Surely Mridul Wadhwa has to go now? Report into ERCC out.

Fucking hell - she really does come across as the type to run over her own grandmother if she thought it would get her off the hook

quite clearly nothing is ever her fault

Surely anyone working at a RC knows that you cannot speak for other women, including survivors speaking for other women, as each woman's experience is personal to them.

This is the epitome of coercive behaviour.

I wonder if that's because she's not a spoilt, demented bully? Just a thought...

JK Rowling skewering the gross justifications on X
"I voted against Brexit. If Neil (the doctor to whom I'm married) came home from work and told me he'd lectured a vulnerable Brexiteer patient during treatment about how misguided they were, I'd divorce him in the belief that I'd inadvertently married a narcissistic sadist."
x.com/jk_rowling/status/1834588357898178565?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Jo Bartosch in Spiked

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/09/14/the-trans-activist-who-destroyed-a-rape-crisis-centre/

I was able to read it by opening it in incognito.

Statement from Wadhwa after 'The Guilty Feminist' podcast, 2021:

<a class="break-all" href="https://web.archive.org/web/20210812173358/edinburghrapecrisis.wixsite.com/ercc/post/statement" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">https://web.archive.org/web/20210812173358/edinburghrapecrisis.wixsite.com/ercc/post/statement

'...it is also critical that we act as proactive bystanders and lead by example as an organisation dedicated to equality and human rights. If what we see/hear from someone is clearly prejudiced and we are not responding to their urgent support need it is also part of our role to provide a space to explore and challenge this, in as kind a way as possible. In order for us to create a safe space for survivors it also needs to be a safe space for staff and volunteers, where everyone feels valued, safe and respected. That must be a priority if we are to be an ethical service provider for all survivors using our service, as well as an employer, taking seriously our role in creating a fairer society; this would be the case for any prejudice experienced be it racism, classism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, or transphobia. '
...
'There are multiple staff and volunteers in our centre who are migrants and women of colour and across their careers they, and I, have experienced racism and bigotry, and too often we have overlooked this across the violence against women sector. If we want to be a truly feminist organisation, we too need to be an anti-racist organisation, we need to be an organisation that stands up to homophobia, ableism, classism and yes, transphobia. This is the bigotry I referred to in the podcast. '

Good old Wikipedia, it's such a truthful and reliable resource.

Ereshkigalangcleg · Today 09:35

"FWIW I don't think that's anywhere near "maximally other side" or that it's going too far at all. I don't even think YFNS's version is maximally anti-Rowling (and support something like it). Maximally anti-Rowling would be something like:^

“Beira's Place is a transphobic organization founded and exclusively funded by well-known TERF J.K. Rowling. It falsely describes itself as a "woman only service" but does not hire or provide services to transgender women.

Well, that seems utterly detached from reality, I have to say.

**
Is there any behaviour so egregious that if committed by a person working for a charity they end up personally liable? e.g. They personally can be sued, held liable, bear any financial penalties, it's not the charity that ends up on the hook.
Put another way is there any behaviour so bad that it removes the shield of being protected by the organisation?

interesting question! Trustees carry ultimate accountability in any charity and they have insurance (well if it’s a well run charity) but that doesn’t cover them if they’re negligent

Given the Scottish Government's continued funding to ERCC, I would suggest that anyone who lives in the Edinburgh and Lothians writes to their MSP's to ask what kind of inquiry will be taking place to ensure that such failings do not continue/happen again.

The website www.writetothem.com is a useful tool for contacting your elected representatives.

Julie Bindels take on this from the Spectator

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/how-trans-ideologues-corrupted-rape-crisis-centres/

Any legal people here able to answer a question for a layperson please?

Is there any behaviour so egregious that if committed by a person working for a charity they end up personally liable? e.g. They personally can be sued, held liable, bear any financial penalties, it's not the charity that ends up on the hook.
Put another way is there any behaviour so bad that it removes the shield of being protected by the organisation?

Same question for organisations like the police. Is there any behaviour so bad that the police officer ends up personally facing the consequences?

I think I know a part of the answer to the police question. In the USA the term is "qualified immunity", which when the rubber hits road some police officers in hot water like to pretend in court the word "qualified" isn't there and it's just "immunity". Police officers get tried in court and sentenced when their behaviour crosses the line too far. High profile example : Derek Chauvin murder conviction for killing George Floyd.

Good work Red.

ERCC Accounts 2023

Just had a quick look at the last set of accounts for the year ending 31st March 2023. I'm going to stick a few bits up because when the next one goes up this current information might evaporate. This is for the MN memory bank and search facility. I think this is going to be worth checking up on, some months down the line from now to see just what the fall out has been.

Things of note:

1. Legal and professional fees.
   In 2022 these were £11,363. In 2023 they had risen to £41,897. I have a sneaking suspicion they may rise in 2024.

2. Most of the income the charity has is restricted in what it can be spent on. It had £68,815 from donations and £1250 from other income (not detailed in terms of what this actually is). This appears to be the only income they recieve that is not ringfenced for a specific purpose. In total the current unrestricted funds minus current liabilities is recorded as £195,339. I think this is the main (possibly the only) pot of money that legal fees and pay outs will be allowed to come out of.

I don't think thats a huge amount all things considered. I think its worth keeping a close eye on.

3. Staff costs 2022 - Salaries and wages: £844,648 2023 - Salaries and wages: £1,164,060 No employee has emoluments of more that £60,000 during either the current or previous year.

Again, eyes on this. Some things can't be hidden.

When are they going to update their website.

How can they have this logo saying they adhere to rape crisis national service standards after THAT report, which says they are still not there?!

I'm just reading it. It's a parallel universe.

Under the heading harassment it says:
On 13 August 2021, the Scottish Green Party issued a statement in solidarity with Mridul Wadhwa after the abuse, denouncing the spread of misinformation about the crisis centres and resulting abuse which posed a threat to survivors and workers at the centre.

This is somewhat useful as it puts in stone who was not paying attention.

Especially as it then later says:
In September 2024, Wadhwa resigned after a review commissioned by Rape Crisis Scotland found that she "did not understand the limits on her role's authority, when to refer decisions to trustees and failed to set professional standards of behaviour". The review found that the Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre had not protected women-only spaces, had not put survivors first, and had not followed national service standards.

They can't ignore the report and resignation and it's pretty glorious really. And really jars in contrast with the previous text.

MW's wiki page seems to have been updated overnight with a long, detailed (and with comprehensive citations) explanation of the ERCC debacle.

Maya Forstater succinctly sums it all up:

Gender ideology turns organisations that are meant to help women into organisations that allow and enable abuse.

Therapy being viewed as a political opportunity will tend to do that.

I'm sick of baseless JKR bashing by brain dead halfwits. As much as I don't want to give it oxygen, this gem (from a male regular on this site) on another thread yesterday just makes me wonder do they actually believe what they post, is it 'fashionable' to go along with the TRA party line? They can never articulate what is it that she's actually said and done that's so heinous apart from not allowing men into women's spaces. One resident TRA admitted not reading ANY of her essays FFS -

'Ah yes, JKR who pretends to promote womens rights, yet reliably stays quiet when women are attacked, raped or murdered, very quiet on abortion and the reduction of women rights in the ME too'.

Of course this 'gentleman' didn't return when presented with quite a few things Joanne has done to help attacked and raped women. Because you know, she's got to comment on every instance of VAWG to the twats on Twitter 🙄.

What gets me, is these men would happily enable a woman to go without trauma support if they could force it.

It's a useful lesson.

Human rights are about always enabling rights and access to health care without prejudice and discrimination. In the UK were forged out of the ashes of atrocities and scandals that allowed abuse and death due to ideological beliefs.

We are seeing calls for this to be overturned in the name of 'progress'.

Thanks for the recommendation @WinterTrees I will check that out. I am a survivor and will bear your comment in mind but generally ok with drama around these issues.

'Saying she's bad for funding a rape crisis centre looks bad' - well, yes. It makes you look like the angry woman-hater that you are, mate. And since your 'very bad reasons' are actually the exclusion of other angry woman-haters from a place where raped women go to be protected, supported, listened to, understood and cared for you can just fuck the fuck off.

I watched a cinema screening of Prima Facie with Jodie Comer this week, so my tolerance for this misogynist shitshow is just fucking fumes now. If you get a chance to see it and you feel you could withstand the emotional onslaught (I'd say not for survivors of serious sexual assault - my own SA experience is lesser) and process the rage, I'd recommend you go.