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

True in a way. They are terrified of being seen as bigoted. So openminded their brains fall out.

Also a lot of women I know think that they if they advocate for safe spaces, they are advocating for transwomen to be treated badly and discriminated against.
They can't see nuance. You can say that Eddie Izzard can dress any way he wants and change his name to Suzy, and yet not want him or other men to be in a rape crisis centre.

So what did you do? What are you doing?

I'm limited physically by disability and financially so I can't go to rallies / KJK events.

I do what I can.

And Frankly if you think JKR should have don more what did you expect her to do?

The author of the OD piece is a TRA, not Wings Over Scotland.

Bumping my post again to post this debunking of many of the claims of the Open Democracy article. Surprise surprise the author is a misogynistic TRA Scottish Green Party member.

wingsoverscotland.com/adam-ramsay-is-definitely-a-liar/

I've posted this sentiment before, but the whole TRA debacle has me convinced that the more academic education a person has, the more likely they are to believe stupid and illogical things.

www.ercc.scot/statement-from-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre-board-of-directors/

State of this! Makes it sound like Mridul is the one making the choices here! No! He should have been fired!

All of them need to go, the directors of Edinburgh and the directors of Scottish Rape Crisis who presided over this for the last few years need to be held accountable.

Honestly, I don’t really understand why. Does everyone who disagrees/makes a different point have to have a penis, or could they just be a woman with a different view.

I've been accused of being a male troll because I didn't agree with something in the Feminism forum. I was recently accused of posting in 'bad faith' (not toeing the party line).

MW is quite ambitious, was going into politics a few years ago but that didn't work out. Not going to want to fade into obscurity.

it's going to be interesting to see how the vacancy is a) advertised and b) filled

So glad to see this topic finally break into the main stream.

MW - for new Stonewall CEO? Isn't the current person a temp hire?

I've read the whole thread now and, honestly, I think it best to grey rock the derailers at this point. They've been engaged with in good faith and empathy, I don't see the same reflected back.

I wonder if Women's Aid will change their policies now? I know the staff have been hamstrung by "inclusivity" at the expense of the women they were set up to support.

@SleeplessInWherever

If you read their posts, they said quite clearly that they didn't have time to campaign for change and expected to be prioritised in a female rape center, despite stats showing men already have better access to support after rape and more options for support after rape.

They also said The system we have in our area is they are under 1 roof, my son had more important things to process than campaigning for male rights after his rape despite it being pointed out again that rape support centres came about because of women being raped and setting up these services to support women. It's a super example of minimising a womans experience and a good example of male privilege. They refuse to do the donkey work but expect the very best of the service.

I refer to them as they as whilst they are posing as female, I'm assuming they are male after their post where they said I can post where I like. As I said women’s rights appear on every other thread which to me just highlights how disingenuous they are and the real reason for their posts was because they feel women's rights feature too heavily on here. How can a woman feel this way?

And one thing about your post which really annoyed me is this

I do think, however, that when women disagree with a conversation about women’s issues, they’re very quick to either be called male, or be told they’re fawning handmaidens etc etc. The woman that disagree with female issues and pepper their posts with "not all men" "women are just as bad" and "but what about my son missing out" etc are NOT on the side of women. They are either defending men or are men so they need to be called what they are.

I don’t think that’s necessary, or helpful to having a reasonable conversation. I think it brings a hostility to it that isn’t necessary, and women just end up fighting each other. Interesting how you expect women to all rub along together because they are women. You thinking this is your upholding the patriarchy by insisting all women must be well behaved and not cause trouble in the ranks. It's staggering that you've come on to a discussion about an issue that directly affects women and rather than contributing to that, have attempted to pull up posters who you feel are hostile towards someone who is ignoring the erosion of women's rights. Why are you not more outraged at how women are being treated by men and other women who choose to support men?

Honestly, I don’t really understand why. Does everyone who disagrees/makes a different point have to have a penis, or could they just be a woman with a different view do you hand on heart, think this was an appropriate post to start on how men aren't treated fairly after a rape? Do you hand on heart believe that? If a woman believes men are disadvantaged and chooses to air this to make their point, on an issue that directly affects women, why can't anyone point this out? Why, again, as women, are we expected to keel quiet and not question anything that adds to the oppression of women?

Male apologists and hand maidens is what they are. The patriarchy is strong enough and big enough and mysoginistic behaviour is deeply ingrained in it, in society and in many women that we need to fight it. You don't need to do that for the patriarchy, you really don't.

And please, stop trying to say how women should behave and should be accepting of other women, despite their inflammatory behaviour.

OK, good luck with that. I'm sure you can resolve the VPN issue. I'm afraid I personally don't think this is a good use of my time. Each woman can put her efforts where she's feels is best.

They won't be able to ignore the fact that Wadhwa has gone.

There's no point with wikipedia, as soon as women put anything up it's undone by men. There are no standards and no integrity and it's a waste of women's time.

You only have to see the KJK page - despite the fact she self IDs as a woman's rights activist apparently she can't self ID and is branded anti-trans. Self Id is only for the blokes it seems.

I agree with your observation about women fighting each other. I think this happens a lot when people and institutions in positions of power inflict misogynist blows. It really saddens me. I feel it's not an accident either. Women divided have less power.

However I don't agree with tone policing women here for fighting for their rights.

I'm a survivor of rape. To know that some other women truly believe I ought to share intimate spaces with males makes me feel absolute anguish. Like one has been cast out rather than receiving the expected solidarity. Maybe it's just too hard for some women to accept another woman would wish this upon them?

I read posts here sometimes that totally disregard the trauma that other women lay bare. To be raped is to be disregarded, dehumanised, treated as an object. Being told your body needs to be present in certain spaces to make a male feel good about themselves is retraumatising because it is that same disregard all over again.

Don't forget most raped women don't get a court case and even less a conviction. We get dismissal, disbelief and a lifetime of shame, self blame and self limitations. I think blunt speaking in this one female dominated corner of the planet is to be expected.

To the mother of the son who was raped - I have a male family member who was also raped... as a child, by men.
He's always asked for a female therapist as he feels safer with a woman rather than a male. He would be terrified if he got into his session and was suddenly alone with a male.

There are less services for men because there are less men being raped. Rape services across the board are underfunded. But he made a good point about being able to have a choice about who you see if you are in that position. If a biological male was sitting in on his sessions he would feel traumatised. Should he have the choice of who he is able to see?

This thread is about women who are traumatised by what males have done to their bodies. And who should have the right to see female counsellors in safety without being duped or lied to or hounded out of a service supposedly created for them.

Does anyone know how Rape Crisis Scotland does define a woman? If it's "anyone who identifies as one" then are we back to square one?

I thought it was.

I have a question. The BBC article says: "In its recommendations, the review said the Edinburgh centre should take advice from Rape Crisis Scotland on the definition of "woman" and publicise this within the service."

Does anyone know how Rape Crisis Scotland does define a woman? If it's "anyone who identifies as one" then are we back to square one?

I am going to say this: I am an Asian woman with a similar background to MW. I also work in the social sector. I suspect he was able to get away with it for so long because he accused anyone who objected of being racist. Certainly on X and other places, the narrative is all "racist white feminists headed by JKR persecute innocent brown immigrant woman" This really enrages me.

Unfortunately, the social sector is very prone to polarised narratives and a sort of "oppression Olympics" for lack of a better word. MW had established himself as an object of sympathy because he was brown and "trans".

Lots of people objected and it has been all over twitter.

JK Rowling set up and funded an alternative.

Women DID do things. It is as a result that this man has had to leave.

“being absolutely outraged at being asked to start their own post about support”

That’s interesting. There was a similar reaction on another thread discussing the impact on women of unwanted / inappropriate male behaviour. A poster joined and tried to turn it into a discussion about their son and became argumentative at suggestions of starting their own thread.

And this is how the narrative is shaped.

This is how women's perfectly reasonable demands are recast as hate and bigotry.

The shocking thing is that so many have fallen for. I wonder how many will ultimately be able to admit that, even to themselves?

I don’t know the ins and outs of what the poster has done in her personal life to support their son.

I do think, however, that when women disagree with a conversation about women’s issues, they’re very quick to either be called male, or be told they’re fawning handmaidens etc etc.

I don’t think that’s necessary, or helpful to having a reasonable conversation. I think it brings a hostility to it that isn’t necessary, and women just end up fighting each other.

Honestly, I don’t really understand why. Does everyone who disagrees/makes a different point have to have a penis, or could they just be a woman with a different view.