Mridul Wadwha and the thought police

[IamSarah]

Great article in Spiked Online about Mridul Wadwha's latest shenanigans:

www.spiked-online.com/2022/02/01/the-thought-police-are-here/

To briefly summarise:

• Mridul was born male

• Mridul is legally male with no GRC

• Mridul is the CEO of Edinburgh Rape crisis

• Mridul claims women who want female only rape crisis services are bigoted and should 'reframe their trauma'

• The CEO of a domestic violence charity Nicola Murray stopped referring women to Mridul's rape crisis service due to Mridul's misogyny

• Mridul reported Nicola Murray to the police for committing a hate crime

• The police actually visited Nicola Murray to question her thinking

The Times, which originally broke this story, has now published a retraction stating that this whole story is in fact completely untrue, and Nicola Murray was never visited by police nor was she the subject of a complaint (see under Feb 2nd) <a class="break-all" href="https://archive.ph/2022.02.03-124930/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corrections-and-clarifications-5phnn0xh2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">archive.ph/2022.02.03-124930/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corrections-and-clarifications-5phnn0xh2

It's only February and this is already the third time this year the Times has published an inflammatory story about trans people and subsequently entirely retracted it.

It's about time some people on this board started exercising some reasonable scepticism. Next time you read some outrageous story about trans people that makes you think you can't believe this is the world you live it - consider you might be right not to believe it.

A man permanently altered my face and broke the rest of me.

I don’t wish to be that vulnerable ever again.

I’m sure I wouldn’t have wanted to be in the presence of another man when I was at my most vulnerable.

No matter how much I was asked to reframe my trauma or address my ‘bigotry’, it would not change my utter need to be in the presence of women and only women to feel safe.

We should be able to access a safe space. And that is what it boils down to.

@SevenWaystoLeave

The Times, which originally broke this story, has now published a retraction stating that this whole story is in fact completely untrue, and Nicola Murray was never visited by police nor was she the subject of a complaint (see under Feb 2nd) www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corrections-and-clarifications-5phnn0xh2" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">archive.ph/2022.02.03-124930/www.thetimes.co.uk/article/corrections-and-clarifications-5phnn0xh2

It's only February and this is already the third time this year the Times has published an inflammatory story about trans people and subsequently entirely retracted it.

It's about time some people on this board started exercising some reasonable scepticism. Next time you read some outrageous story about trans people that makes you think you can't believe this is the world you live it - consider you might be right not to believe it.

I may have missed further information on this but the archived article you've linked to doesn't say she was never visited by police. It says 'The police have now confirmed she was not the subject of a complaint or investigation.' That's quite vague and could mean she was visited, but not as part of an investigation. Why would she lie about this?

How odd. As I posted that it was immediately hidden. What happened there?

The Times, which originally broke this story, has now published a retraction stating that this whole story is in fact completely untrue,

And this is what is known as spin. Doesn't say that.

and Nicola Murray was never visited by police So is this. It doesn't say that.

So nor was she the subject of a complaint (see under Feb 2nd)

It says she is not under investigation and there wasn't a complaint. What wordplay that signifies, I don't know, but it does not mean she did experience the intimidation of a police visit.

What it says.

Our article “Police interview charity chief after tweet ending referrals to rape centre” (Jan 29) and subsequent articles reported that Police Scotland interviewed Nicola Murray, the head of the Brodie’s Trust domestic abuse support group, about a reported hate crime. The police have now confirmed she was not the subject of a complaint or investigation.

*did not experience

...

@IamSarah

I've been raped Sarah, I don't need to ask someone else's experience.

I'm sorry that happened to you. Would you be able to talk about it with the embodiment of your rapist? Would you be able to talk about it in a women's group with a man, dressed in male clothes, leaning back and smiling at you? Because that's what happened to me.

I fully support you having the provision you need, I want to see more provision and a better range of provision. I would not support shutting down NIA for their policies, and I wouldn't support shutting down trans inclusive organisations either. We should be attacking the appalling state of funding and fighting for more rather than attacking individual providers who are struggling to meet as many people's needs as they can in an underfunded system.

Thank you Purgatory. My post has been put in stasis for saying the same thing as you.

Our article “Police interview charity chief after tweet ending referrals to rape centre” (Jan 29) and subsequent articles reported that Police Scotland interviewed Nicola Murray, the head of the Brodie’s Trust domestic abuse support group, about a reported hate crime. The police have now confirmed she was not the subject of a complaint or investigation.

This sounds to me like a hate crime was reported but the police did not identify that a crime had been committed or follow it up.

Which fits exactly with what Mridul said.

So there is some trick to link to archive, which we do not have.

Thanks MNHQ. But purgatory covered it anyway.

without being part of any official complaint.

@IamSarah

Our article “Police interview charity chief after tweet ending referrals to rape centre” (Jan 29) and subsequent articles reported that Police Scotland interviewed Nicola Murray, the head of the Brodie’s Trust domestic abuse support group, about a reported hate crime. The police have now confirmed she was not the subject of a complaint or investigation.

This sounds to me like a hate crime was reported but the police did not identify that a crime had been committed or follow it up.

Which fits exactly with what Mridul said.

It clearly says she was not the subject of a complaint which means no-one had reported her.

Perhaps they reported her charity, meaning Nicola was not the "subject of a complaint".

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Perhaps they reported her charity, meaning Nicola was not the "subject of a complaint".

That sounds more likely

Or perhaps someone 'just had a quiet word'...?

@PurgatoryOfPotholes

Perhaps they reported her charity, meaning Nicola was not the "subject of a complaint".

Then why pull the story? There's some desperate reaching going on here.

Why the story in the first place?

I hold my hands up and admit I don't trust men. I don't believe that all males who want access to vulnerable women have good intentions. I don't believe I'm not being manipulated and lied to. I'm cynical precisely because I was manipulated and lied to by my abusers.

The whole thing with Mridul boils down to what message Edinburgh rape crisis is giving to women.

The implication is it's more important for women to validate a male's feelings and be inclusive than to feel safe in a rape crisis centre.

Do you think that's ok Barley?

@IamSarah

I hold my hands up and admit I don't trust men. I don't believe that all males who want access to vulnerable women have good intentions. I don't believe I'm not being manipulated and lied to. I'm cynical precisely because I was manipulated and lied to by my abusers.

The whole thing with Mridul boils down to what message Edinburgh rape crisis is giving to women.

The implication is it's more important for women to validate a male's feelings and be inclusive than to feel safe in a rape crisis centre.

Do you think that's ok Barley?

I don't think it's about validating her feelings, I think it's because she has a lot of experience in the sector, is presumably good at her job and that's why the board appointed her.

Nicola Murray has herself explained exactly what happened when the police called at her home so its hardly the place of The Times to say it didn't happen. Sounds like they gave the the job of writing that piece to a journalist who wasn't bothered about accuracy. Not unusual now, I feel.

Then why pull the story? There's some desperate reaching going on here.

The reaching would be Seven's post. Your problem here is that I can read. Don't worry, many others have found my reading comprehension inconveniently high, too.

The original statement was from Brodie's Trust, so it makes sense that that would be the subject of the complaint.

The police have not denied visiting Nicola Murray though.

Nicola was deluged with abuse on twitter after that article was printed, and journalists got the facts of how she lost her son Brodie offensively wrong. That would explain the withdrawal.

They pulled the story because Nicola Murray herself asked them to, citing her concerns about what was effectively doxxing of her personal information and concerns about the publicising of her home address and therefore the safety of her family.

don't think it's about validating her feelings, I think it's because she has a lot of experience in the sector, is presumably good at her job and that's why the board appointed

'She' has no GRC and is legally male. Do you think that any male cross dresser who wants to run a women's rape crisis centre should be given a shot?