Navarro, while appreciate your comments on this subject and your view points the fact is there is/was some kind of potential category grouping of Rape Victims. It was not made up by me or anyone else, and your comment makes it sound as though it was. Although a few have kept saying the category doesn't exist it did exist enough so for me to actually go to it, and go thru from it by way of links onto 2 profiles of my own 1st cousin ancestors which were infact Labeled with this Rape Victims red words . The red-tags (which i'm being told are not actually tags in the tag puter world of wikitree definition were non-the-less still very red and still very much on the 2 profiles in question, and still were very much attached to both profiles with links from this potential sub-category within the Categories section. the red words have been removed and I am grateful for their removal.
I will repeat this one last time for those that seem to feel this is white washing history... Place the crimes on the criminals, they did the crimes, not the ones whom the crimes were committed against. The deed belongs to the one who committed the action, the reciever of the crime was not a willing participant, not like someone purchasing a piece of land or pelts of furs, or buying a house etc. Stating the person was a victim of a specific crime is one thing, to place the details of that crime on the victims page is just genealogically unnecessary, there is no reason why descrete link(s) to additional information available all over the net cannot be added within the sources for those that want to know more. We add links to source evidence all the time what makes these facts different? the violence? all the more reason to add links instead of descriptive details.
I for one would like to be able to share these family genealogies with not only my adult children but with my gr.children as they grow up. But i don't want to have to worry as i come onto a page and start reading to them..."ohmygosh..nevermind gr.son/daughter your are too young for this because of unnecessary descriptives on profiles.
I began my profile on wikitree because of the original belief of this site, one profile for each person, connecting all to see how we all relate and interconnect. but over the years it has become more about labeling people by thier actions, nationalities, notability, crimes, etc, maybe the intial reasons behind this sites beginnings have just been lost, i dunno, i hope not, because i think connecting all should be the most important part of wikitree, it is what at least brought me here anyway.
To those that think I'm whitewashing, unless you have walked in the shoes of a victim of a particular crime, you may not fully understand the impacts of not only the crimes on past victims or their families, living or dead, or on those who have walked in similar shoes and may stumble onto a genealogical page while reading their own family histories here on the wikitree, history is good and bad yes, but genealogy and history are not exactly the same, where do we draw the lines on acceptable genealogical displays of evidence?
ok I'm done. Thank you to all that helped with the issues today, and to all who have given opinions on both sides, thank you for taking the time to speak