Why has this rape victim been forced to quit her therapy sessions? Because she feels threatened by a 6ft tran

TYRANNY OF THE WOKE WARRIORS

ARAPE victim who thought she had found a safe allfemale space to help her come to terms with the sexual violence she endured has told how she was left deeply troubled by the arrival of a biologically male trans woman ‘with no obvious female attributes’.

The mother of two joined a survivors’ group seeking support over the rape and childhood abuse that had cast a traumatic shadow over her life.

But she has told The Mail on Sunday how she felt the sanctuary and trust of the sessions were violated by the 6ft newcomer in masculine clothes.

Charity bosses insisted the trans woman had every right to be there as they allow people to define their gender for themselves, saying: ‘We do not police gender.’

But the mother, Sarah, said she was disturbed and panicked by the presence of someone with such a masculine appearance. She explained: ‘When I was sexually abused as a child, I was tricked into it by a man. Then I was raped as an adult by a man and felt tricked into it, so I don’t always trust men.’

She added she was left feeling even more uncomfortable after sharing her experience of sexual violence in front of the trans woman, who did not speak about any abuse she may have suffered.

Sarah, who was abused between the ages of eight and 12 and raped when she was in her 20s, said that the new arrival disrupted the dynamic of the support group.

‘Some women had been abused as children so obviously we had that shared experience of being a girl and abused by a man,’ she said.

‘We talked a lot about male entitlement, about how men feel entitled to women’s bodies. Quite often we just said how we didn’t trust men and it felt like a safe space to say that.’

BUT after the trans woman arrived, such talk became ‘nonsensical’, Sarah said, adding: ‘It felt like the priority of the group was not to talk about male entitlement any more or our shared experiences, but about making sure this person who was born male felt comfortable.

‘No matter how much a man says they’re a woman, they’re still born male.’

Sarah – not her real name – said she wanted to speak out as she felt the rights of women are being eroded to appease trans activists.

‘I completely support trans people’s right to live how they want to live, but in practice women who have been raped are being left to get on with it on their own because of the approach these groups are now taking to please trans activists,’ she said. ‘The reason I am speaking out is that I have a daughter and if something like this happened to her, I want her to be able to go to a female-only group if that’s what she wants.’

Sarah, now married and in her 40s, was abused by a family friend when a child, and later raped by a man she knew who persuaded her to take drugs. It was hearing that he was moving back into the area that persuaded her to seek help from the Brighton-based Survivors’ Network.

When Sarah first contacted the charity, she noticed that the sessions were for ‘self-identifying female survivors’, and in her first phone call with a member of staff was asked what her ‘gender identity’ was.

However, she believed that as the charity also runs separate groups for trans and non-binary people (who identify neither as male or female), her Wednesday-night session would be most probably exclusively for biological women.

For the first five ‘peer support’ sessions, that was indeed the case, but in the sixth, the towering transgender woman wearing masculine clothes sat two seats from her.

‘When I first went, it was all women and we all had similar experiences so I was reassured and it was really positive,’ Sarah said.

But the atmosphere in the sessions – in which the participants would sit in a circle to talk about their experiences – changed abruptly in September with the new addition to the group.

The trans woman was introduced by the session facilitator with the comment: ‘Everyone is welcome here.’ Sarah recalls: ‘I thought, “What’s that about?” Then I realised there was someone there who I presume identified as a woman, but to me they just seemed like a man. She was over 6ft tall, had a deep voice, wore casual trousers and a sweatshirt and had no obvious female attributes.’

Because of her traumatic experiences at being ‘tricked’ by her male abusers, she said: ‘I immediately wanted to walk out. I thought, “I don’t want to be in this space.”’

Sarah said there was no outward physical sign that the new member was transitioning to become a woman and the recruit did not volunteer any comment about any sexual abuse that she may have suffered.

‘I’ve no idea why she was there,’ Sarah added. ‘My paranoid side makes me think they were there for voyeuristic reasons. My rational side thinks they were probably there because they need help.’

After discussing the matter with her husband, Sarah wrote a long, carefully considered letter of complaint to the charity.

‘Please understand this is not a personal attack on the individual group member but an account of how their inclusion felt for me,’ she explained. ‘When the trans service user began speaking, my first instinct was to leave the group and never come back. I knew that I couldn’t possibly tell the facilitator or any of the volunteers how I felt because the group is explicitly trans-inclusive and I could be labelled a bigot or a transphobe.’

But a reply from Carys Jenkins, head of operations at the charity, ruled out any change of policy. ‘We

Women who have been assaulted are being left on their own

How can you disregard victims who are triggered by males?

do not police gender and we do not define who is and is not a woman; we allow women to define this for themselves,’ she wrote.

The letter added, in what Sarah considers a cruel snub, that her ‘primary option’ was to move to one-to-one support or to find another service in the city which ‘may be suitable for you’. Sarah,

who works in accountancy, took the advice and tried to find another support group solely for biological females in Brighton, but discovered there were none, as they all stated that they welcomed ‘selfidentifying females’.

Sarah suggested the charity should set up a service solely for those who were born women – which is allowed under an exemption to equality legislation – but was turned down.

She said: ‘I thought, “How can you let women down so badly?” You’re supposed to be a service for women who have experienced sexual violence. How can you completely disregard that the main thing about sexual violence is that you feel triggered by males?

‘We’ve been told by men to ignore our instincts and do what they want us to do and now we’re being told that by a rape crisis service. It’s crazy.

‘Survivors’ Network runs a group for men. They can run a group for trans people, so male-born people are really well catered for.

‘But women, who make up the majority of those who get sexually assaulted, haven’t got a space where they can just be with other women.’

Survivors’ Network was set up in 1990 by former child abuse victims, and was recognised for its work when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex paid a high-profile visit in 2018. It is funded by the Government, local authorities and the NHS.

In written evidence to a Commons select committee last year, its chief executive Jay Breslaw opposed tightening rules on single-sex spaces, adding that her charity ‘strongly feel that the use of women-only spaces by trans women should be actively encouraged’.

In a statement last night, Survivors’ Network said: ‘We are a feminist organisation and we support survivors of all genders.

‘Survivors of trauma and sexual violence, irrespective of gender identity, need support, care and belief. With 30 years of expert knowledge, we are well equipped to offer this in a safe, survivor-led and empowerment-based way.

‘Trans-inclusive feminism is key to our values and central to our services as a rape crisis centre.’

The charity declined to say what, if any, gender reassignment surgery the trans woman at the session also attended by Sarah has received.

They also did not provide details of any vetting process undertaken in the case, but said they had ‘robust safeguarding procedures and training in place to support the safety of everyone who accesses and delivers our services.’