#AskRapeCrisisScotland

[MaudTheInvincible]

Is trending at number 1 in the UK at present. I haven't been around all day so I'm not sure what this has happened in response to and came here to find out, but there aren't any threads. Heart breaking reading these stories and the effects on rape victims who can't access support services because they've been excluded by male-centring policy.

@mustlovegin

The new charity will be vilified, some will try to cancel it, etc. But if women go there, and people donate, why would it matter?

I hear what you're saying but why should women have to start all over again. We fought for and built these services from the ground. These are OUR services. Why should we walk away. We should stand our ground and fight to get those services back.

If you want to report a woman to the police for hate crime - let's say for referring to a convicted rapist as 'he' - the College of Police guidelines say:

'The victim does not have to justify or provide evidence of their belief...police officers or staff should not directly challenge this perception'.

If you're a woman in Edinburgh who has been raped and you want a female-only service, your bigoted beliefs and perceptions are to be challenged and reframed.

Heads I win, tails you lose.

@BuffysBigSister

The more I read about this, the more I wonder what the hell the interview process was like for the CEO role. Are there interviews for CEO roles? Its not like MW is shy about their views. The people who hired MW must have known and accepted those views. I wonder if anyone with GC views would have been interviewed/hired. It feels all kinds of wrong to me. Did anyone at any point think, wait, how will this look to the people who actually use our service?

Wadwha has been involved in Women's Sector in Scotland for many years shaping policies and influencing recruitment. Wadwha gained a shoe-in via Shakti Women's Aid in 2005 and was part of their information and education program funded by Big Lottery.

2019 Engender Podcast (screenshot by For Women Scotland) appears to show how Wadwha, as volunteer coordinator, filtered out those applicants who did not conform to the gender ideology. orthodoxy. Such a policy would apply to board members as well as volunteers running the helpline

We fought for and built these services from the ground. These are OUR services. Why should we walk away

This is true, obviously. But I was thinking, ok, we are fed up with this constant BS. Why not change tack, be pragmatic an show them that women are in control as we are the users of the service and ultimately the ones who decide where we will go.

But that's the point. If someone funds a new charity, they can establish whatever policy they want.

Much of the funding comes from government who put conditions on that funding, it's why we're where we are now. A female only service would be unlikely to receive funding in the current climate which means that all women only services would have to be funded by donations.

@mustlovegin

We fought for and built these services from the ground. These are OUR services. Why should we walk away

This is true, obviously. But I was thinking, ok, we are fed up with this constant BS. Why not change tack, be pragmatic an show them that women are in control as we are the users of the service and ultimately the ones who decide where we will go.

When I dream about what I would do if I won the lottery, one of the things on the list would be to set up a service for females only, where I had enough money to ignore the hate, the abuse, the threats from TRAs. Where I wouldn't have to rely on a government which has an agenda for money. Because whatever you set up, TRAs will want to be included and then we will spend more & more time fighting them than providing a service. We need to draw the line here & now and fight the fight. I wish we didn't have to be fighting this fight. I want to be focussed on what we can do to support women in Afghanistan or Tigray.

A female only service would be unlikely to receive funding in the current climate which means that all women only services would have to be funded by donations

I know I'm not being very realistic here. But also, on the topic of funding, I wonder how much is actually needed to run a charity like this vs. how much is spent on perhaps inflated salaries, PR, lobbying, publicity, media advisers, etc.

Could you not run an equally effective but leaner service with volunteers focusing on the job at hand, keeping overheads to a minimum? These charities increasingly appear to be tools for propaganda rather than organisations to help people in need.

This is true, obviously. But I was thinking, ok, we are fed up with this constant BS. Why not change tack, be pragmatic an show them that women are in control as we are the users of the service and ultimately the ones who decide where we will go.

There are growing numbers of women from within Women's Services standing up and/or whistleblowing. Now is the time to support them in order to help turn the tide and correct the systemic failings.

forwomen.scot/11/08/2021/scottish-womens-aid-have-failed-the-womens-aid-network/

Susan Jack
"I was the Training and Development worker with Glasgow Women’s Aid (GWA) from 2002 until Dec 2019.

From 2015 onwards there was an increase in discussion regarding the service provided to, and the potential impact of, trans women accessing GWA for support/refuge accommodation.

At this time, Scottish Women’s Aid (SWA) circulated a report which (I think) had been compiled by Rape Crisis Scotland. The aim of this report was to encourage women’s services to be inclusive of trans women. From memory, SWA did circulate a guidance, of sorts, which basically reiterated that message.

There were concerns within GWA that this guidance had been compiled without any consultation with the network of Women’s Aid groups in Scotland. It was also of concern that this guidance was produced by SWA, who as an organisation DO NOT provide direct support to women or children and were therefore not best placed to produce guidance.

We felt that the inclusion of trans women, particularly those that had not undergone reassignment, was of huge significance to the women and children being supported by Women’s Aid groups. There was a frustration that a full consultation with groups had not taken place.

From approximately 2016/17 onwards we became aware that SWA were being quoted on social media as being fully trans inclusive. This led to GWA being contacted by trans activists demanding to know our stance. It also led to GWA being bullied via their social media networks by trans activists.

At this point, I began to engage with SWA (Ash Kuloo) to enquire why there hadn’t been a consultation with groups. Any enquiries were met with mild hostility and no clarification on the matter.

I contacted workers from other groups that I trusted and asked their status. All had concerns regarding trans inclusion and were aggrieved at the lack of consultation and indeed support from SWA.

There was a fear and anxiety as to how we were being portrayed on social media as being ‘TERF’s’. As a group, we acknowledged the need for trans women experiencing domestic abuse to be provided with support, however our priority was the safety of women and children in refuge. The vast majority of those being supported have been abused by men and the element of shared space within refuge meant that any trans woman that retained the physical identity of a man had the potential to re-traumatise and impact the essential security women and children feel whilst in refuge.

We were quite staggered by the behaviour and attitude of SWA. Their authoritarian behaviour essentially demeaned the ethos of Women’s Aid and highlighted their further removal from the network and the work being carried out at ground level.

I asked refuge workers to consult with women they were supporting as to what their feelings were regarding trans women (no reassignment) being accommodated in refuge. Whilst women were sympathetic to their situation, they did not want to share a refuge with them. They felt it would negatively impact their ontological security. One particular woman said she was terrified of men and would have to leave refuge in those circumstances.

I attended a talk given by Megan Murphy at Holyrood in June of 2019. At this event, Iain Macwhirter from the Glasgow Herald asked Ms. Murphy why she thought organisations such as Engender and SWA were fully backing trans inclusion in women’s safe spaces. I raised my hand and stated that I worked for a Women’s Aid organisation that had consulted with service users and there were concerns. This resulted in my manager being contacted by Ash Kuloo (I think) who was furious that I had spoken out. Marsha Scott also contacted my manager and was extremely displeased.

A few weeks later, I was asked by Joan McAlpine to attend an event being hosted at Holyrood by Angela Constance. The panel was made up of Sandy Brindley, Mridul Wadhwa, Emma Ritch and speakers from LGBT Youth, Stonewall Scotland and the Equality Network. Marsha Scott was to be attending but her flight to Edinburgh had been delayed (I checked this out as we knew where she was flying from and it was nonsense). When SWA found out I was on the guest list they contacted my manager to state their disapproval. I challenged Sandy Brindley and a researcher (who was extremely condescending) regarding a report published that day with a comprehensive number of direct quotes from women with concerns.

Marsha Scott’s behaviour towards my manager reached a point where the GWA Board were considering raising a grievance against her.

As far as I am aware, the situation remains the same. Many/most staff are extremely apprehensive to directly discuss this issue due to a genuine fear of bullying and harassment.

I am of the opinion that SWA have failed the Women’s Aid network in Scotland and essentially are a stand alone organisation, that does not provide any direct form of support to women and children experiencing domestic abuse and does not represent Women’s Aid in Scotland."

Patricia Currie on 12th August 2021 (comments):
I am the Board chair at Glasgow East Women’s Aid and these concerns are front most in our minds. We recognise trans women and would not turn them away but we cannot support them in refuge. We are a women’s organisation and are protected by the Equality Act 2010 which recognises that there are organisation who support women and children specifically. We do not support men, work with men nor do we have any intention of doing so. Women and girls need to have access to safe spaces to be able to survive domestic abuse in all it’s forms. We are reluctantly affiliated to SWA due to the funding given to SWA which they will distribute to us. The women we work with need us to have as much funding as possible to allow us to support them. SWA do not appear to represent the voices of women’s aid and we now need the SG to engage with the wider WA organisations to allow us to be heard and to shape the future more positively for women and women’s aid. We need to come together to actually be heard."

[quote AlecTrevelyan006]The latest statement is no better than what was said on the podcast

edinburghrapecrisis.wixsite.com/ercc/post/statement[/quote]
Yes. What's needed is an apology and a retraction. What we got is a mealymouthed concession to women in acute crisis, who'll not be re-educated when they first attend, but will be re-educated asap, alongside every other woman attending.

And that's final.

That's the statement to clarify the words supposedly taken out of context.

But the thing is, I'm now at that point. No longer in acute crisis. Since WM's interview I've had a persistent flashback again, which I haven't had since Christmas. I'm upset, unsettled and those words bring back a lot of the unhelpful thoughts that I worked on in rape crisis counselling. When I first heard the interview, I felt ill. But I am using what my counsellor taught me so I don't spiral down again. So far it's working, although I have been much better than this.

Which according to MW's clarifying statement, means I'm now ready for re-education about my unacceptable prejudice against males in a female-only therapeutic environment.

I haven't changed my mind though. Neither have my needs. I still need a female-only therapeutic environment and I have the right to access help from the national rape crisis service without being re-educated.

Because the trauma is still there. Counselling cannot make it go away. That was probably the hardest lesson I learned from my counsellor. I've learned to live with it. She helped me find ways to manage it. By all accounts, I had very successful counselling, and it did involve a lot of reframing to help me deal with my guilt and shame. But this passage still makes no sense, even in the context of successful counselling that profoundly changed my life:

But if you have to reframe your trauma, I think it is important as part of that reframing, having a more positive relationship with it, where it becomes a story that empowers you and allows you to go and do other more beautiful things with your life, you also have to rethink your relationship with prejudice. [my emphasis]

I would like MW to explain to me how I should simultaneously reframe my trauma, have a fucking positive relationship with being attacked as a child, turn that into a story that empowers me when it almost broke me 30+ years later and then, newly empowered, meekly submit to be lectured that my involuntary trauma responses to males are prejudiced and bigoted when they also happen in the presence of males who identify as trans.

I mean I don't even see why that ought to be of any importance to my life or my recovery.

To be wholly charitable here, MW's words remind me of people who have learned about something, but they don't understand it. They use the lingo, but something's off. They say things that sound good (empowering, positive, beautiful) but it's just meaningless waffle, because they have completely failed to grasp the real issue.

And there is a reason why probably 99% of rape crisis services are offered in a female-only space by female-only counsellors - because if you're using a structural analysis of sexual violence as male violence that predominantly affects female victims all of whom have to navigate a world dominated by males, regardless of their trauma, then that is the only logical setup.

Give survivors one space where they know they will not have to be on guard. Where hypervigilant survivors can relax in the knowledge that there are no males present.

MW has not demonstrated - in none of the many interviews given - a fraction of an understanding of that. It's just not there. And I don't think it can, because that's simply not what MW is focused on.

MW has not demonstrated - in none of the many interviews given - a fraction of an understanding of that. It's just not there. And I don't think it can, because that's simply not what MW is focused on.

Charlie I think your last paragraph hits the nail on the head.

To be wholly charitable here, MW's words remind me of people who have learned about something, but they don't understand it. They use the lingo, but something's off. They say things that sound good (empowering, positive, beautiful) but it's just meaningless waffle, because they have completely failed to grasp the real issue.

Guilty Feminist transcript extracts:
MW "It happened not to deliberately. When I graduated, I did a Masters at Edinburgh University, there was a job going at Shakti and I just completed a masters in training. And they needed someone to do some training. It wasn't by design. I just applied for this job, it looked interesting. Obviously, I had been around violence. I grew up in a home with domestic abuse. I'd experienced violence as a transwoman in India. And so it looked like somewhere I wanted to work. And I applied and I got the job. And I just stayed.

Like before working in women's services, I used to teach people how to sound American in India, in a call centre. So it is not by design that I got into this work. But I stayed by design because in fact, I moved back to India and then moved back again to work at Shakti Women’s Aid."

"So I've worked in the women's sector now since 2005, so quite a few years. And when I worked at Shakti Women's Aid, you know, it was eye opening, not just to see an experience, like what does domestic abuse really look like" (continues)

Wadwha became involved in Women's Services via Shakti Women's Aid. Shakti Women's Aid is a grassroots organisation formed in 1985 and incorporated in 2004.

from website:
Shakti Women’s Aid helps BME women, children, and young people experiencing, or who have experienced, domestic abuse from a partner, ex-partner, and/ or other members of the household.
shaktiedinburgh.co.uk/about/

I am struggling to understand why/how someone male whose previous experience was training Indian telesales staff to mimick Americans came to be employed by a domestic abuse organisation providing specialist support to very vulnerable women and their children.

Karen Davis examines the context and consistency of Wadwha's claims to have imitated an American in a call centre role managing access to food stamps and cash benefits for US citizens. Wadwha describes enjoying the "sense of power" associated with this role in a Provoke interview: www.buzzsprout.com/1219151/4569950-provokecast-episode-1-mridul-wadhwa

'MRIDUL AND POWER. HAVE YOU HEARD THIS, EDINBURGH RAPE CRISIS?'
6 May 2021
www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHhOugmuhKk

I was thinking that it's obviously not easy to build a new prison, hospital, changing rooms when women can't use them as they don't feel safe there.

But these services are different, something more thrifty could be set up without the need for mammoth investments. We, as users, are the ones who can decide where to go.

MW has not demonstrated - in none of the many interviews given - a fraction of an understanding of that. It's just not there. And I don't think it can, because that's simply not what MW is focused on.

But this is a recurring pattern. Males getting into "women's officer" or similar roles, and being 100% trans focussed, and using the position to basically block female activism. Barely the slightest hint of actual interest in anything to do with female reality, just minimal signalling about things like period poverty.

From what I've seen a random non-trans male would likely do a better job than transwomen in these positions. They're less likely to have an actively anti-female agenda.

When I dream about what I would do if I won the lottery, one of the things on the list would be to set up a service for females only, where I had enough money to ignore the hate, the abuse, the threats from TRAs. Where I wouldn't have to rely on a government which has an agenda for money. Because whatever you set up, TRAs will want to be included and then we will spend more & more time fighting them than providing a service. We need to draw the line here & now and fight the fight.

This.

There was a Twitter post the other day where someone called for re establishing female only services. There was an immediate demand in reply: Will that be inclusive of TW?

Men's services are available to TW
Women's services have been forced to mixed sex in almost all cases and are available to TW

If female only services are (re) established to cater for the women bounced out of women's services and excluded due to their need for a single sex space - why do TW have to have access to that too?

At some point this absolute intolerance of females and the demand to take away resources from them is going to have to be challenged. Along with that weasel word 'inclusive'.

It is not inclusive to excluded women from women's spaces.

But this is a recurring pattern. Males getting into "women's officer" or similar roles, and being 100% trans focussed, and using the position to basically block female activism. Barely the slightest hint of actual interest in anything to do with female reality, just minimal signalling about things like period poverty.

From what I've seen a random non-trans male would likely do a better job than transwomen in these positions. They're less likely to have an actively anti-female agenda.

Female and male transactivists have undermined women's services and rights as well as sex-based Safeguarding.

@TheHarpySings* report of 2018 TRA conference organised by Jane Fae, 'We're Still Here'

(extract)
6) GETTING THE GRA WE WANT

This was a workshop with 3 experts sitting with groups and talking through activism. They were:

Helen Belcher (Lib Dems, Trans Media Watch)
James Morton (Scottish Transgender Alliance)
Alex Moore (GenderJam). Moore is from N Ireland.

James Morton gave some insight into tactics the TRAs will probably start using in England and Wales as they were successful in Scotland.

He said the TRAs need to build allies in mainstream women and children’s organisations so it looks like they care about them.

He also said what worked in Scotland's was a “constructive, friendly, innocent” tone when debating or in dialogue with the GC side. To be mindful about who is watching- essentially like what we do with the lurkers on the FWR board. To make the TRAs look like the reasonable side.

James also said that in dialect with elected officials, to clarify that the trans side aren’t silencing anyone but want to clarify the misconceptions being bandied around by GC feminists. (continues)

James Morton talked about how they can get rid of “gender” markers on things like IT systems and places where it isn’t relevant- apparently GDPR might be able to help them here.

JM’s campaigning tips were to gain trust in the local community- and to approach moderate feminists, “correct misconceptions and forgive any ignorance they may have displayed”. They want to gain trust and make themselves likeable.

Apparently small acts like helping to campaign about period poverty or retweeting the local branch of Women’s Aid will make a difference and result in some reciprocation. They want to make it look like they care about Women's issues so they don’t appear threatening"
(continues)
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3398737-We-re-Still-Here-Conference-8th-September-A-report-from-the-inside

Yep, I've seen comments of "go and find a female only service then!" Only when these services appear they get piled on by "is this inclusive to TW?" all wide eyed and innocent, but we all know that undercurrent of "because if they aren't you're gunna get it"

There was a Twitter post the other day where someone called for re establishing female only services. There was an immediate demand in reply: Will that be inclusive of TW?

Yes. The woman who disingenuously asked got ratioed and eventually flounced.

It’s a shame that TRAs don’t direct all the energy they put into invading places set up for women into setting up separate places for trans people. It’s almost as if they don’t actually care about the vulnerable trans people that they cite as the need to be allowed into women’s spaces, they just don’t want women to have something of their own.

Have you seen this?

3 women's aid groups in North Lanarkshire had all their local authority funding removed because they would not admit men to refuges or work with perpetrators of abuse. The contract for domestic violence services now sits with SACRO instead.

MW's husband was a director of SARCO until last March.

twitter.com/VerdiMurray/status/1425946091749617672

Glinner Update has just posted about this too

The msm need to make this front page news over the weekend - absolute scandal in the making

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/mridrul-wadha-sacro-and-the-14-million?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email&utm_source=copy

MW's husband was a director of SACRO until last March.

THIS!!!

This needs to be shouted long and loud

SACRO is not a specialist in this area, nor was it local to the Lanarkshire site it took over, despite that looming large in the funding criteria.

It has 50 years in supporting prisoners and their families, running drop in centres of offenders post release. The vast majority of their previous clientele have been male offenders, plus travel arrrangements for access visits.

So offenders... not victims.

Is it just me that screams Fox / Hen House at that?

Does anyone know if anything came of Posie Parker's plan to fundraise for an all female refuge?

And yes, this:
The contract for domestic violence services now sits with SACRO instead.
MW's husband was a director of SACRO until last March.

Are Sacro the Scottish equivalent to NACRO? Cos I understand Nacro do good work but as stated, their focus is offenders, most of whom are male.

Is it just me that screams Fox / Hen House at that?

Not just you. Jeezus, the truth really is coming out now 😲