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/

All of this could be resolved by amending the sex exemption ground in the Equality act to include a requirement of justification when it is not met.

So if the role is not filled by a woman whose sex is female, for instance by a transwoman, then the employer or organisation or public authority should be required to produce reasonable justification why the role was not filled by a woman.

The statistical probability of one of the tiny number of transwoman being the best candidate for this role is so low that it might create a presumption that there is a sex based agenda at play here in the recruitment process which does not favour women.

It's incredibly suspicious and requires further investigation.

@Leafstamp, thank you for your post, I've made my complaint and it was made much easier from your examples. I've not reported anonymously so be interesting to see what comes back, if anything.

This appointment has also been noted on No Conflict They Said, which exists to collect stories about women's sex-based rights being infringed upon and how this plays out in daily life - when we are continually told there is 'nothing to see here.'

www.noconflicttheysaid.org/

@CirclesWithinCircles

All of this could be resolved by amending the sex exemption ground in the Equality act to include a requirement of justification when it is not met.

So if the role is not filled by a woman whose sex is female, for instance by a transwoman, then the employer or organisation or public authority should be required to produce reasonable justification why the role was not filled by a woman.

The statistical probability of one of the tiny number of transwoman being the best candidate for this role is so low that it might create a presumption that there is a sex based agenda at play here in the recruitment process which does not favour women.

It's incredibly suspicious and requires further investigation.

There is an assumption of that! The odd fact here is that they invoked the single sex exception IN THE JOB DESCRIPTION!

So they wanted the job to be filled by a female, they invoked the specific EA2010 exception to ensure that happened, and was seen to be within the law.

And then appointed a person who did not meet their own criteria.

The chances that this specific individual would apply was high, given their previous employment.

All of which does indeed bear more scrutiny.

If anyone has had their interest piqued, and you feel you might want to do a bit more reading around the topic, here are a few links. You may have been told that these women and these organisations are hateful bigots, but I would encourage you to have a look anyway, and make up your own mind.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3145470-Break-it-down-for-me - this thread looks at some of the issues in plain, simple language for those who are new to it and maybe don’t get all the language being used

Www.Sex-matters.org - an organisation founded to enable civilised debate around the topic of sex, to ensure that people and organisations understand what single sex services are for, and why they matter

Www.fairplayforwomen.com- an organisation that campaigns around women’s rights, particularly in sports and prison reform. They were recently successful in challenging the Office for National Statistics over erroneous guidance given on the 2021 census in relation to sex and gender.

And, as a bit of a left field, off topic recommendation, I am linking JK Rowling’s essay on why she chose to speak up in defences of women’s rights and our spaces. It’s a cracking read from a fine wordsmith, and while you may have heard her being traduced as some sort of bigot, I highly recommend reading what she actually wrote and seeing what you make of it yourself.

www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

The Student asked Wadhwa if she believes a man could be a successful rape crisis centre manager. She does not: “I don’t think men are ready to go out and set up services of this nature. Women’s aid organisations and rape crisis centres have been set up with the blood, sweat, and tears of women. It’s about the women’s experience of sexual violence. Our workforce is reserved for women only.” But legally and biologically they're male. And they lied about that. Surely being honest is one of the most important qualities for this role?! They lost their credibility in my view when they actively decided to lie.

It stinks to high heaven!

I think it needs an FOI request to see who was on the recruitment panel and ultimately responsible for the recruitment decision.

The very fact that it's attracting such adverse publicity seems in itself damaging to the charity and possibly harmful to achieving its aims.

Thank you @Sophoclesthefox I have bookmarked them all.

I still don't really understand why this person was appointed though. I mean i understand why they wanted the job, and the risks that this will bring to the service, and how changes could be brought in under the radar to this and other services as a result. But why was it allowed to happen - there must already be members of the hiring committee/board/whoever that also have this agenda, in addition to the person that was hired?

Mridul Wadwha has been working within Women's Sector in Scotland for many years. (This is not the first post that Wadwha has taken up which appears to have been advertised as female only under the Genuine Occupational Requirement)

Experience includes:
Shakti Women's Aid from December 2005 to March 2007 as Information and Education Officer and then again as Information and Education Officer and Children and Young People's Services Supervisor from September 2008 to April 2017.

Training and volunteer coordinator for Rape Crisis Scotland from June 2014 to August 2018, delivering training across the country and campaigning for inclusion and equality.

Manager at Rape Crisis Forth Valley started in August 2018.

I think its very wrong and it setting a bad precedent..

Just like men competing in women's sports is wrong.. males are biologically different, can we just stop trying to be politically correct and just remain factual?

He might be a great CEO, he might be a great "woman" but he will never and can never relate to what it is like growing up as a girl into a woman, life of a biological woman etc. especially relating to sexual abuse.

To add to @Sophoclesthefox excellent post, here are a couple more links -

For Women Scotland - forwomen.scot/
'We believe that there are only two sexes, that a person’s sex is not a choice, nor can it be changed. Women are entitled to privacy, dignity, safety and fairness. Our legal rights should be protected and strengthened. We campaign on a positive, pro-women basis and call for evidence based discussion and legislation.'

Keep Prisons Single Sex - www.keep-prisons-single-sex.org.uk/.
Their aims and objectives -

• No male, no matter how he identifies, should ever be housed in a women’s prison.
• When a male is arrested, commits a crime or is imprisoned, he should be always be recorded as male & never as female.

This thread. My first thought was to bang my head against a wall after reading some of the comments. But then I remembered that actually this site isnt just used by women any more.

This person was placed in this position strategically no mistake about it.

@Hotankles

This thread. My first thought was to bang my head against a wall after reading some of the comments. But then I remembered that actually this site isnt just used by women any more.

This person was placed in this position strategically no mistake about it.

Great links thanks!

@R0wantrees

I still don't really understand why this person was appointed though. I mean i understand why they wanted the job, and the risks that this will bring to the service, and how changes could be brought in under the radar to this and other services as a result. But why was it allowed to happen - there must already be members of the hiring committee/board/whoever that also have this agenda, in addition to the person that was hired?

Mridul Wadwha has been working within Women's Sector in Scotland for many years. (This is not the first post that Wadwha has taken up which appears to have been advertised as female only under the Genuine Occupational Requirement)

Experience includes:
Shakti Women's Aid from December 2005 to March 2007 as Information and Education Officer and then again as Information and Education Officer and Children and Young People's Services Supervisor from September 2008 to April 2017.

Training and volunteer coordinator for Rape Crisis Scotland from June 2014 to August 2018, delivering training across the country and campaigning for inclusion and equality.

Manager at Rape Crisis Forth Valley started in August 2018.

yes, I understand the reasons why they might have thought that this person had the experience, and I understand why this person thought they themselves were the most suitable and wanted the role.

But someone higher must have agreed/approved/actively sought out the person for the role, as if it were genuinely a panel of people wanting to support women who saw this, they would have raised all the objections that we are making. And they could have chosen someone else for the role who had applied, and used the single-sex exemption that was in the job description all along, and avoided the controversy. So why didn't they?

I mean, I could understand if they hadn't put that in the job description, and then this person came along and applied, and had more experience that other people, and claimed that they would sue for discrimination if they weren't given the job. Or if they'd applied for some sort of counselling role that hadn't specified single sex. Or if they'd tried to use the service as a client and were turned away for being trans. I could see them suing or going to the press or making sure that funding was taking away or making a hoo-ha about it in some way that basically forced the organisation's hand, and made them feel they had to appoint them.

But it doesn't sound like there was any of that kind of coercion going on. They were actively chosen - presumably from a field that included women (although maybe nobody else applied, I suppose it's possible). And that suggests that there is already an element from within the organisation that wanted this person, or another trans person, to be on board, and that they actively want to change things to include transpeople. That is what seems very suspicious to me, that they had the legal method to choose a woman, and didn't.

Or maybe the whole panel/board/committee are just totally and utterly naive and didn't do any background research on the candidates and took it at face value that this was a woman with great experience applying, but that seems unlikely too.

I think you have missed a lot of the politicking that have gone before. Whilsy I am pissed off at this, like many others here I am nt at all surprised. There has been a concerted effort to remove 'female and woman' from Scottish law!

And I know how ludictous that sounds. Which is why many people don't give any credence to the women trying to point it out and stop the wholesale dismantling of women's rights!

But someone higher must have agreed/approved/actively sought out the person for the role, as if it were genuinely a panel of people wanting to support women who saw this, they would have raised all the objections that we are making. And they could have chosen someone else for the role who had applied, and used the single-sex exemption that was in the job description all along, and avoided the controversy. So why didn't they?

For some time there has been a concerted effort by a small number of influential organisations to change the definition of both "woman" and "female" in Scotland. For Women Scotland and Murray Blackburn & Mackenzie have been at the fore of attempts to prevent this and protect women's sex based rights and Safeguarding:

2018
fairplayforwomen.com/scottish_stole_woman/
2021
murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2021/04/16/forwomenscotland-legal-challenge-to-gender-representation-on-public-boards-act-putting-the-case-in-context/

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2020/12/07/sex-and-gender-in-the-forensic-medical-services-bill/

forwomen.scot/

This thread prompted me to check my employer's diversity policy. It says that it covers the various protected characteristics under the EA - including sex and gender reassignment. So far so good.

But then it says that it monitors work carried out related to certain characteristics as well as any disciplinary action taken in relation to certain characteristics - and both refer to gender, not sex or gender reassignment. Hmmmm.

Am I brave enough to point this out? I don't think so, but if I ever leave the job, I will.

Yes there must be a lot more going on than I'd realised.

I have been appalled when I read about the cases where perfectly normal organisations, services, companies etc. have been publicly shamed by not treating a trans woman as a woman, have had funding pulled, or have been sued, or have had advertisers pull out, or all those sorts of things, and have then had to cave in and include the trans woman, somewhat against their will/judgement. I understood that sort of pressure, and could see how the trans activists who were applying/suing/going to the media etc were the ones to 'blame', if you will.

But this seems different. Not that I don't see this trans woman as at fault for taking a woman's position and making an organisation no longer single sex, I do, but it seems to be not only them - it has to have come from so much higher up for it to have even been possible. And that is what surprises me, I guess. I don't quite know who is behind it all, if there are already people in positions of power who are making things like this happen, and who they are.

Mridhul has a Y chromosome, and a fully functioning male reproductive system. This means he biologically male.

The job was advertised as for women only, for a good reason. Not some sexist bullshit reason. Mridhul claiming to be a woman, is sexist bullshit.

*he's

@LifeInAHamsterWheel

I am wondering if there's any way this thread can be saved, or moved to someplace it won't disappear, because it is so hugely informative.

I will admit that my knowledge and understanding of the whole trans debate is limited, and it's something I've been trying to improve. I often find myself really frustrated that I don't have the words to express my thoughts and feelings on the matter. I am so impressed with how articulate and eloquent so many of the posts on this thread have been, and they have been hugely helpful to me.

I am also so glad that this thread is in AIBU rather than just on the Feminist board, as it will have reached a far bigger audience. I can't be the only person who is intersted but keenly aware of my ignorance at the same time. I'm certain that I'm not the only one who has found this thread informative and empowering. I will continue to try and educate myself as much as I can on this topic and I will no longer stand idly by while the world my DD is growing up in seems to becoming a less and less safe place for her, as a young female.

Thank you all, in particular @Ereshkigalangcleg, @PurgatoryOfPotholes, @TalkingtoLangClegintheDark, @Redapplewreath, @Helleofabore and of course the OP. I'd even like to thank @BetterKateThanNever as it was good to hear the 'arguments' brought forward by someone who claims to represent the trans movement and indeed it helped to cement my own views and have confidence that it doesn't make a horrible bigot to believe that sex matters.

I'm really glad that you've found this thread informative. The posters you've listed (and others) should be awarded for their services to women!

As for this thread, you could report your post and request it be added to Classics I guess?

However, I think there are enough MNetters around to keep the knowledge and stories in prominent enough places. It's already hitting main stream media too.

Whilst there have been some "get back in your box" comments, I think posts like yours LifeInAHamsterWheel show that there are still a great many people who would like to know more about the dangerous places some of these issues (conflating gender and sex, ignorance of Equality law etc) can lead to for girls and women.

'The importance of women only spaces and services for women and girls who’ve been subjected to men’s violence'
January 20, 2020 by Karen Ingala Smith (CEO nia)
Speech to Scottish Parliament – January 14th 2020
(extract)
"A couple of years ago, nia’s board of trustees, in the latter stages of finalising the charity’s strategic plan, took the decision to identify supporting the preservation of women-only services as one of our strategic objectives. We agreed that if we did not speak out, we were being complicit in the erosion of women-led specialist services for survivors of men’s violence. We have developed a ‘Prioritising Women Policy’ which meets our obligations under the Equality Act and uses the single sex exemptions permitted therein." (continues)

It’s not unusual for women who’ve been subjected to men’s violence to develop a trauma response. These sometimes develop after a single incident of violence, especially with sexual violence, but also sometimes after years or months of living in fear, walking on egg-shells, recognising that tone of voice, that look in the eyes, that sigh, that pause, that silence, that change in his breathing. Some women have lived this, with a succession of perpetrators starting from their dad, all their lives.

A trauma informed approach is based on understanding the physical, social, and emotional impact of trauma caused by experiencing sexual and domestic violence and abuse. A trauma-informed service understands the importance of creating an environment – physical and relational – that feels safe to victims-survivors in all the ways I’ve just mentioned. A trauma-informed safe space creates space for action and recovery from violence and abuse and places the woman victim-survivor in control and in the centre. For many women this absolutely means excluding men from that space, including those who don’t identify as men.

Women are gas-lighted (manipulated to question their own judgement or even sanity) by their abusive male partners all the time. It is a cornerstone of coercive control. As a service provider you are in a position of power, no matter how you try to balance this out, and of course we do as much as possible to balance this out, but ultimately it is inescapable." (continues)
kareningalasmith.com/2020/01/20/the-importance-of-women-only-spaces-and-services-for-women-and-girls-whove-been-subjected-to-mens-violence/

MN webchat March 2020:
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_live_events/3838243-Webchat-with-Femicide-Census-co-founder-Karen-Ingala-Smith-Wednesday-March-4-at-1pm?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3838302-Karen-Ingala-Smith-webchat-tomorrow?

@FlattestWhite this is a useful article to explain how this whole debate has taken such a hold - www.spectator.co.uk/article/the-document-that-reveals-the-remarkable-tactics-of-trans-lobbyists

Well said. Thanks to @R0wantrees too for her exhaustive knowledge and excellent archiving.

And yes I agree that whoever is making these hiring decisions, and policy changes etc, behind the scenes, in situations like this, don't have womens best interest at heart.