..To be mortified at the treatment of rape victims at the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre?

I found this article from 2021 https://thecritic.co.uk/unclean/ , which seems to strongly support suggestions up thread that Wadhwa was very quick to label anyone who questioned what was happening as racist and right wing, and that this was an excellent way to shut up dissenters. Framing raped women as privileged is an especial low but also:

There is a breath-taking cruelty in the framing of women who have been raped as “privileged” and, as Wadhwa went on to stress, that some (meaning trans identified men) are “more marginalised”. The blithe dismissal of women who have been raped or abused was a recurring theme of the talk. What was also sensationally revealed is that women in Scotland are self-excluding from Rape Crisis from fear of encountering male people who identify as trans. As Wadhwa explained:

You have large groups of survivors, some are not using our services because they see us as trans inclusive and feeling that they may be exposed to… er… to an issue that they are not prepared to deal with.

Whilst there is clear obfuscation by Wadhwa about the “issue” survivors are concerned about, it is abundantly clear that what those women who have been raped wish to avoid, is a man, however that man may identify. They are tragically holding back from the help and the services they desperately need because of this CEO and the decisions made about including trans-identified men in a service for female survivors of sexual violence.

That was in 2021. Wadhwa knew why raped women were self excluding from ERCS, and the validation of gender ideology was more important than their needs. I do not believe that Brindley and RCS weren't aware of what was happening, Wadhwa was talking about it in public. They should all go.

Current and past directors of Edinburgh Rape Crisis

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC291742/officers

Current and past directors of Scottish Rape Crisis

find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/SC258568/officers

How do we find out how many complaints RCS had received about MW? Can a FOI be done?

He claims to be a feminist and yet he hates women.

These misogynistic pricks make me so angry but I actually feel more contempt for the fawning penis pandering handmaidens who facilitate this BS at the expense of their own sex.

Oh 21st August 2021 RCS had this to say, in response to the outcry following the 'reframe their trauma' interview with Wadhwa:

Women only spaces are a core principle of the Rape Crisis movement and upheld through our National Service Standards (read these here). These spaces include women with a diverse range of lived experience and views, including trans women and girls.

Now, the same RCS are doing a surprised Pikachu face that ERCS didn't have women only spaces for actual women. The statement also had a trigger warning at the start for 'abusive tweets'. The abusive tweets quoted being:

'Anything to say to that you fucking cowards? Or are you too busy searching for your missing spines'

'We already know what they are. A bloody disgrace and betrayers of women. They crawl'

'(RCS) is now an abusive organisation caping for fetishistic men, & using women as validation props'

'What the fuck, why do you hate women so goddamn much? Do you get off on ignoring the please (sic) of raped women? Does it excite you somehow?'

Now those tweets may have been strongly worded, but they weren't inaccurate.

Brindley and RCS absolutely 100% knew what Wadhwa was, and what was happening at ERCS, and that women objected, and what women were objecting to, and they still thought they were right and the women who didn't like it were wrong.

Brindley and the rest put their luxury beliefs over the needs of raped women they were meant to serve. They all deserve to go.

State of this. He's a massive hulking bloke! No one who has ever seen an Indian woman would think this was an Indian woman!

Of course they knew he was male. Indian women do not look like him. But he was able to somehow conceal and confuse and misdirect because he used racism as a shield.

I agree. He got favourable treatment because they wanted to show how "progressive" they are. 🙄

Sorry they are not trans. Should have said Transwomen are women zealots.

I don't believe they didn't know he was male as he had publicly admitted to lying to get a post with a Rape Crisis centre, in Fife ,I think. On the contrary, I believe he may have been appointed because he was male. Remember, both Maggie Chapman and Sandy Brindley are trans zealots.

Blatant liars. These people will do anything to save their own skin.

I have zero patience with all these female TRA who met MW and claim not to have been able to tell he was male

Indeed and surely it would be a concern that someone in a position of power would be so unaware of what’s going on around her that she could possibly be considered up to the job.

Though I bet she’s fully aware of any TRA flag waving support - selective awareness I feel

Well if she’s unaware that MW is self identified as a woman, unaware of the “reframe their trauma” interview, unaware of the bullying, and unaware of the opening of Beira’s Place and the refusal to refer women there she’s has spent the last few years with her fingers in her ears singing lalala I can’t hear you.

As has been pointed out, it was well known that Mridhul Wadhwa was male when he was appointed to ERCC and was supported by Sandy Brindley and Maggie Chapman ,even after his infamous " reframe your trauma" interview.
Daily Record take on it .
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/rape-crisis-scotland-boss-unaware-33670476

We used to be kind. Until they tried to force us to #bekind.

We are over that, chaps.

It places emotional labour onto service users at a time which it may be not fair to do that.

Oh of course it's totally inapproriate in the the setting. My point was that Roz's offence wasn't even saying 'that woman's a man' - it was outing (actually, merely enquiring whether she could out) a woman as a woman.

I didn't mind a male HCP doing an ECG for me; it didn't worry me. But I feel that if someone might not like to have an ECG which involves being partly naked being done by a member of the opposite sex, they ought to be offered the option, (and indeed, as far as I remember I was on that occasion). I trusted the person involved to do his job professionally and not make me have to scream and hit him hard between the legs with a heavy walking stick... Not all women would share that trust.

What I very much mind is being lied to by someone pretending to be female when he clearly and obviously is not. If he isn't even sure which sex he is, how can I possibly trust his judgement about anything else? Will he in fact be capable of doing his job properly? That's the sort of doubt you really don't need when you are having a test whose results may be life-altering.

I think this feeling is relevant to that particular lie being told in any situation where a woman is vulnerable, even before the practicalities of previous trauma have to be considered. It's a matter of trust, or rather of a lack of trust.

I think it's fair to a point but we are also expecting survivors to play the mental gymnastics of validating identities as male, which still might be wholly inappropriate in the context of a rape counselling session tbh. It places emotional labour onto service users at a time which it may be not fair to do that.

If we are talking about survivor centred care we really should be mindful of this.

Dont forget Roz Adams did not object to the inclusion of TW at ERCC. Her complaint, and the subsequent bullying was because she believed a service user should be told the truth. ie that she might be offered support by a TW. And the ERCC decided this breach of the TW privacy was more important than ensuring a victim of rape got the support she wanted

It wasn't even that. The service user was offered a counsellor who was a non-binary identifying woman with a non-female name, and Roz simply wanted to reassure her that she would be seeing an actual woman.

The offended rape counsellor at the centre of this case was a "non binary" woman, which a surprising number of these cases centre around. The survivor would have been able to have female support but she couldn't be told that.

My point being that certain circumstances mean that disclosure of sex is something that should be non negotiable and there should be full transparency.

That would cover whether a service is actually properly single sex or you might come across situations where that was not the case and it has to be up front and allow people to make informed choices about.