To think that a Rape Crisis centre should not have a transwoman CEO?

[ArabellaScott]

Mridhul Wadhwa has just been appointed CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis. The job was advertised as for women only. Mridhul is a transwoman (born male) without a Gender Recognition Certificate.

AIBU to think that women survivors of rape and sexual violence should be able to have a female only space?

theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2021/05/new-boss-for-edinburgh-rape-crisis-centre/

What a hill to die on.

Slightly related, Twitter TRAs once made a spectacularly tone deaf hashtag:

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3383043-First-they-came-for-the-rapists-and-I-did-not-speak-out-because-I-was-not-a-rapist

#RapistHill

The job was open to females only, the applicant is not female. I’m not sure is you could even advertise for a job to be open to females and transwomen. How would that work? It’s SEX not GENDER that can be stipulated where it can be shown to be necessary. The RCC have hired someone who is demonstrably not suited to the sex exclusive role they were hired for. Their advertising as a female only set up is false and women who use their service have a right to know in advance that they are no longer single sex.

At the very least they need to repeat the recruitment process, explaining why the sex of the applicant is no longer key, and opening the playing field to other men....or hire the sex they needed?

I honestly think it is a case of "because this doesn't effect me, it doesn't matter" Prisons, rape centres .... I won't ever be in a position of needing them so I don't actually need to care about the women service users, instead I can champion the wants of the trans community.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

What a hill to die on.

Slightly related, Twitter TRAs once made a spectacularly tone deaf hashtag:

http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3383043-First-they-came-for-the-rapists-and-I-did-not-speak-out-because-I-was-not-a-rapist

#RapistHill

The optics on that!

It’s an exercise in identity validation - anyone with a modicum of empathy would understand how women (original version) would feel uncomfortable with biological males in spaces like this. Victims should be centered, rape crisis centres are not places for transwomen to find validation for their identity.

Blithering, I hope all is okay. Wishing you well.

@Beachcomber

thecritic.co.uk/women-in-scotland-risk-having-their-rights-virtue-signalled-away/

Good analysis here. It's written before this latest development but very much applies.

Last Thursday, in six short words Johann Lamont MSP did her job and ensured that traumatised women in Scotland would not become props to support the gender identity of men. But that removing this most basic right, to be examined by someone of the same sex, was even raised as a possibility should set alarm bells ringing. The speed at which the ideology of gender has captured institutions and governments gives an indication as to the sex of those who benefit. As 2020 draws to a close, women are no longer pushing for equality, we are fighting for basic legal recognition as a sex and at serious risk of having our rights virtue-signalled away.

Men have been circumventing recruitment processes for decades to gain access to vulnerable women and to exploit their positions of power. Its a different tactic, but its the same battle.

It will probably take some scandal or major crisis to remove this particular loophole. I would say legal loophole but the law is actually quite clear on recruitment here so its the organisation itself at fault via those who were in charge of recruitment. Since the role itself is a permitted female only role, there would appear to be a potentially fair reason for dismissing the new CEO from that role.

In terms of what women who are adversely affected by this recruitment decision can do - presumably they can sue for nervous shock resulting in measureable/quantifiable harm, such as the recurrence of a recognised depressive illness or exacerbation of mental health issues leaving them unable to earn a living, due to the decision to recruit a non-eligible trans woman to a role reserved for women. Just as anyone could who suffers loss or damage due to a negligent recruitment decision. You would also tend to think that quite a few women who might be potentially adversely affected might be eligible for legal aid.

I wonder whether the Centre's insurance policy is also invalidated by such a recruitment decision.

The job was open to females only, the applicant is not female. I’m not sure is you could even advertise for a job to be open to females and transwomen.

There is no legal definition of 'transwoman'. Any adult human male who asserts this is his identity is a 'transwoman'.
UK Equality Act 2010 defines "males of any age" as men.

Yes that was my thinking @R0wantrees

Its striking isn't it that women are denied the capacity to protect the word to describe ourselves and to maintain legally defined Safeguards and boundaries whilst some men are enabled to breach those constraints on the basis of their assertion/ self-description.

This mirrors abuse/coercive control dynamics:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3452784-Coercive-Control-a-need-for-better-awareness

@Chev2021

I can't believe this question is even being asked. SHE is a women.

For those hiding their ignorance behind a technicality - a lot of jobs advertise certain qualifications/qualities that the successful candidate doesn't have. Surely, having the best person for the job is most important, especially for such a vital organisation.

I sincerly hope that this opinion of the trans community fades out soon.

And have you read this thread?

Can you tell us when MW has actively made decisions that have made life better for traumatised females in Scotland ?

@Chev2021 if you think the MW is a woman, and you disagree with the equality act definition of “woman” is “a female of any age” , what I’d your definition of “woman” which includes MW?

@ArabellaScott

Blithering, I hope all is okay. Wishing you well.

Thank you @ArabellaScott I've written about my situation on here on the past (under another username) and was told I should contact women's aid and it took me a long time to even consider that it was a possibility. Thankfully my son isn't in danger from OH and the abuse is mainly financial/emotional and sometimes sexual so I am not in a life threatening situation or anything. Some women have it much worse and it's a devastating thought that those women are being disregarded by certain people, I honestly don't understand it.

Single sex provisions never used to be a controversial idea so I really want one of those posters to answer, why all of a sudden the thought of single sex services for somebody who is vulnerable or traumatised is suddenly so unpalatable?

@AfternoonToffee

I honestly think it is a case of "because this doesn't effect me, it doesn't matter" Prisons, rape centres .... I won't ever be in a position of needing them so I don't actually need to care about the women service users, instead I can champion the wants of the trans community.

This is what I think too sadly 😔

I am always open to discussion and to changing my opinion, that's what healthly debate is about. And whilst I think some people have raised interesting points, the accusations made against me due to a difference in opinion are absolutley outrageous. You know nothing about me so to suggest that 'this doesn't affect me so I don't care' is offensive.

Also, to suggest in some way that this appointment will lead to events which compare to abuse is incredibly offensive.

I won't be reading any more of this and to be honest, I regret posting anything. It's clear that users simply want others to agree with their opinion and not go against that. Some of you (not all, of course) seriously need to consider what you would actually say to a person face to face and step away from being keyboard warriors.

Helle apparently they did read the thread and MW is still a top notch choice.

Blithering I very much hope you get the support and help you deserve and need.

And yes, I find it heartbreaking that some people find it so easy to brush aside the needs of women, or place them second to those of males. Women deserve better; it's not a bad thing to advocate for the rights of women.

Chev, I may have missed some of your posts. I made this thread because I wanted to hear what women thought on the subject. It is an enormously sensitive subject - so many women have lived experience of the issues involved. So sometimes hard to discuss. Thanks for giving your input, and I hope you feel that something worthwhile comes out of your posting.

Blithering I very much hope you get the support and help you deserve and need.

I echo this.

If I met anyone who had been part of the hiring process I think I’d be very happy to say everything I’ve said on this thread. They’ve behaved very badly and I think illegally, given they were supposed to exclude male people from the process.

Women should not be shamed for standing up for the law and sex-based Safeguarding.
When women are in need of support services following rape/male violence they are rarely in a position to take on the systemic Safeguarding failures of service/s. None of know when we might be in need of these services which were built by women and for women.

I won't be reading any more of this and to be honest, I regret posting anything. It's clear that users simply want others to agree with their opinion and not go against that. Some of you (not all, of course) seriously need to consider what you would actually say to a person face to face and step away from being keyboard warriors.

I think we're just tired of all the awful misogyny and lack of care for women and girls that we are seeing on a daily basis, that people can't seem to see, Chev. Perhaps we should all cut each other some slack.

And I'd like to think I would have the integrity and courage to challenge this misogynistic worldview face to face.

@AfternoonToffee

Helle apparently they did read the thread and MW is still a top notch choice.

Yes. I can see that.

The deflection and distraction though didn’t answer the question about what MW has actively and actually done to make the lives better for traumatized females.

I guess when people have posted evidence to the contrary here, those supporting this appointment believe it is falsified or taken out of context. I have watched the interviews, read the tweets etc at the time they have come out.

I am not sure how ANY poster can believe that posting a picture of an Indian god with heads etc with the aggressive caption against women who disagree can be ever condoned. In a CEO for a rape crisis centre!

Some of you (not all, of course) seriously need to consider what you would actually say to a person face to face and step away from being keyboard warriors.

Anyone running services supporting children and women should be more than able to say no to men who are attempting to breach boundaries/ Safeguards. Its a basic requirement and responsibility of the position.

Contrary to rules of misogyny, women saying no is not a hate crime.
4w.pub/the-rules-of-misogyny/