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

Specifically I think fear of being called a bigot. Calling women who wants single sex services hateful bigots has been very effective in shutting up any dissent.

And Wadhwa seems to have been pretty quick to accuse those who questioned him or his job role as head of a rape service racists - there are video clips of him saying that those who don't chant the mantra TWAW are also racist and bigoted in other ways. People really fear being called a racist or being called far right.

Add to that a board of trustees who mostly are young, inexperienced, white and well educated, and there's a good chance they'll fall over themselves to show that they're inclusive intersectional right thinking non racist non transphobes. Wadhwa isn't stupid. He was top of the oppression tree, as PP said, being brown and trans. Anyone disagreeing with him, on anything, must be a hateful bigot. That's where we get, when identity trumps reality.

Why don't more women fight harder? Speak up sooner? Because women's lives have been destroyed. Yes, the resilient ones like Maya F and Jo P (appropriately) have risen from the ashes to fight again. What we don't see of course are the ones who haven't.

The ones who have lost jobs, their homes, their lives, their financial security, their peace of mind. Whose children have been harmed. We know they exist.

Whistleblowers are treated appallingly in general.

Even when people have won ETs the amounts awarded are a pisstake. You have massive institutions with deep (often taxpayer funded) pockets against women crowdfunding mostly in £5, £10s. Hundreds of thousands in legal costs and then they get awarded something like 20k after a year or more of not working. There are a hell of a lot of people who would be on the streets if they couldn't work for a year.

Justice is a joke, because we have these rulings and nothing changes. Normal people on normal wages with mortgages can't afford to do that. There are stories, if you look, of women who HAVE fought who've almost lost their homes.

Gillian Phillip had to become a lorry driver after being dumped by her agent as an author: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12364265/Author-Gillian-Philip-dumped-agent-support-JK-Rowling-says-women-terrified-speaking-trans-debate-fears-theyll-lose-jobs-targeted-cancel-culture.html

In some cases the TRAs have threatened children by direct action or doxxing or by weaponising the police (See what happened to Caroline Farrow, Marion Millar, Kate Scottow, Posie Parker). There's a threat to making their parents lose their jobs too. Lots of women in this fight have dependent children. The impact on them of being made homeless would be huge. Most women have caring duties and are responsible for others. When we speak out we put those others at risk too, and the TRAs know that and use it, so of course up to now many women shut up. Is it cowardly to protect your family? I'm not sure to be honest. We all do what we can within our own circumstances.

This is why SEEN in the workplace is so important - so there is pushback, but it does need to be safety in numbers as much as possible to overturn this ideology. The vast majority see it for the bonkers, abusive, unscientific bollocks it is.

She spoke up a while after the CEO implemented the changes. I didn't hear of them not going along with it up to that point.

She probably thought that it was being kind to offer support to traumatised trans people without realising, like so many of us in the beginning that, that meant women's rights to same sex services would be undermined

Sky news now finally reporting on it.

https://news.sky.com/story/edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-chief-executive-mridul-wadhwa-resigns-after-report-into-failings-13213828

She spoke up a while after the CEO implemented the changes. I didn't hear of them not going along with it up to that point.

https://unherd.com/newsroom/rape-crisis-centre-ceo-resigns-over-failure-to-protect-single-sex-spaces/

Absolutely. #bekind only works one way with people like that.

Probably fear after seeing what happened to the one woman brave enough to speak up.

Creating a culture of fear is absolutely fundamental to how people like Wadhwa operate.

They post in a very similar style to someone who posts on every thread (with a different username) about violence against women. They always have a story about how a male relative was a victim, or they claim to be a female victim of another female's abuse, and do their best to derail.

I can see that but all of them? All the support workers and therapists went along with retraumatising rape victims, allowed an unqualified man into counselling sessions and turned away survivors.

The one support worker who didn't toe the line was victimised and bullied, unlikely it was just the CEO bullying her.

The whole organisation was toxic and everyone was unprofessional and not acting in the client's best interests. It's appalling.

I genuinely don't believe that poster is a female, or that such a son exists. It's a male MRA/incel getting off on upsetting women.

🎯

Fear, I'd imagine

Fear of losing their job
Fear of being scapegoat
Fear of public ridicule / attention

Same reason many of us feel unable to speak publically about our concerns

It’s outrageous to refuse women’s support to traumatised women, and only people utterly devoid of empathy or humanity would think otherwise.

I can understand why the CEO went along with it as it obviously benefited him but why did the other staff, who presumably wanted the best for their clients, go along with it?

This has been public knowledge for a long time, and all over Twitter / X for sure. I have been seething for just as long. Women have rape crisis centres because they set them up, because the vast majority of survivors are women rather than men. It’s outrageous to refuse women’s support to traumatised women, and only people utterly devoid of empathy or humanity would think otherwise.

Two months into the job, Wadhwa said:

Sexual violence happens to bigoted people as well… If you bring unacceptable beliefs that are discriminatory in nature [into the centre], we will begin to work with you on your journey of recovery from trauma. But please also expect to be challenged on your prejudices… If you have to reframe your trauma, I think it is important as part of that reframing… you also have to rethink your relationship with prejudice. Otherwise, you can’t really, in my view, recover from trauma, and I think that’s a very important message that I am often discussing with my colleagues… Because, you know, to me, therapy is political.

By his own admission, he made therapy as a political tool to enforce adherence of women to his ideology. This was deliberate. He was deliberately targetting vulnerable rape victims to spread his political agenda. Two months in. Thats why he wanted the job.

And on this thread we have posters saying:
I'm not really comfortable with referring to a trans woman, who has lived as a woman for many many years, as a man. It seems unnecessarily hateful, and detracts from what otherwise could be valid points being made.

It is very very very much a point of relevance. It is key to why he took the job. To further the political agenda of males like him. Not to centre women. He said therapy is political - he was actively targeting the therapy of raped women.

Not once during his tenure at ERCC did Wadhwa centre women. Its strategy document mentioned women ONCE. ONCE. This is a rape crisis charity. Reminding everyone that 94% of rape victims are female according to police Scotland in this context.

I have made a long list of the acts of sexism which worked against the rights of women - both service users and employees during Wadhwa's tenure.
You can read it in a post here at 11:56am:
https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5163926-surely-mridul-wadhwa-has-to-go-now-report-into-ercc-out?page=9&reply=138256811

I am not hateful. This man is.

Oh well. How could it work out when a male CEO of a Rape Crisis Centre has a political tantrum about an amendment to a bill to allow female people (and male) to choose if they want a same sex medical examiner to conduct rape examinations.

I mean, that alone should have sent ERCC board members a very clear message. But it didn't.

That Wadwha left one political party because they supported the amendment to go to another political party says everything that you also need to know about the party Wadwha joined.

Seriously, a CEO of a RCC that demanded that rape victims should accept a male who said they were female as a medical examiner to conduct after rape assessment is a huge red flag. Male or female.

That this person also expressed interest in whether female people orgasm during rape or not, and seems fascinated by this, and told female rape victims publicly they had to reframe their trauma to accept male people who believe they are female in single sex provisions had a series of red flags that should have been shining like a fucking beacon.

Calling the act of correctly sexing a male person 'hateful' is trying to shame others for not complying with your own choices around language. And it is also highly relevant when discussing the actions of this individual, Wadwha.

And if you seek to shame any person on this thread for correctly sexing this male person, one who has now shown the world just how harmful such an ideological view can be when laws are formed where 'gender' is placed at the same priority to sex, please understand that no one has to comply to your philosophical belief. No one. Not one of us.

And we have recently been shown just how meaningless the language that some people demand is and how it IS based on philosophical belief. Why?

Because to be a person with a transgender identity is not based on having gender dysphoria. We have been told this now by professional academics as well as trans people themselves. There is only a rare group that may have gender dysphoria at all.

Therefore, the only commonality for people with transgender identities is that their philosophical belief.

Meaning no one needs to comply with another persons philosophical belief. No matter how kind or respectful that person who is trying to shame you into complying tells you that it is to use the preferred language, it is someone who is demanding that you support their own philosophical belief.

You are totally free to choose to base your own language on using the sometimes centuries old established meanings of words and the established protocols of language that are based around sex. Not someone's identity. Or you can choose to base your own language around someone's identity.

But you don't get to shame those who choose differently.

In addition, the situation with the male boxers has shown us that the word 'cis' is also meaningless, and always was, and based on someone's philosophical belief.

In fact, because we were reminded that 'cis' means any person 'assigned' female at birth, this also includes those male people who have been incorrectly registered as female. And I am talking about the male people who have differences of sex development where their bodies are capable of processing the testosterone that their testes produce.

What this means is that there is now no words to describe a unique group of female people that reliably means just those female people, either pre or post puberty, who have bodies that are female sexed.

Cis is a meaningless word.

Using preferred language around describing someone is based on someone else's demand to believe in their philosophical belief. It is purely up to you.

What you don't get to do, is to shame others for not supporting your belief if they do not choose to.

Very little of the whole trans debacle has anything to do with men wanting to be considered women. It's all about having the power to dominate and bully and that's the same for their female handmaidens. Having power over others makes them feel good.

These trans women likely failed to succeed or dominate in our, still, highly male centered society. But discovered that by wearing a dress and faking period pains they could bully and manipulate an awful lot of people, and they really liked that.

Sounds like he (that particular poster) has been doing the rounds of any thread about rape or abuse of women.

The level and standard of support for women is to be told that they have to accept being supported by a male. Many will then go on to have a significant mental health crisis due to the 'care' they received, this will often be diagnosed as EUPD (very similar symptoms to PTSD but wildly different empathy for sufferers) they will go on to receive further low standard mental health care. Because of their diagnosis they may not be believed in any DV reports.

By that standard the bar is very low. If your sons only complaint is a scheduling issue I'd say he's getting a much higher standard of care than women.

I am so sorry for what your son has gone through. I hope that he or you feel able to campaign for meaningful change for male rapeseed victims. Please don't campaign to reduce the shitty support that women currently receive. That isn't a win for anyone.

I genuinely don't believe that poster is a female, or that such a son exists. Its a male MRA/incel getting off on upsetting women.

Well done @TorghunKhan fantastic work.