Inclusion Is a Practice, Not a Product Line: Rahma Utami, Suarise and a Reader with a Psychosocial Disability
A review of public posts by the X account @rahmaut, whose owner I understand to be Rahma Utami, founder of the Indonesian social enterprise Suarise, set beside the mission Suarise states. It judges statements and consistency, not the person or the quality of Suarise's work. I am a party to a dispute with her; see Disclosure, limits and right of reply.
RAHMAT WIBOWO | 13 OCTOBER 2026
Why I am writing this
I am a person with a psychosocial disability. I live with bipolar disorder, among other conditions. I am also in a dispute with Rahma Utami, who founded Suarise, an Indonesian social enterprise for digital accessibility and disability inclusion.
Those two facts are why I looked closely at how a founder of a disability-inclusion company speaks in public. I want to be careful about what that does and does not prove, so this post sticks to what the screenshots show, what they do not show, and a fair question: does the practice match the mission?
Who Rahma Utami and Suarise are, from their own material
Per the site screenshots (captured 13 October 2026), Suarise describes itself as "an Indonesia-based social enterprise focused on enabling digital accessibility and disability inclusion through advocacy, accessibility audit and consultancy, technical capacity building, community engagement, and cross-sector collaboration." Its home page says "Business performance and social impact in one leap through digital disability inclusion" and credits the Kotex #SheCan Fund Indonesia. It also carries a notice that the site meets WCAG 2.0 and is being upgraded to WCAG 2.2, which I count in its favour.
A November 2023 webinar poster, shared by the @rahmaut account itself, names Rahma Utami as Founder of Suarise and Digital Accessibility Specialist, speaking on inclusive and accessible design for people with disabilities. That post, together with the addressee of my legal notice, is why I treat @rahmaut as hers. I have not verified account ownership independently.
One scope point: the services visible on the screenshots mention people with visual impairment and companies. They do not say whether psychosocial disability is within Suarise's work. I do not claim that it is.
The public record
All translations below are mine and loose. Dates are read from the screenshots in day/month/year.
6 November 2023: "digging your own graveyard"
Beneath a post that joked about Ibam being "confronted by that kid", @rahmaut wrote: "Yawla dek, digging your own graveyard. Udah sah bisa dibawa pake UU ITE ini anaknya" ("Oh dear, kid, you're digging your own graveyard. This kid can now properly be taken in under the ITE Law."). I understand "that kid" to be me. The screenshot does not name me; that reading is mine, and my legal notice cites this post.
Six days later, the same account promoted the Suarise inclusive-design webinar above. I note the sequence; I draw no conclusion from it beyond that.
10 May 2026: "Sakit ni orang"
Two posts: "Sakit ni orang" ("This person is sick") and "Keliatan dia ngerendahin cewe yg kaya gimana. Berani emang sama gw?" ("Looks like he looks down on women somehow. Dares to go up against me?"). Other accounts replied with "Awas kak masuk leaderboard nya dia" and "Sikat kakkkk" ("Go get him").
The screenshot does not show the post being answered, so I cannot show from it alone that "this person" is me. My notice cites a series of May 2026 posts, and I read these as part of it. In everyday Indonesian, calling a person sakit ("sick") usually means twisted or deranged. If it was aimed at me, it uses sickness as an insult, and I live with an illness. If it was aimed at someone else, then this particular post says nothing about me.
28 August 2026: the notice
On 28 August 2026 I emailed Somasi Hukum No. 013/SOMASI/RW/VIII/2026 to Rahma Utami (via the @rahmaut account, with a secretariat address in copy). It concerns conduct I describe as "repeated in two different periods: a post in November 2023 and a series of posts in May 2026 that attack my dignity and good name." This is my own one-sided demand. It is not a finding by any court, police or authority, and this post does not say which law was broken.
30 August 2026: her public reactions
She wrote: *"Ini sekertariat ia itb emang kurang kerjaan mau nanggepi alumni yg kaya gini? Hadeh hadehz. baru bangun dapet surat somasi" ("Does the ITB alumni secretariat really have nothing better to do than deal with alumni like this? Sigh. *just woke up and got a legal notice").
And: "Pengumuman; GW DISOMASI. Ini yg para dikirimin disomasi kaga ada grup wasap/discord/tele apa? Kebiasaan deh tekbro kaga berserikat kalo gada" (roughly "Announcement: I'VE BEEN SERVED A LEGAL NOTICE. Don't the people who get these have a WhatsApp, Discord or Telegram group? Typical techbros, never banding together"). Later captures show it at 16 to 17 thousand views.
Receiving a notice is frustrating, and she is entitled to say so publicly. I record these posts because they are part of the thread. Under the second one, other people replied, including one who asked whether the sender had long been "problematic" and one who suggested punching "their face". Those are other people's words and I do not attribute them to her.
20 September 2026: "ngerusuh di threads"
Beneath a post joking about the energy of Threads users, she wrote: "Gw di forward ama bbrp orang pas dia ngerusuh di threads wkwkw" ("A few people forwarded it to me when he was causing a ruckus on Threads lol"). The screenshot does not name "he"; I read it as me and say so as my reading.
What I am not saying
- I am not saying Suarise's accessibility work is bad. Whether an audit is sound or a WCAG recommendation is right stands or falls on its own. A person's conduct does not make their expertise false. Treating it that way would be the mistake I criticised in Laughter Is Not a Rebuttal.
- I am not saying she knew my diagnosis. The screenshots do not show that she did. I do not know what she knew.
- I am not saying every post above was aimed at me. I have marked where the target is my reading.
- I am not saying she may not criticise me, or be angry about a legal notice. She may. Disagreement and anger are not the issue.
- I am not saying "she is a hypocrite" as a conclusion. Calling someone a hypocrite does not answer a legal notice, and I do not use it as one.
The fair question
What I do say is narrower. A founder whose public identity is disability inclusion invites a reasonable expectation from the disabled people she says she serves: that her own public language will not use illness as an insult, and will not mock a person who is, or may be, one of those people. That expectation holds whether or not she knew about me, because words like "sick" and "crazy" used as insults land on everyone who lives with those conditions.
This is where an inclusion company is different from other firms. The mission is not a product line that sits beside the founder's personal conduct. It is a claim about how people with disabilities are treated, so the way its founder talks in public is evidence about whether the claim is lived.
Five questions I would welcome answers to
- If "Sakit ni orang" was aimed at me, would she retract or clarify it?
- Does Suarise have a code of conduct, or language guidance, that covers founders' personal public speech, including the use of illness words as insults?
- Does Suarise's scope include psychosocial disability, and if so, how?
- Which specific parts of my notice does she dispute: the facts, the reading of the posts, or the law?
- Would she be open to a mediated conversation about the posts, separate from the legal notice?
Evidence gallery
The folder I was given contained more captures than the sections above use. They are listed here so readers can check everything. Some are the same post captured at different times, which shows the view counts changing.
- Further captures of the November 2023 reply:
- Further captures of the ITB secretariat post:
- A 29 August 2026 post by @rahmaut quoting a doctor's post about how men respond to problems, captioned "Ternyata saya laki2 in mind" ("Turns out I'm a man in mind"). I see no connection to me and do not analyse it:
- Further replies by @rahmaut in other threads ("Welkom to the club") whose context is not shown. Not analysed:
- A reply by @rahmaut, ":))) kenapa jadi kelas berbayarr" ("why did it become a paid class"), under a post about being served notices by me. Not analysed:
Disclosure, limits and right of reply
- Disclosure. I am the sender of Somasi Hukum No. 013/SOMASI/RW/VIII/2026 and a party to this dispute. I live with bipolar disorder, among other conditions, and I chose to say so here. I also publish other case records on this site, and some readers will find my notices aggressive. I have tried to quote and date rather than characterise.
- Limits. This review reads screenshots only. I have not verified account ownership independently, and I could not always see the post a reply was answering. I have not assessed the substance of my own notice, any law, or Suarise's work. Translations are mine and approximate. Posts by other people appear only as context and are not attributed to her.
- Right of reply. Rahma Utami, Suarise, and anyone quoted may send a correction or response. A well-founded correction will be added to this post, and I will say plainly where I was wrong.
If anything here has distressed you, step away and talk to someone you trust or a professional. Emergency line in Indonesia: 119. This post is not medical advice.