labelled bigots and their pleas were stored in a folder marked ‘hate emails’.
“In our city, female survivors of sexual violence like me have already experienced a devastating breach of trust at the hands of our male attackers.
“But when we turn to council-funded services only to be told that no single-sex services will be offered our trust is betrayed all over again. This is unforgivable.
“When rape survivors are being denied services simply because they need to know men will not be present something has gone very wrong in this city.
“It means women in need of female-only services are now self-excluding from these services.”
The deputation, led by Allison Hooper, said that “the definition of a woman” was being eroded by some council-supported services.
It added: “How many other women are self-excluding from vital services in health and wellbeing settings due to this obvious blatant dilution of women’s safe spaces?
“No woman who has been sexually assaulted by a man should be put into the position of having to accept a man, however he identifies, in a support or therapeutic environment.
“The major issue here is that women do not even have the right to know in advance or, in the current climate, be able to make a complaint without being vilified.
“Given the council is funding these services, I trust that cabinet will ensure that its ‘violence against women and girls strategy’ will take on board and remedy this anti-woman policy?
“How many more women are silently struggling due to the denial of our sex based rights and access to single-sex spaces?”
The deputation also said: “In describing violence against women and girls, the strategy document states that this ‘can happen to anyone regardless of age, ethnicity, religion, gender, ability or disability or sexual orientation’.
I appreciate what they are saying but Survivors Network already do this. Everyone has the right to request support and councilling from someone who is the same sex as them. In a diverse city like Brighton it is good there is somewhere that supports our LGBTQ community too. Not sure why they petitioning council when they do this already, these people must know this. They are a great service need more support and funding.
This is categorically untrue. Survivors network are currently in a legal case because they refuse to provide single-sex provision alongside a range of inclusive provision. Please amend your comment because it is completely irresponsible to share inaccuracies with victim-survivors.
I would also challenge you on your point that women who need life-saving single-sex spaces are against the parallel provision of services for trans people. We aren’t.
Women across Brighton have been forced to go without expert rape crisis services for years because of Brighton’s failure to commission single-sex services. Groups like Sisters Salon advocate for this community of victim-survivors.
https://brightonsisters.wordpress.com/why-we-need-female-only-rape-crisis-services/
I appreciate and support the sentiment behind the deputation, but it feels like this would be better served as a challenge towards the myriad of services that already exist in Brighton by organisations like Survivors Network, RISE, and others.
As stated above, “Survivors network are currently in a legal case because they refuse to provide single-sex provision alongside a range of inclusive provision”
…Further strengthening my point.
The deputation was entirely appropriate. BHCC fund Survivors Network and Brighton Women’s Centre. Neither offer single-sex trauma services because they, like our council, regard males who identify as women to be present in those spaces. The brave woman who read out her deputation yesterday tried (as this paper has reported), repeatedly, to be heard by BHCC and was told her views were “offensive”. That she was finally, 9 months later, granted an opportunity to be heard was a step forward. However, if anyone cares to listen to the reply given by Cllr Daniel on the webcast every single point raised in the deputation is ducked.
Also (to correct) RISE do not provide the trauma services described and are not at all culpable in this. RISE are a brilliant organisation to which, ironically, the council has cut funding.
…and is thus a good challenge to put towards organisations like RISE to provide those services. No-one here is questioning the appropriateness of the question, Adrian, just, I wonder about the effectiveness.
Am I reading the comments right? People are SUING a rape crisis centre? Think of the money they spend defending this they could use to help people. This is shameful
I was reading up on this. One lady put in legal papers in 2022 after following through a complaints procedure about a transgender individual in one of the classes, and the group decided that transwomen were welcome into the female-only support group. You might be comforted in your concern that apparently the case was taken on a pro bono status by a City of London law firm, Reed Smith, and two barristers, Antony White QC and Robin White.
Survivors Network released a press announcement here: https://survivorsnetwork.org.uk/statement-on-legal-action-against-survivors-network/
And for balance, the lady wrote an article about her rationale here: https://unherd.com/2022/07/why-im-suing-survivors-network/
A sentence that struck out at me after reading your comment Alison was this one, by the claimant. “This isn’t about money for me — I don’t care about the money. I just want a change of policy…” I wonder if suing was the best way to enact that kind of change she proclaims. Maybe she felt that was the only way forward?