Whilst we are gradually working to improve this including by listening to all Survivors, by providing safer feedback and by building up a general understanding of the below and whichever other cases we become aware of or which people present to us, this website and its campaign ideology were not originally construed with awareness of all Survivors' issues, as follows (a list which will always be non exhaustive but which we are fine with adding to).

Survivor circumstances are, or are perceived to be, unusual include the following.

I) Survivors of domestic violence and other forms of ongoing abuse, and their implications. This includes, but is not limited to:

i) Family abuse.

ii) Partner abuse.

iii) Abuse from someone that was considered a prospective partner, e.g. that one has been on some dates with without being considered a partner.

II) People whose abuse occurred while they were minors, with implications.

III) Survivors other than women who have been attacked by men, and the implications of their existence. This includes, but is not limited to, the following.

i) Survivors who are female and have been abused by one or more females.

ii) Survivors who are male and have been abused by one or more males.

iii) Survivors who are male and have been abused by one or more females,

iv) Cases in which one or both of the Survivor and the abuser do not identify in a gender asigned at birth or gender-binary manner, e.g. Survivors who are Trans. Survivors who view their own gender in other than discrete M/F terms, such as whichever of part of a continuum, involving one or more gender poles in addition to M/F, as time-dependent, fluid or multi-valued.

v) Survivors who have been abused by individuals of more than one gender.

IV) Survivors of non-consensual sex attacks which occurred during their consensual work as escorts, including people working as non-sexual escorts being sexually attacked.

It can no longer be assumed that no university students are involved in such, and it should never have been assumed that no university students have a past of this kind.

There is space for it between school and university, nor does all escort work exclude people still at school or under 18, not least because some of it is highly illegal.

That said, there is far more space for escort (or sex industry) work in mature students' past.

In the days in which some groups openly attacked and shamed people of this occupation present or past, this was one of the worst ways in which a few mature students felt left out.

We will eventually link here as regards other prejudices based on age and occupation which still remain status quo in western universities.

V) Survivors of sex attacks by groups, whether all at once or "passed around" within a gang. Including sex traffic rings. Including in cases in which some of the group or gang involved span multiple genders. Or in which the instigating abuser acted by getting one or more others to carry out the attacks. And the implications thereof.

VI) The implications of some Survivors' abusers being highly dangerous people, whether in person or through connections.

VII) That some Survivors are also abusers, and that some abusers want to abuse people who are already Survivors, along with its implications.

VIII) While at least some of the above mentioned are free to consider themselves to be non-normative Survivors, there are a number of other criteria by which Survivors may consider themselves, or their ordeal and aftermath as Survivors, to be non-normative. These include, but are not limited, to the following.

i) Survivors who view sex non-normatively.

ii) Survivors who were attacked in a sexual and yet sexually non-normative manner for all that they themselves view sex normatively.

iii) Survivors who consider their main, principal or sole characteristics that they publicly or privately identify with to be ones which are invisible or unrecognized by the current establishment. These characteristics are in some cases connected to sex, romance or gender, and in other cases are social. These are intersectionality factors which have hitherto seldom or ever been taken into account by the welfare establishment, whose "non-judgmentality" would not appear to extend to letting people identify as they please, including how strongly and in what priority order.

Examples of iii) include, but are not limited to, at least some cases of each of: Polys (Polyamorous people), Fetishists, consensual BDSM people (Bondage Domination Discipline Submission Sadism Masochism), Aces and Aros (Asexuals and Aromantics) Cross-dressers whether or not they self-identify as part of Trans. Other Trans, Queer or Non-Binary people, including some the details of whose self-identifications are rejected by "more mainstrem" Trans, Queer and Non-Binary communities. At least some cases of mental health. People whos main, principal or sole identification is a currently unrecognized characteristic such as Geek or Goth.

Variants of i) include cases in which the attack itself was normative, but there were BDSM aspects of non-sexual emotional abuse to the relationship which render the attack worse in terms of trauma because of the link between the non-sexual BDSM trust and the sexual attack.

IX) Survivors who are closeted about their intersectionality characteristics, whether or not these are recognized characteristics.

X) Survivors who are closeted about some or all aspects of themselves as Survivors.

XI) Survivors who react by avoidance rather than by confrontation, alongside how some of their safety and anonymity needs far outstrip anything that we here are currently familiar with.

A number of other sources of information, support groups and welfare establishments now cover some of the cases above, at least to the small extent of providing a modicum of public awareness. There has been quite a big increase in such awareness over the past few years, including over the past 4 terms at Cambridge.

Thus we here concentrate on the issues of some of those Survivors who are not currently afforded public awareness elsewhere. These are in part not afforded this due to politics, activism and journalism not yet having enough awareness of many Survivors' issues. As such, readers do not have our consent to put material from these webpages into student (or other) journals, or blogs, or social media, whether verbatim or by links or associating any of our groups' names with the ideas here present. If you want to link to these webpages, you can write to us in full acceptance that we may choose to say no and without having to say why.

The issues that we concentrate on are then VIII to XI, in 3 topics.

* Non-normative Survivors in the sense of VIII.

Though other senses will occasionally be mentioned. In particular, concentrating on VIII to XI does not preclude the intersections of these with I to VII.

* The relationships between closet awareness and Survivor awareness that start from IX and X

* How to include Survivors whose wish or requirement is to avoid rather than confront. These usually need separate means, and plenty of them, out of some only being circumstantially viable. Anyone insisting on putting all Survivors on the same boat is in fact excluding most of VIII to XI, and possibly even threatening to leave some such with nothing.

Also note that trying to put all Survivors on the same boat is flagrantly ignoring VI) and VII). It is hardly only the avoidant Survivors who don't want to be in the same "support group" as Survivors who are also abusive, or for there to be only one support group system so that once their abuser has infiltrated it posing as a Survivor, they are then left with nowhere to go. This makes particular sense, since partly closeted Survivors (X) are often closeted about who their abuser is, and so would not dare point out their presence to organizers. Also (III) implies that those running a place for Survivors can no longer presume they can trivially tell which person is the Survivor and which is the abuser simply by looking at them. This implication still hasn't sunk into most of the groups which acknowledge the truth of (III), particularly in the instance of (VI) applying as well. If a highly dangerous person is posing as a Survivor in order to further terrify, harm, control or isolate the actual Survivor, well part of being highly dangerous is telling lies. This can lead to situations in which one person says 'that's my abuser' to which the other says 'no, you are my abuser'. Furthermore, lies and hidden threats can lead to other people involved backing the wrong party, whether out of fear or due to having been deceived.

Disclaimer Some countries' legal definitions of rape and sexual assault involve very restrictive definitions of sex. It could be helpful for facilities nominally for Survivors to make it clear whether they only support the legal definition or a fuller definition as defined by the true diversity of Survivors. After all, many Survivors just wish for refuge and support rather than for any kind of legal confrontation or any having to conform to limited and inflexible tick-boxing.