Reports Roz Adams successful in her action against Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre

[LargeSquareRock]

https://x.com/journalismseen/status/1792305714595012730?s=46&t=f8U9xaap9RM6pcBCdpsFIA

Excellent news and looking forward to seeing the judgement.

'The version of gender identity theory embraced by ERCC (described by the Tribunal as “dogmatic”, “extreme”, and “hardline”)

This is a mistake by the tribunal - the version of GI theory embraced by ERCC is what GI theory is. It is what LBGT Youth are teaching in Scottish schools, what the various charter marks require adherence to, what the Scottish Greens expelled members for failing to follow, what the TRA protestors threaten women with violence and try to drown out their rallies over. There was nothing particularly extreme about the version displayed by ERCC versus that being pushed across society.

I'm not on X but I've read that Sonia Sodha has tweeted in support of RA and the judgment - perhaps some Twixer could do the necessary?

Try again without a share token maybe?

Well done to Roz Adams. I'm so happy for her and for all victims of sexual assault and rape who deserve better than being gaslit and misled by that poisonous narcissist man.

I'll try again. Why are share tokens an issue now or have they always been?

Everyone was misgendering Wadhwa merrily on the AIBU thread, it wasn't the link. I thought they might leave it up given how awful MW is, but sadly not.

If I've understood this correctly, this decision has established, amongst other things, that it is reasonable for a user of a sex-sensitive service to ask about the sex of her service provider, and expect an honest answer.

This is incompatible with the GRA, which enables someone with a GRC to falsify all their documents, and keep the existence of the GRC itself secret. Relaxing the rules on GRCs will only make this worse.

Obviously, someone's sex may be readily discernible, or scientifically detectable, and continues to have evidentiary significance even if its not the same as their legal sex. But it's no longer recorded anywhere.

Any review of self-ID surely needs to have this case in mind.

@WandsOut if you start another one don't reference the first one as it will be deleted as a TAAT.

They've reinstalled the original I think

This is incompatible with the GRA, which enables someone with a GRC to falsify all their documents, and keep the existence of the GRC itself secret. Relaxing the rules on GRCs will only make this worse.

I completely agree, and TRAs and the government have happily pushed the line that there are exemptions and some spaces can be single sex if it really is necessary.

@WandsOut yes i see now they have! I didn't misgender MW, I just referred to MW as male and a misogynist. But I still got deleted

But other people's he/hims are still up, so not sure what the issue is.

They seem to be deleting personal attacks more than "misgendering"

That's an important point, though in this case the staff member didn't have a GRC, if I've remembered correctly - in fact they were a female person who identified as non-binary. (Presumably you can't get a GRC to say you're non-binary though I expect someone somewhere has tried.)

(Presumably you can't get a GRC to say you're non-binary though I expect someone somewhere has tried.)

Yes, some Californian tried recently in court, it was thrown out.

Someone asked up thread what will happen to MW now. My prediction is that MW will cling on for the duration of the 'independent review', which seems to have been commissioned by Rape Crisis Scotland, and will leave within the next two years, citing the impossibility of doing the job when everyone is conspiring against MW, and having exhausted all possible sick pay. Depending on how things go in Scotland on this issue in that period, MW will then either be entirely unemployable or will walk in to some ridiculous role like Trans People's Commissioner (watch MW start campaigning for this now). For what it's worth I am quite sure MW is a nightmare to work with or for regardless of this issue, MW is far too similar to a load of dodgy characters I have known in the sector over the years. Anyone with any sense could have seen that at point of recruitment so the Trustees really do need to share responsibility here, not just for the total mismanagement of it all but also for being daft enough to employ MW in the first place.

Surely when a tribunal has found MW led a heresy hunt and harassed an employee MW cannot stay in position?

Neatly pointing out the contradiction of "non-binary"

IwantToRetire · Today 00:55

And, which I didn't note at the time, but that the judgement at each instance recognises the right of women who have suffered male violence absolutely have the right to be honestly told whether or not any support staff are (biologically) male.

As MurielThrockmorton ponders, I wonder if this will affect Sarah's case in Brighton? Roz's case was in Scotland, where the legal system has differences. Does anybody know whether Employment Tribunals have an effect nationally? I hope so.

I think ERCC posting on Instagram that they remain an inclusive organisation indicates that MW will indeed cling on. At least long enough for a government job to become available

Given yesterdays thread about our favourite trans stand-up/actor/wannabe MP was deleted PDQ, it seems that MNHQ get very twitchy on the delete button about high profile people who may have lawyers on speed dial b

Sloejelly · Today 08:04

Non-binding at this level, but also I don’t think Scottish courts bind English ones or vice versa, though they are persuasive.

Thanks, I posted in hasted after reading Muriel's post.

Iirc the last I heard this guy said he was appealing (in a strictly legal sense). Although he, last time I checked, was in the hole for the several tens of thousands shortfall for his original crowdfunder. Amazingly he grifted over £70k for this childish vanity project.

MarieDeGournay · Today 09:54

I'm not on X but I've read that Sonia Sodha has tweeted in support of RA and the judgment - perhaps some Twixer could do the necessary?

https://x.com/soniasodha/status/1792452742105207276

Sounds like the gender ideology rot extends up to Rape Crisis Scotland (the umbrella federation of which ERCC, a standalone charity, is a member). They have comprehensively failed female rape survivors in putting a contested ideology before beneficiaries.

(referencing the following)

https://x.com/lnmackenzie1/status/1792445728763101427

A reminder of what happened when a group of survivors met the directors of Rape Crisis Scotland and Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre in October 2019 to discuss their concerns about a policy which allowed trans identified males into women only support services.

(Sonia Sodha)

The judgment is excoriating re Mridul Wadhwa, the male who identifies as female who still runs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre: for hounding a female employee and seeing sacking women as a legitimate way of achieving a gender ideology-compliant organisation. So: what next for him?

The judgment is excoriating re Mridul Wadhwa, the male who identifies as female who still runs Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre: for hounding a female employee and seeing sacking women as a legitimate way of achieving a gender ideology-compliant organisation. So: what next for him?

It would be up to the trustees of ERCC to sack MW. The trustees are as deep in this as anyone. It would require OSCR to investigate the trustees but they don’t seem to do much (probably just one man and his dog running OSCR).