Full Transcript of the meeting with Mridul Wadhwa about rape crisis centers

[ChristinaXYZ]

For Women Scotland have the full transcript of this meeting on their website

forwomen.scot/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Mridul-Wadhwa-Building-Intersectional-Inclusion-in-Rape-Crisis-Services-14Sep2021.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1nWY9_l4DrpSo5spLHokK5_NBBDF8yJMigurcrvVbBTTgjXkmTkwS2kfU

And here's another post that should be read & absorbed by MW's sycophants.

Link to tweet

This pic is the screenshot attached.

I'll come back with a copy/paste version to help those who can't see this.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

And also here

CID Officers explained that there would need to be a forensic examination when the on-call forensic examiner (FE) arrived. I was not given any idea of how long that would be.
I felt that I had to wait a long time for this.
I was asked to get on to the examination table. I was wearing a medical gown and no other clothing.
I do not recall being asked if I would prefer a female FE. When the FEs arrived, they were two men. The nature of the testing was explained to me. I was never asked if I felt ok with a second person attending. I did not feel in the frame of mind to object.
I was asked to get on to the examination table. I was wearing a medical gown and no other clothing.
I was feeling very apprehensive and vulnerable. I felt like a piece of meat, not a live human being who has just been through extreme trauma. I did not want any man anywhere near me and certainly not touching me. Because I wanted all this to be over, I didn’t feel able to voice this. I just wanted to scream at them. Clinical information was given to me but I felt no compassion, care or consideration for my feelings.

Dear God. That has actually given me a physical feeling of revulsion on behalf of that poor woman.

She is being abused again and again.

I genuinely cannot conceive of a mindset that is determined to use abused and raped women, in their job, to validate one's self-imposed notion of who one is.

@ArabellaScott

MW should be running a trans specific service, which is obviously where their primary interest lies.

Yes, this sounds like a great idea. Surely TRAs would get behind a service specifically for trans women and/or trans people and non-binary people? I would imagine there are specific needs and considerations that Mridhul could serve very well.

I think I've said elsewhere that surely this would be the answer but I strongly suspect that's not really what MW wants to achieve. If MW gets what MW says MW wants, MW can't carry on doing what MW is doing now.

All this MW shit does my head in. Do we get deleted for the he/him thing?

@Orgasmagorical

All this MW shit does my head in. Do we get deleted for the he/him thing?

I'm begrudgingly acquiescing to the imposed language censorship to avoid deletion. It's something that really angers me, especially in this discussion, because the issue at hand is the fact MW is both biologically and legally male & this is a material fact which matters enormously in this discussion. The fact that we even have to censor our language to continue to speak because knowing the monitors will jump immediately to report anything that supposedly 'misgenders' MW & curtails the discussion is infuriating. It's something that @MNHQ really should reflect on.

Glad it's not just me, PlayYou, thank you.

@Orgasmagorical

All this MW shit does my head in. Do we get deleted for the he/him thing?

Mine too. I was doing really well for seven months and these comments are just retraumatising. It's institutional betrayal and I just cannot understand why there is no compassion for survivors coming from the service.

Frankly, I also cannot understand why the managers of the other VAWAG organisations aren't saying this has to stop. Escalating hostility against the most traumatised female survivors of male violence who self-exclude because they cannot cope with a mixed-sex therapeutic is not the way.

But they don't. I have some ideas why -some agree with MW that women like me are just hateful bigots, others are too scared of the backlash if they speak out.

Well I have had enough of this shit now. It does my head in, too. So forgive me if I say that if you get paid to run a Rape Crisis Centre and you don't stand up now and say enough, then you are failing in your duty to survivors.

@toomanytrees

Why does a rape crisis centre have equality and diversity promotion as its first purpose?

Mission creep.

Having read a couple of past annual reports, I strongly suspect that there were not enough female rape and domestic violence victims using this service to keep (government and lottery) funds rolling in, the staff in paid employment and the directors in enhanced linkedin profiles. The diversity and inclusion mantra is just a boondoggle to hide behind.

We as women have every right to be outraged but we also also need to ask hard questions. If a rape crisis centre is working at capacity why does it have to troll for new types of victims beyond its original remit? If it is not working at capacity why not? Where are the legions of satisfied clients standing up for this organization?

All this

Well I have had enough of this shit now. It does my head in, too. So forgive me if I say that if you get paid to run a Rape Crisis Centre and you don't stand up now and say enough, then you are failing in your duty to survivors.

I agree.

Bloody hell, why can they not see exactly what MW is doing! Hiding in plain sight.

Shame on MW, for so many reasons.

Well I have had enough of this shit now. It does my head in, too. So forgive me if I say that if you get paid to run a Rape Crisis Centre and you don't stand up now and say enough, then you are failing in your duty to survivors.

Women are in an almost impossible position though, they are worried that there's a risk that if they do speak out they could lose their funding and the whole organisation could go, with staff they have supported over many years being transferred to larger generic organisations and a worse service for the women they support. They may have a board that doesn't support them, they may have staff who disagree. It's a big thing for one person to do, and every centre might need to influence relationships with multiple health and local authorities services as well as the police and grant funders to protect the organisation. They really don't have as much power as you might think, though I do think eventually it will come to a head - there is stuff happening behind the scenes.

@SpringCrocus

Bloody hell, why can they not see exactly what MW is doing! Hiding in plain sight.

Shame on MW, for so many reasons.

I could not agree more.

This is good news:-

Brodie's trust is a not for profit organisation supporting women who’ve suffered pregnancy loss through domestic violence or forced termination.

Due to deeply concerning comments made by the current CEO of ERCC we have taken the decision to no longer signpost to this service. We cannot in all conscience send vulnerable women to the service in its current state.
Empathy, Trust and Victim focused service is at the heart of what we stand for and we have no interest in our clients religion, sexuality nor political views. Our purpose in post trauma services is to see our clients through the most difficult circumstances with compassion. It’s heartbreaking to see what was once an exceptional service fail clients in this way.
We remain a female only service, run by women for women and will not be intimidated into changing our stance on this matter, considering our support group is for those who’ve experienced pregnancy loss through domestic abuse.

I’m probably going to fail to explain what I’m trying to say but I’ll try. Does anyone else feel like the way MW talks about VAWG services being mainly managed by white, heterosexual cis women, it comes across as though it’s like, look at these “normal” women who don’t tick many of the protected characteristics bingo categories? MW is always mentioning how they are an Indian trans woman, and it’s like, okay but what does that really matter? I get wanting services to be inclusive and diverse is important so you get different perspectives and understand the needs of different people, but I feel like when MW talks about all these white, hetero cis women, it’s said in a sneering way? Like “imagine being non-LGBT” (don’t know how MW could possibly know the women who run these services are straight, or whether they have a disability etc but that’s another point).

I hope I’m being clear... my own experience with LGBT groups (as a white straight “cis” woman) is that when they’ve found out I’m straight, or assumed I am, I’ve had comments such as “I thought you were one of us”. I feel like some people do create an us and them divide. It’s very contradictory, these minority groups want to be accepted and included, but they also label people and make people “other” from them. The way MW talks about white hetero cis women, it’s like “I’m more diverse than you because I’m Indian and trans, so I’m better than you”.

People are who they are. Being straight shouldn’t be seen as something to be sneered at.

Quite.

It's another highly worrying aspect of the comments that it would appear that white, straight female rape victims are not really that welcome.

Which is an odd view, when providing a service in a country where about 95% of your service users are going to be white and heterosexual.

The priority of a female only rape crisis service is to meet the needs of raped females. All of them. Inclusively. When the main purpose of the service (and the women) is to serve the very obvious political agenda of the male service leader?

You see why the Brodie Trust can no longer in good faith refer female service users there for care.

Edinburgh Rape Crisis are advertising for board members

"We are keen to promote diversity and welcome applications from disabled women, trans women, and women of diverse backgrounds, sexual orientations, ethnicities and ages, to help us best meet the wide-ranging needs of survivors of sexual violence.

We are also keen to encourage women with an interest, and/or skills and experience, in finance and fundraising to apply.

No previous experience of being on a Board is required as induction and training will be provided.

Only women need apply under Schedule 9, Part 1 of the Equality Act 2010."

www.ercc.scot/get-involved/board/

This is unlawful.

It's another highly worrying aspect of the comments that it would appear that white, straight female rape victims are not really that welcome.

Which is an odd view, when providing a service in a country where about 95% of your service users are going to be white and heterosexual.

The priority of a female only rape crisis service is to meet the needs of raped females. All of them. Inclusively. When the main purpose of the service (and the women) is to serve the very obvious political agenda of the male service leader?

I completely agree.

Hats off to the women who tried to save ERCC back then.

Indeed