RAINN Marks Beginning of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month (SAAPM) 2025 With #TakeBackOurTech Campaign
Washington, D.C., April 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Today RAINN, the nation's largest anti-sexual violence organization, marks the beginning of Sexual Assault Awareness and Prevention Month (SAAPM), and we're shining the spotlight on the emerging realities, mental health impacts, and possible solutions to tech-enabled sexual abuse.
A rapidly growing form of sexual violence, tech-enabled sexual abuse includes non-consensual intimate images shared online like 'deepfakes' created with AI technology or child sexual abuse material (CSAM) posted to websites and social media accounts.
'With every advancement in technology, there are those who will abuse it to harm others, and that is exactly what we're seeing with tech-enabled sexual abuse,' said Jennifer Simmons Kaleba, vice president of communications for RAINN. 'While many things stand out about this kind of sexual abuse—the fact that anyone from a celebrity to a classmate can be a victim, or that internet platforms aren't required to do anything about it when it's reported—the ease with which someone can cause so much havoc and harm is possibly the most shocking.'
Take the case of Elliston Berry in Texas, who was 14 when an image-swapping app was used to turn an innocuous photo of her into a nude image and then shared with her classmate. RAINN has worked with lawmakers to create legislation that would give survivors like Berry a tool to not only make this act a crime, but hold tech platforms accountable to take down the material within 48-hours of reporting. Take it Down has passed the Senate unanimously and RAINN and advocate partners are calling for its full passage.
'We've worked with fierce determination for the past year to bring this bill forward because we know—and survivors know—that AI-assisted sexual abuse is sexual abuse and real harm is being done; real pain is caused,' said Stefan Turkheimer, RAINN vice president of public policy.
This SAAPM, RAINN is calling on supporters to help 'take back our tech.' Tech-enabled sexual abuse is a violation of your rights, dignity, and safety. It robs individuals of control over their image, voice, and personal boundaries. Together, we can fight tech-enabled sexual abuse and build a safer world for everyone.
Learn more at RAINN.org/saapm-2025.
###
About RAINN
RAINN, the nation's largest anti-sexual violence organization, created and operates the National Sexual Assault Hotline. RAINN also carries out programs to prevent sexual violence, help survivors, help organizations improve their sexual assault prevention and response programs, and ensure that perpetrators are brought to justice. If you or someone you know has experienced sexual violence, free, confidential help is available 24/7 by calling 800.656.HOPE (4673) or visiting hotline.rainn.org.
CONTACT: Erinn Robinon Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN) 8133351418 Media@rainn.orgSign in to access your portfolio
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Associated Press
an hour ago
- Associated Press
Mike Johnson downplays Musk's influence and says Republicans will pass Trump's tax and budget bill
With an uncharacteristically feistiness, Speaker Mike Johnson took clear sides Sunday in President Donald Trump's breakup with mega-billionaire Elon Musk. The Republican House leader and staunch Trump ally said Musk's criticism of the GOP's massive tax and budget policy bill will not derail the measure, and he downplayed Musk's influence over the GOP-controlled Congress. 'I didn't go out to craft a piece of legislation to please the richest man in the world,' Johnson said on ABC's 'This Week.' 'What we're trying to do is help hardworking Americans who are trying to provide for their families and make ends meet,' Johnson insisted. Johnson said he has exchanged text messages with Musk since the former chief of Trump's Department of Government Efficiency came out against the GOP bill. Musk called it an 'abomination' that would add to U.S. debts and threaten economic stability. He urged voters to flood Capitol Hill with calls to vote against the measure, which is pending in the Senate after clearing the House. His criticism sparked an angry social media back-and-forth with Trump, who told reporters over the weekend that he has no desire to repair his relationship with Musk. The speaker was dismissive of Musk's threats to finance opponents — even Democrats — of Republican members who back Trump's bill. 'We've got almost no calls to the offices, any Republican member of Congress,' Johnson said. 'And I think that indicates that people are taking a wait and see attitude. Some who may be convinced by some of his arguments, but the rest understand: this is a very exciting piece of legislation.' Johnson argued that Musk still believes 'that our policies are better for human flourishing. They're better for the US economy. They're better for everything that he's involved in with his innovation and job creation and entrepreneurship.' The speaker and other Republicans, including Trump's White House budget chief, continued their push back Sunday against forecasts that their tax and budget plans will add to annual deficits and thus balloon a national debt already climbing toward $40 trillion. Johnson insisted that Musk has bad information, and the speaker disputed the forecasts of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office that scores budget legislation. The bill would extend the 2017 Trump tax cuts, cut spending and reduce some other levies but also leave some 10.9 million more people without health insurance and spike deficits by $2.4 trillion over the decade, according to the CBO's analysis. The speaker countered with arguments Republicans have made for decades: That lower taxes and spending cuts would spur economic growth that ensure deficits fall. Russell Vought, who leads the White House Office of Budget and Management, said on Fox News Sunday that CBO analysts base their models of 'artificial baselines.' Because the 2017 tax law set the lower rates to expire, CBO's cost estimates, Vought argued, presuming a return to the higher rates before that law went into effect. Vought acknowledged CBO's charge from Congress is to analyze legislation and current law as it is written. But he said the office could issue additional analyses, implying it would be friendlier to GOP goals. Asked whether the White House would ask for alternative estimates, Vought again put the burden on CBO, repeating that congressional rules allow the office to publish more analysis. Other Republicans, meanwhile, approached the Trump-Musk battle cautiously. 'As a former professional fighter, I learned a long time ago, don't get between two fighters,' said Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin on CNN's 'State of the Union.' He even compared the two billionaire businessmen to a married couple. 'President Trump is a friend of mine but I don't need to get, I can have friends that have disagreements,' Mullin said. 'My wife and I dearly love each other and every now and then, well actually quite often, sometimes she disagrees with me, but that doesn't mean that we can't stay focused on what's best for our family. Right now, there may be a disagreement but we're laser focused on what is best for the American people.' —- Associated Press journalist Gary Fields contributed from Washington.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Trump's palace coup leaves NASA in limbo
When President-elect Donald Trump nominated Jared Isaacman to become NASA administrator, it seemed like a brilliant choice. Business entrepreneur, private astronaut, Isaacman was just the man to revamp NASA and make it into a catalyst for taking humanity to the moon, Mars and beyond. Isaacman sailed through the confirmation process in the Senate Commerce Committee, chaired by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), by a vote of 19 to 9. He was poised to be confirmed by the full Senate when something so bizarre happened that it beggars the imagination. The White House suddenly and with no clear reason why, pulled Isaacman's nomination. After months of a confirmation process, NASA was back to square one for getting a new leader. Ars Technica's Eric Berger offered an explanation as to why. 'One mark against Isaacman is that he had recently donated money to Democrats,' he wrote. 'He also indicated opposition to some of the White House's proposed cuts to NASA's science budget.' But these facts were well known even before Trump nominated Isaacman. Trump himself, before he ran for president as a Republican, donated to Democrats and was close friends with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Berger goes on to say that a source told the publication that, 'with Musk's exit, his opponents within the administration sought to punish him by killing Isaacman's nomination.' The idea that Isaacman's nomination is being deep-sixed because of Musk runs contrary to the public praise that the president has given the billionaire rocket and electric car entrepreneur. Trump was uncharacteristically terse in his own social media post. 'After a thorough review of prior associations, I am hereby withdrawing the nomination of Jared Isaacman to head NASA,' he wrote. 'I will soon announce a new nominee who will be mission aligned, and put America First in Space. Thank you for your attention to this matter!' CNN reports that Isaacman's ouster was the result of a palace coup, noting that a source said, 'Musk's exit left room for a faction of people in Trump's inner circle, particularly Sergio Gor, the longtime Trump supporter and director of the White House Presidential Personnel Office, to advocate for installing a different nominee.' The motive seems to be discontent about the outsized influence that Musk has had on the White House and a desire to take him down a peg or two. Isaacman was profoundly gracious, stating in part, 'I am incredibly grateful to President Trump @POTUS, the Senate and all those who supported me throughout this journey. The past six months have been enlightening and, honestly, a bit thrilling. I have gained a much deeper appreciation for the complexities of government and the weight our political leaders carry.' The idea that a man like Isaacman, well respected by the aerospace community, who was predicted to sail through a confirmation vote in the full Senate, could be taken down by an obscure bureaucrat in White House intrigue, motivated by petty spite, is mind boggling. Even Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), who has not been fond of Trump's space policy, was appalled. He posted on his X account that Isaacman 'ran into the kind of politics that is damaging our country.' 'Republicans and Democrats supported him as the right guy at the right time for the top job at NASA, but it wasn't enough.' NASA is in for months more of turmoil and uncertainty as the nomination process gets reset and starts grinding its way through the Senate. The draconian, truncated budget proposal is certainly not helpful, either. Congress, which had been supportive of Trump's space policy, is not likely to be pleased by the president's high-handed shivving of his own nominee. Whoever Trump chooses to replace Isaacman as NASA administrator nominee, no matter how qualified, should face some very direct questioning. Trump's NASA budget proposal should be dead on arrival, which, considering the cuts in science and technology, is not necessarily a bad thing. China must be looking at the spectacle of NASA being mired in political wrangling, a leadership vacuum and budget uncertainty with glee. Beijing has its own space ambitions, with a planned crewed lunar landing by 2030. It's possible that the Chinese will steal a march on NASA, with all the damage that will do to America's standing in the world. It didn't have to be this way. Isaacman could be settling in as NASA administrator, deploying his business acumen and vision to lead the space agency to its greatest achievements. Instead, America's space effort has received a self-inflicted blow from which it will be long in recovering, Mark R. Whittington, who writes frequently about space policy, has published a political study of space exploration entitled 'Why is It So Hard to Go Back to the Moon?' as well as 'The Moon, Mars and Beyond,' and, most recently, 'Why is America Going Back to the Moon?' He blogs at Curmudgeons Corner. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
American Military News
2 hours ago
- American Military News
CT Senate passes controversial gun safety bill after 11-hour marathon debate
After a marathon 11-hour debate, the state Senate passed a gun safety bill Friday that would make it easier to file civil lawsuits against gun manufacturers and make it harder for some residents to obtain a pistol permit. On a mostly party-line vote, the Senate granted final legislative approval for a controversial measure that would allow civil lawsuits against gun manufacturers, marketers, distributors and retailers who fail to take 'reasonable controls' against selling guns to traffickers, straw buyers, and those the sellers believe would commit a crime. 'Despite the deadly nature of their products, gun manufacturers and sellers have enjoyed broad immunity to civil action, which has allowed them to turn a blind eye to dangerous sales practices that all too often end in tragedy,' said Senate President Pro Tempore Martin M. Looney, a New Haven Democrat. 'This bill holds the industry accountable by giving victims an opportunity to recover appropriate damages from an irresponsible gun industry member.' The measure passed by 25-11 with Democrats largely in favor and Republicans largely against. The two members to break with their parties were Democratic Sen. Cathy Osten of Sprague, who voted against the bill, and Republican Sen. Tony Hwang of Fairfield, who voted in favor. Republicans staged an 11-hour filibuster and offered 18 amendments that were rejected by the Democratic majority. Sen. Rob Sampson, a Wolcott Republican, offered numerous amendments in an unsuccessful attempt to change the legislation that he says would lead to more lawsuits. 'This bill does not address gun violence or criminals who choose to commit it,' Sampson said. 'This bill represents a concerted national effort to effectively litigate the firearm industry out of business. It's an attack on lawful business owners in the firearm industry alone, with civil liability based on the unforeseen actions of criminals. There are vague and subjective terms—trap doors—throughout, which are a dream for anti-gun activists and litigators looking to harm the industry with meritless cases. This is simply a political bill disguised as an effort to keep people safe.' Sampson added, 'The message is clear: If you manufacture, sell, or promote legal firearms in Connecticut, you are no longer welcome here. It will have a chilling effect on the state's firearm industry, and thus your innate right to self-defense through the Second Amendment, the likes of which we have never seen. This is not about public safety and will not save a single life.' Before the Senate approval, the state House of Representatives voted 100-46 last month in favor of the legislation. Gov. Ned Lamont will sign the bill, his chief spokesman, Rob Blanchard, said Friday. House Bill 7042 allows the state attorney general, as well as private citizens and cities and towns, to file civil lawsuits against those 'who fail to implement so-called reasonable controls in preventing the sale of firearms to straw purchasers, firearm traffickers, and individuals who are prevented from purchasing firearms under our laws.' Democrats said the bill is necessary because the federal Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, known as PLCAA, was passed by Congress in 2005 that provided special immunity protections for gun manufacturers. So far, nine other states have passed similar legislation to expand the possibility of gun-related lawsuits, including New York, New Jersey, California, Maryland, Illinois, Colorado and others. The 11-hour debate, which started at about 1:30 p.m. Thursday and ended at 12:30 a.m. Friday, was among the longest of the year. The Senate then continued debating other bills and adjourned at 1:37 a.m. Friday. In a long stemwinder on the Senate floor, Republican Sen. John Kissel of Enfield blasted the bill as an attack on Second Amendment rights. During his speech, Kissel made winding references to railroads, attorneys' fees, scratch-off tickets, casinos, Hartford, car fatalities, troopers, eye-hand coordination, Jack LaLanne, Methuselah, the Bible, and hallucinogenic mushrooms. He talked about walking from the Hartford train station to state Capitol and visiting his grandfather in Philadelphia as Republicans talked throughout the entire day and past midnight. 11 misdemeanors The multi-pronged bill also makes it harder for some residents to obtain a gun permit if they committed crimes in other states. Currently, Connecticut residents who commit felonies and 11 'disqualifier misdemeanors' are not permitted to obtain a pistol or revolver permit. But residents who commit essentially the same misdemeanors in other states, and then move to Connecticut, are still able to obtain a permit. The bill would cover anyone convicted of those misdemeanors in another state during the past eight years; they would now be blocked from getting a pistol or revolver permit, lawmakers said. Under Connecticut's 'clean slate' law, convictions for certain misdemeanors are erased. But Connecticut's clean slate law does not apply to out-of-state convictions. In a longtime oversight, police and attorneys have somehow never noticed that out-of-state convictions were handled differently, officials said. Separately, attorneys for the families of victims of the shootings at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown in 2012 filed a civil lawsuit under a different provision of the law concerning unfair trade practices. The provisions in the bill would be in addition to the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, known as CUTPA. Striking workers With time running out in the regular legislative session that adjourns at midnight on June 4, some lawmakers are concerned about the length of the debates in the final days. When debates extend for long periods, other bills can get left without a vote because time runs out at midnight next Wednesday. Republicans were concerned Friday when the House debated on a highly controversial bill on awarding unemployment compensation to workers who have been on strike for at least 14 days. The measure passed by 87-57 with 13 moderate House Democrats against the bill by 5 p.m., which allowed time to debate other bills on transportation and motor vehicles. In a letter to all legislators, the parent company of East Hartford-based Pratt & Whitney expressed 'strong opposition' to the bill that would impact more than 4,300 unionized employees at Pratt and Colllins Aerospace operations at plants around the state. The letter stated that the median base pay under the new union contract 'is now over $51/hour, an increase of over 26% in the last five years.' The 'typical Pratt union-represented employee' likely 'will see annual earnings this year of over $140,000.' For years, the House has avoided debates in the final days on issues where the governor has pledged a veto, which Lamont has done. But House Speaker Matt Ritter, a Hartford Democrat, told reporters Friday that the striking workers' bill is a high priority for some members of the House Democratic caucus. 'This is the one exception,' Ritter said. ___ © 2025 Hartford Courant. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.
