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

[TorghunKhan]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clynyky7kj9o

No women only spaces for 16 months. Basically women, RAPED women - were told they could not definitely see a woman to help them with such an awful crime, they might have to see a man in a dress, and if they objected they were to be 're eductaed' by the man in charge - a man who himself applied for, and got!! a job which was supposed to be only filled by a woman.

It's shameful, disgusting, but whats worse is how many people put up with it!! Who thought this was ok?! why did nobody do anything, or say anything FOR YEARS

“Also I noticed we've gone from 'transpeople want to be in single sex spaces because they feel they belong there' to 'sensible trans people accept they don't belong in single sex spaces and are fine with that'.

Yes. I have noticed this.

I have noticed we have been scolded for what was essentially ‘being obsessed with discussion on Twitter’, the discussion has flipped to ‘but I agree with single sex spaces’, back again to ‘it is just a few bad ones, not ALL’ and basically it all seems more like someone who has decided they should be able to tell people they feel who are obsessed with Twitter discussions that everything is fine. When the reality is that those who are on the thread discussing what has happened and how are fully fucking aware of the situation and know that no, things are not fucking fine!

And please uninformed posters, stop treating women who do understand the situation like grannies being taught to suck eggs.

The fucking point of the discussion is that extreme trans activists will not accept third spaces, and they are the ones in positions of influence where the policies have been made. The entire fucking thread is about how this happened in fucking plain sight and with women’s groups (of which many of us may even be part of) vocally stating that there were problems!

It is not just ‘one bad one’. This ‘bad one’ is one of many who have successfully compaigned to have their demands met to the detriment of female people. ‘Because they felt they should be in those spaces’. FFS!

The statement about ‘they are not fighting anyone’, is not only tone deaf in the light of the topic of the thread and how this situation has been allowed to happen and how there are very few publicised female only rape crisis groups. However it completely ignores the number of female only events that have been cancelled due to extreme trans rights activists blocking entry, disrupted due to loud music, shouting, air horns, windows and doors being hit loudly , or even smoke bombs or the number of women who have been abused and threatened on line or assaulted while speaking in public.

It is very clear that someone who makes such a statement as that has a very superficial understanding of the situation or believes they have some kind of knowledge that others don’t.

It paints other posters as being unreasonable, when the reality is that that poster making such a statement has a very superficial understanding of what they are commenting so confidently on.

Can’t be sure - but I think you may mean me.

I did say earlier in the thread that the reason I’m not “clued up” on the trans debate as a whole, is because I genuinely don’t feel the passion around it that some here clearly do. I don’t feel threatened by it and I’m not angry about it.

I read things as and when they come up. Have done no further research, and never tell anyone they can’t go anywhere or be anything.

I would never be in an all woman event, for anyone to protest against. Nor would I ever protest against one. Fence, population me.

I appreciate that some may now decide to come and tell me I’m a traitor to all womankind for that, but if you just read the bit about me not being angry enough to argue about it - that would be a big help to all involved.

To be honest I only answered this one because it was so evidently about me, and whilst I don’t plan to spend all my evening arguing, “that poster” should at least respond.

Yes. We understand that you don’t have knowledge or even interest behind your claims.

How wonderful for you that you are not negatively impacted by male people’s identities being prioritised above female people’s sex based needs so that you can frame others as feeling ‘threatened’. That must be very nice.

It's nice you have the privilege not to feel threatened or angry, and are therefore able to 'never tell anyone they can’t go anywhere or be anything'. The raped women who are the victims here didn't have that luxury.

It doesn't make you 'a traitor to all womankind' if you choose not to stand up for the women who have been harmed by gender ideology, but the least you could do is not make digs at the women who have stood up. And yes you did make digs, about 'spending all day arguing on Twitter' and whatever else. If you haven't been impacted by gender ideology it doesn't make you more reasonable than others, maybe just more fortunate.

But then many women who support, or at least don't oppose, gender ideology are fortunate. They don't think they'll ever be in a prison, or a refuge, or a shared hospital bay, so they can afford to #bekind and give away other women's safety and services and rights to men with special feelings.

I mean I personally wouldn’t wade into threads/topics, especially ones where rape victims have been treated appallingly, where I admittedly know hee haw about the subject, and proceed to make such disingenuous statements.

I don’t think you are a traitor to womanhood, with your limited understanding and lack of research you clearly can’t add much to such an important topic and understand the ramifications for survivors, you should however maybe treat such topics with a bit more respect until you do. That’s just what I would do.

It's a very privileged position to be in to not have to think about this much and be sitting on the fence. I wish people would be a bit more self aware when it comes to that fact.

I cannot reply to this (or indeed the others about privilege) without instigating what may be a pile on. I do have a feeling that what I am about to say may be worse.

I, like most women, have been a victim. Of DV, of assault of various kinds. Always from men. Those men weren’t wearing dresses, but I appreciate they could have been.

I’m aware that saying I don’t feel threatened by trans women (or men, as we’re calling them) generally.

That is honestly because I don’t feel threatened by all men. After Sarah Everard, when men were saying #NotAllMen I was responding saying I didn’t mean all men, I meant dangerous men, and that’s different.

It appears though that others do have an “all” view.

I would say though that I’d prefer people didn’t assume I’d lived a life free of male risk. I absolutely have not, I would imagine there are very few women coming into a conversation about female issues that have.

I just don’t extend that to the wider male/trans/any group as clearly others do. I am not saying that’s right, or wrong, I’m saying that is the other perspective.

For goodness sake, people, this thread is not about the feelz of an individual who is clearly a little hard of thinking and clearly cares only about what she herself thinks and feels on a subject; don't let us get derailed into this futile argument. There is no point in arguing with stupid.

I mean, the very fact that this is not an isolated issue that many rape crisis centres now offer no female only groups means that Wadhwa is not ‘the only bad one’. The issue is now deeply embedded in policy throughout the UK.

This is where there is ignorance behind trying to frame this as a ‘not all’ discussion. It is a false position. And dishonest, because no one is saying ‘all male people
who declare they are female’ are predators or whatever.

However, it is not ‘reasonable’ male people who have demanded these concessions, it is activist males like Wadhwa who demanded and got the concessions in the first place. But it seems that significant fact has been passed over or ignored. If there are any ‘reasonable’ male people who declare they are female, they are also very quiet and don’t seem to stand up and say ‘this is not what we want, this is an unreasonable demand on female people’. Let a remember, Even Hayton wrote that male people in schools should have access to female toilets if they wanted access.

There is enough extreme male activists though who have caused significant policy shift to the detriment of female people.

Along with the direct impact of using preferred pronouns in the first place. How many activists have we seen repeat the lie that people use their preferred pronouns because they see the activist as a ‘female’ therefore it is cruel to ever exclude them from living fully as a ‘female’? McKinnon was one. We have seen so many others use the same line of argument.

Using wrong sex pronouns does negatively impact female people on a collective level. It already has.

And Wadhwa is another who used people using preferred pronouns to harm female people directly.

Just one of the points of harm is the gaslighting aspect. Because people who women and girls trusted to put them first used female language in discussions referred to Wadhwa, this made women and girl’s feel that they were not in any position to reject Wadhwa as female. It was perpetuating a significant falsehood.

It also lowers the boundaries of women and girls who already have boundaries they need to rebuild for healing and self preservation. If they feel they have to perpetuate a lie to be able to access help, that is abuse. If they feel they have to put those male people’s needs ahead of theirs at this time, that is delaying their healing.

Obviously, these are just some points of harm. There are plenty more.

Kindness only seems to go one direction with male people who claim to be female. It doesn’t seem to flow towards female people as a primary and significant goal.

I would say though that I’d prefer people didn’t assume I’d lived a life free of male risk. I absolutely have not, I would imagine there are very few women coming into a conversation about female issues that have.

I just don’t extend that to the wider male/trans/any group as clearly others do. I am not saying that’s right, or wrong, I’m saying that is the other perspective.

Whatever about one's individual experience (and my sympathy for what you've been through) coming through it emotionally intact enough to sit on the fence on this issue can still look like a kind of privilege in its own way. Perhaps you are just much more in control of your emotional response than other people. Congratulations if so. But so many women will not be able to 'sit on the fence' on this, I hope you can understand that.

Just a head’s up.

Calling those who don’t share your opinions “hard of thinking” and “stupid” is why you’re then called unreasonable. The whole point I made about it becoming unnecessarily rude.

Conversations aren’t one sided. Hope this helps.

How do we tell the dangerous men from the rest though? Other than after the fact? We exclude all men from women's single sex spaces, not because all men are dangerous, but because we can't tell which until it's too late and women have been harmed. And I personally think that offending some men in order to keep women safe is better than saving some mens feelings and putting women at risk of harm.

Or as I've seen it put, 'good men stay out so bad men stand out'.

It appears though that others do have an “all” view.

No, I don't have an "all view". I have family members and a partner who I love. I had a dad that I loved. They don't need me to stick up for them though.

Of course it's not all men. Has anyone said this?

My partner is one of the good guys, as was my late dad. How do we tell the good guys from the bad guys until it's too late? This is why sex based spaces exist, regardless of how one 'identifies'. Do more research.

Calling those who don’t share your opinions “hard of thinking” and “stupid” is why you’re then called unreasonable. The whole point I made about it becoming unnecessarily rude.

Perhaps don't breeze into threads about misogynistic practice in a rape crisis centre calling women concerned about it "angry" and musing about why "I definitely couldn’t find the passion to be on Twitter all day long arguing about other people’s choices."

And FWIW I fully agree with @AskingQuestionsAllTheTime

Of course, we don’t create safeguarding exceptions for any group of male people. Regardless of what they believe about their identities.

So, safeguarding in this way is an ‘all’ proposition.

This thread is about Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre. More widely it's about the harm the gender identity movement is doing to women's rights. It's not really an appropriate opportunity to virtue signal about how unbothered you are.

How have we got back to pandering to the person determined to derail and minimise?

Of course, we don’t create safeguarding exceptions for any group of male people. Regardless of what they believe about their identities.

So, safeguarding in this way is an ‘all’ proposition.

Yes, exactly. My Nigel as much as anyone else's.

Perhaps don’t tell people what to say, think, or do. I don’t know whether you realise, or care - but it totally devalues the rest of your argument.

This isn’t a dictatorship, and any willingness I hold to actually look into what you’re saying, and become more informed on the matter, disappears when you speak to them like that. You’re making the “camp” you fall into look completely undesirable.

I’m sure you’re making some great points that really are worth looking at, but even getting to them currently involves me stopping wondering who you’re talking to like that and why.

And “FWIW” I had a feeling you would, because you’ve had some problem with basically everything I say for the last 3/4 pages now.

Not interested.

Tell that to yourself from pages 23 onwards. Not that I’ve actually looked at where this even began.

You all go on about people being stupid and not listening/being ignorant to the cause of gender identity and their relationship to women’s issues. This is why. Because becoming informed involves joining a mass of women who shout at strangers on the internet - not a particularly welcoming group to even consider joining.

I mean, the very fact that this is not an isolated issue that many rape crisis centres now offer no female only groups means that Wadhwa is not ‘the only bad one’. The issue is now deeply embedded in policy throughout the UK.

It is. Even when they say it's "women only" or "women centred" they mostly mean they include males if they identify as women, either with or without GRCs.