After I'd speak to the victim, they'd receive a medical exam from a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE).
(1/25) A number of Silicon Valley investors are putting their money and influence into a campaign to gaslight rape victims into not seeking medical treatment
despite the warnings of top law enforcement officials
and NOBODY is talking about this.
After I'd speak to the victim, they'd receive a medical exam from a Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE).
The victim may also receive:
- counseling (hello!)
- treatment for (potentially invisible) injuries
- medications like Plan B and emergency antiretroviral therapy for HIV prophylaxis.
which is possibly the most HARMFUL startup idea that I have ever heard of.
Furthermore, rape kits in a hospital are protected. There needs to be a strong "chain of custody" or the kit will not be admissible in any court.
Such a kit cannot be admissible in court and may harm other efforts to collect evidence.
Leda Health used to be called "MeToo Kits" and they were widely panned in the press for both their tasteless name and their nonsensical plan.
https://t.co/LrGgiCaJGK
https://t.co/3rk0rK2sgF
- Minnesota Coalition Against Sexual Assault
- End Rape on Campus
- New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault
- The Aurora Center (my old org)
- National Alliance to End Sexual Violence
- HAVEN
- CAPPA
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel issued a cease-and-desist to MeToo Kits under the Michigan Consumer Protection Act--arguing that MeToo Kits "misleads victims."
https://t.co/EO0Xpcx1Q6
https://t.co/P6K9tmoBhU
https://t.co/5dFHnXoiJ5
https://t.co/IhQk5Ffw04
https://t.co/BJhHPp7d74
Congresswoman Sylvia Garcia and 15 colleagues sent a letter to Madison and MeToo Kits warning about the medical and legal issues of DIY rape kits.
https://t.co/TPC64uSmuD
but as per the attorneys general and district attorneys, she doesn't have to.
The kits are misleading nonetheless.
Campbell rebranded "MeToo Kits" to "Leda Health" and started raising money.
They just redesigned their website, and Campbell is a featured case study.
Later, Campbell insisted in an interview that the kits would be "encrypted and backed with blockchain technology."
as if that were the real problem.
https://t.co/3ZTVBDweA7
but they don't solve the chain of custody issue for biological evidence of a crime.
DIY kits or "the blockchain" will **NEVER** achieve this, and Campbell is being misleading about this to raise money.
Last August, they applied for a USPTO trademark for marketing rape kits.
https://t.co/iJi2VqBZeq
#BuildInPublic
given Madison Campbell's commitment to selling inadmissible kits
even after being censured by law enforcement officials and members of Congress,
we can't trust her to not break the law in the future.
DIY kits or the goddamn "blockchain" are false flags. Their marketing misleads rape victims and is a danger to the justice system.
More from Trading
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
