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

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.

Again you're not addressing the point being made. MW believes women who don't believe TWAW and want female only rape services should be "educated" or expected to "reframe their trauma". MW, the male leader of ERCC has gone on record more than once to say it. This is indefensible.

@CompleteGinasaur

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.

They didn't publish her home address and there's no way they would pull a story for that reason. They might amend it, or add a clarification, but to pull the entire thing is exceedingly rare and only ever usualy happens when it is deemed completely unrescuable - in other words it's a load of nonsense. The story contained no more detail than the spiked story which began this thread. It may well have been embellished, Murray said that herself and referenced hyperbole - which means elements a least of the story were untrue assuming you take her word for it.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

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.

Again you're not addressing the point being made. MW believes women who don't believe TWAW and want female only rape services should be "educated" or expected to "reframe their trauma". MW, the male leader of ERCC has gone on record more than once to say it. This is indefensible.

Reframing trauma is a very common approach in counselling/support services and it's an entirely unremarkable comment from someone doing the job she does. And bigotry has always been challenged in such services, it has to be, you can't expect a project to function if people feel they can be openly bigoted to other members of the group.

You were just saying that Stonewall couldn't set up specialist support services because they didn't have the expertise. By Jove, I have hit on the answer. Barley, you should apply there and establish their service, as you have the expertise to say this terminology is acceptable!

Reframing trauma is a very common approach in counselling/support services and it's an entirely unremarkable comment from someone doing the job she does.

That was definitely not the way it was used. I don't know who you think is buying it.

Wanting female spaces to recover from male violence is not "bigotry". It's callous in the extreme to frame women's trauma responses that way.

But thanks for yet another demonstration of how gender identity ideology utterly fails women and girls.

MW is not a fit person to be involved with this sector, because judging by their comments and actions MW has zero respect or empathy for women who have suffered male violence. MW flaunts that in full public glare.

barleybadminton
It is not [VAWG services’] fault if alternative [single-sex] provision does not exist and it is unfair to attack them for it. They have chosen to be a trans inclusive service, they are the ones getting up every morning to do the work and it is their right to decide what kind of service they offer and who to - provided they remain within the Equality Act - and there is nothing in the act which prevents service providers from offering a service to two different protected groups.

Then I assume barley would be just as content if an analogous rationale was used by a rape crisis centre that wanted to provide female-only services?

"It is not VAWG services’ fault if alternative provision for transwomen does not exist and it is unfair to attack them for it. They have chose to be a single-sex service, they are the ones getting up every morning to do the work and it is their right to decide what kind of service they offer and who to – provided they remain within the Equality Act – and there is nothing in the Act which prevents service providers from offering a service to a single protected group."

Because it would be hypocritical to accept the first statement as true, reasonable and legal but not the second, no?

Wasn’t MWs main experience in telephone counselling where MW revealed MW revelled in the power of being able to grant or deny food charity? I am sure I read this on a previous thread about MW….

Also remember reading that individuals who had undergone counselling with MW were not in the least complimentary of MWs therapeutic relationship or advice….

Does anyone remember similar?

@N0Name

Wasn’t MWs main experience in telephone counselling where MW revealed MW revelled in the power of being able to grant or deny food charity? I am sure I read this on a previous thread about MW….

Also remember reading that individuals who had undergone counselling with MW were not in the least complimentary of MWs therapeutic relationship or advice….

Does anyone remember similar?

I haven't heard that but I know that a woman born female wouldn't get away with.

Nor would a woman born female get away with blatantly lying on her job application or telling rape victims they are bigoted and need to reframe their trauma.

No-one.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Reframing trauma is a very common approach in counselling/support services and it's an entirely unremarkable comment from someone doing the job she does.

That was definitely not the way it was used. I don't know who you think is buying it.

Oops that was in response to this.

are we allowed to say yet that it's incredibly fucking creepy for a man to move heaven and earth to have a career which gives him power over vulnerable and traumatised women?

Seriously creepy.

are we allowed to say yet that it's incredibly fucking creepy for a man to move heaven and earth to have a career which gives him power over vulnerable and traumatised women?

Mridul would probably class saying it as a hate crime but yes, incredibly fucking creepy.

We need to keep on saying it, the more of us that speak up the better.

I find it creepy for any man to be trying to gain access to female only spaces. It's an absolutely clear demonstration of why they shouldn't be allowed in. They can't accept being told no.

@N0Name

Wasn’t MWs main experience in telephone counselling where MW revealed MW revelled in the power of being able to grant or deny food charity? I am sure I read this on a previous thread about MW….

Also remember reading that individuals who had undergone counselling with MW were not in the least complimentary of MWs therapeutic relationship or advice….

Does anyone remember similar?

You may be thinking of this.

Transcript of MW on a podcast, previously compiled by @helleofabore

"It was the first time I experienced power. It was a call centre job where we were the customer service for the benefit card that was being rolled out in the United States, in certain States. Where people who were receiving food stamps and cash benefits from the local state governments were now receiving it on an electronic card."

So they were transitioning from whatever system was there before to the electronic card. And I was responsible for whatever the person had phoned me about, you know I could do whatever they asked me to and I experienced this complete powerfulness. This idea that I was in charge and it wasn't me, it was Louise who was in charge. And this is how I discovered Louise."

When I was shocked with fear about anything, I would call on Louise. And Louise could do whatever. So, in my most difficult moments I spoke as Louise. And Louise (the western woman's name they chose to convince Americans' they were also American') could do whatever. She could do anything. In my most difficult moments, I spoke as Louise. And Louise had a very Southern drawl. I have lost it. But I was very good at it."

It was so racist as well, because most of my colleagues sounded Indian, no matter how hard they tried and whenever I came on the phone you could hear, um, (indistinguishable) who would say 'finally a white American'."

www.buzzsprout.com%2F1219151%2F4569950-provokecast-episode-1-mridul-wadhwa

Yes - thank you @PurgatoryOfPotholes.

Thanks for finding that purgatory, I was out and about and could find it.

Could not find it. Dah

FPFW put in a complaint to the equality watchdog regarding comments made by Police Scotland in the Times article. I wonder if this has anything to do with the pulling of this and other articles with the same comments. Not sure if this was highlighted on the original Nicola thread.

@N0Name

Wasn’t MWs main experience in telephone counselling where MW revealed MW revelled in the power of being able to grant or deny food charity? I am sure I read this on a previous thread about MW….

Also remember reading that individuals who had undergone counselling with MW were not in the least complimentary of MWs therapeutic relationship or advice….

Does anyone remember similar?

Yes I remember those comments. That piece of work is on a Power trip and anyone who enables it should be ashamed.

That’s the interview thank you for finding it.

This is a section of a transcript of a feminist podcast that had MW on as a guest in August 2021.

You can read the full thing at www.forwomen.scot/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Mridul-Wadhwa-Guilty-Feminist-transcript.pdf

MW: Well, as you're building bridges, maybe I should put away the Goddess Kali that seems to
have emerged as I'm speaking to you. Trust me. One of my favourite pictures if you Google Goddess Kali, the first Wikipedia picture, that's often me. I think it's important that there's a group of women that I'm really interested in, who are affected by this debate. And I say debate very generously because I don't believe it is. Debate is when there's equality of voices and respect. But this is about who has power and who doesn't.

But there are a group of survivors who will be watching and seeing what is being played out about spaces that they're potentially going to use. And be informed or misinformed about what actually happens here and be, possibly be fearful. And I think if you're worried about
these things, about inclusion and what trans inclusion means within women's organisations, and if your local women's organisation or Rape Crisis Centre or Women’s Aid is openly trans inclusive, and you just don't understand, reach out to them and ask those questions. I think it's important to know that we see you as an individual. And we come as survivors with experiences that often feel to the outside world as holding prejudice. So we might have fear of men of a certain ethnicity, we might have fear of trans people, and it could be linked to an experience of trauma. I think it is, it is okay to hold those things as long as you are willing to acknowledge that, in support, we will accept that.

But there is a difference also when, and I am not sure if I said this as clearly and transparently as I want to, but I’m trying. Apologies, if I haven't done it well. But I think the other thing is that sexual violence happens to bigoted people as well. And so, you know, it is not discerning crime. But these spaces are also for you. But if you bring unacceptable beliefs that are discriminatory in nature, we will begin to work with you on your journey of recovery from trauma. But please also expect to be challenged on your prejudices, because how can you heal from trauma and build a new relationship with your trauma, because you can’t forget, and you can’t go back to life before traumatic incident or traumatic incidents. And some of us never, ever had a life before traumatic incidents. 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. Otherwise, you can’t really, in my view, recover from trauma and I think that’s a very important message that I am often discussing with my colleagues that in various places. Because you know, to me, therapy is political, and it isn’t always seen as that.