Minister for Equalities invites Mridul Wadhwa to meeting to discuss LGBT+ hate crime

Who is the person in the orange polo neck jumper please?
I don't recognise them?
MW stands out
And the fragrant "Helen"

Olivia Bailey seems to have remembered which sex does the bulk of the childcare

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/sponsored_discussions/5502971-minister-for-children-and-families-olivia-bailey-wants-to-hear-from-you

Sonia Sodha has written about the meeting:

https://soniasodha.substack.com/p/how-is-the-government-so-useless

'The evidence is mounting that while Starmer talks a good game on defending women’s spaces, services and sport, ministers are not committed to the hard graft of ensuring the law of the land as interpreted by the Supreme Court is upheld by employers and businesses. This is the government trying to keep gender-critical women onside, while not taking on the party activists and union funders who continue to back the sexist idea that men should be able to identify into female-only services. It is cynical and insulting.

Some might argue that this is only one area of women’s rights, and that the government’s poor record here is outweighed by positive developments in other areas. It is true that some of the government’s proposals to tackle male violence against women and girls are sound, such as its plans to provide rape victims with dedicated legal support during the criminal process. But having a clear view on what a woman is, and being prepared to defend single-sex spaces against entryism from men who demand admittance, is not some optional add-on to a women’s rights policy. It is a fundamental test of whether a government understands why there’s a need for single-sex spaces in the first place. A test this government has failed.

And there are worrying signs that ministers sometimes see women’s rights not as an end in itself, but as a means to achieve cover for doing other, unpopular things. Thus justice secretary David Lammy is disingenuously using speedier justice for female sexual assault victims as an argument for drastically cutting back access to jury trial, despite analysis suggesting that any impacts would at best be marginal.'

Legible thanks.

Page 2

Maybe this will work

Some or all of those things.

It is a local archive of the webpage so no web link unfortunately
Will try as .gif otherwise will have to break up into smaller parts

Why why why do they do this though? It absolutely makes no sense!
Fear? Woke points? Courting approval from TRAs?
What's in it for WOMEN to be so sucky uppy??
(Not a real phrase I know but I'm so fed up with this s*e and I'm tired 🤬)

Have you got a link to the archive? The image is blurred when zoomed in.

Found an archive of the first few pages of comments from the deleted tweet.
The image is long and thin but will hopefully be readable if zoomed in

There are sadly many, many women who are falling over themselves to affirm men who openly display their fetish..

This man hates women.

Applying for and taking a role in a rape crisis centre for women and then telling the victims of male sexual violence to "reframe their trauma" is disgusting beyond belief.

How any woman gives this man with a woman fetish the time of day is beyond me.

🎯 exactly!!

quite the opposite

Exactly. The idea it’s misogyny is ludicrous in the extreme and completely counter-factual.

While they can do experience discrimination and hostility, it is not because they are women but because the person who is hostile knows they are not the woman they’re pretending to be.

This weird idea that transwomen experience misogyny really pisses me off and makes no sense at all unless you’re a fervent twaw believer. Nobody who’s going to be violent or abusive towards transwomen does so because they think they’re a woman, quite the opposite.
Ffs, is there nothing they won’t appropriate?

Thanks ArabellaScott

"commissioned by Zero Tolerance"

You know what is coming now, before I even post it . . .

About us
Zero Tolerance is a Scottish charity working to end men’s violence against women by tackling its root cause: gender inequality.

We began in 1992 with a ground breaking and radical Edinburgh-based poster campaign. The campaign successfully brought the issue of violence against women out from behind closed doors and into public consciousness by asserting that violence against women is never acceptable.
https://www.zerotolerance.org.uk/about/

(Zero Tolerance Position Statements - only two, the second one is about Abortion, but top billing goes to men:)

Position statements

Inclusion and respect of trans women
It is our position that trans and non-binary rights are integral to, and contribute to, feminism. Scotland’s violence against women services provide trans inclusive services and trans inclusion plans have been in place since 2012.

This inclusive approach has not given rise to any concern or challenges. Rather, trans women have added to our movements through their support, voluntary work and as staff members. You can find out more about our stance on our blog.

Violence against women, homophobia and transphobia are all rooted in misogyny. We are committed to working with partner LGBTQI+ organisations to end this inequality, discrimination and violence.
https://www.zerotolerance.org.uk/vaw-position-statements/

Our response to the Scottish Government’s consultation on adding the characteristic of Sex into hate crime legislation
Posted on October 7 2025

We are disappointed with the proposal to add sex as a characteristic to existing hate crime legislation.

The Scottish Government committed to implementing the recommendations of the Independent Working Group on Misogyny, published in ‘Misogyny: A Human Rights Issue’, for a standalone Misogyny Bill. Adding the characteristic of Sex into hate crime legislation is an ineffective response to rising misogyny and fails to protect and ensure the rights of women and girls.

Reasons for a standalone Misogyny Bill

• A Misogyny Bill better protects women as a majority group, as opposed to hate crime legislation, which is designed to protect minorities
• A Misogyny Bill better recognises the complexity and nuance of misogyny, which is not only portrayed by acts of hate but also of prejudice and inequality
• A Misogyny Bill will better protect the rights of trans women who experience misogyny and transphobia at the same time
• A Misogyny Bill recognises that the issue of misogyny is not gender neutral - women experience misogyny because we are women. The approach outlined by the government does not recognise this.

Misogyny is on the rise in Scotland.

We call on the Scottish Government to heed the evidence which has been laid out by equalities organisations since 2018, and bring a Misogyny Bill to Parliament.

Read our full consultation response.

https://www.zerotolerance.org.uk/news/news-events/our-response-to-the-scottish-governments-consultation-on-adding-the-characteristic-of-sex-/

Our staff

(No photos, just "female avatars". No indication whether any of these staff are actually male.)
https://www.zerotolerance.org.uk/about-staff/

Our funders

We are grateful to the following organisations who fund our work and allow us to challenging violence against women.

We receive funding for our core work from the Scottish Government Equally Safe (Violence Against Women and Girls) Fund.
https://www.zerotolerance.org.uk/about-funders/

https://aliciabruce.co.uk/violence-unseen/ilzgsimltgz256y95xcl22hrvolfzw

Good for BP. Could she please pass that wretched guidance now? And not send her lawyers to support our Jolyon in his ceaseless campaign against women’s rights?

https://list.co.uk/news/violence-unseen-4662

Maybe this?

'portraits by Alicia Bruce commissioned by Zero Tolerance'

I cannot find any references to it now but I thought there was a mini side-scandal about Mridul Wadhwa paying for a professional photographer to produce flattering portrait photos. Does that ring bells with anyone?

Maybe not this time round but he's putting a marker down for the future and even now I don't feel very secure that he wont get elected. The Scottish parliament is much easier than Westminster because of proportional representation and the "list". As I understand it he doesn't need a majority in any constituency, just enough disaffected voters across the country who decide on Green.

Maybe it'll turn out to be an own goal when the ordinary voter finds out the background of Candidate Wadhwa? Might peak a few...