Post-rape care was pioneered by feminist rape crisis centres working outside and beyond the apartheid state. On the transition to democracy they were drawn into the orbit of social welfare services and situated within an inequality constituted by a particular set of governmental arrangements, a residual labour regime, and a complex economy staked out by the philanthropy of giving and the logic of business calculation. These circumstances have combined to also make NGO services the temporary and contingent effect of power relations, divisions of labour, and local and global operations and practices. These are the outcome of very different rationalities of rule. Where the Global Fund manages, calculates, measures and targets, the Department of Social Development (DSD) dreams of territory to call its own and resents NGOs' intrusion onto the terrain of the state. One result of this desire for rule is an ongoing set of boundary disputes around the meaning of the state and who is recognised as bearing the gifts of governmental labours. A second is NGO workers' positioning as subordinate to DSD staff, accomplished through their lower pay and attenuated labour rights. These inequities area also spatially determined. Ultimately, this comes at the cost of post-rape care. Not only is its immaterial, affective labour inadequately compensated, but its vocational convictions are made a means of exploitation.