Surely Mridul Wadhwa has to go now? Report into ERCC out.

[GargoylesofBeelzebub]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13842189/Edinburgh-Crisis-Centre-designed-protect-women-suffered-sexual-violence-condemned-failing-damning-report.html

Pretty scathing. Wadhwa cannot stay surely?

Fox Fisher: 'Is there a personal reason for getting into this line of work?'

Mridul Wadhwa: 'Staying on has been personal because it was pretty clear to me that I was the only trans woman, in the women's aid movement.
And I wasn't even sure that if I had been hired, if they had known that I was trans.
When I came out individually to various colleagues, there was this disbelief: 'Oh, you can't be trans'.

https://x.com/sarahstuartxx/status/1297442651235647488/photo/2

https://archive.ph/x5Qv5

How to use survivors to 'help you stay connected to the cause' while also 'keeping it fun'. (my emphasis):

“I think the biggest myth [of sexual violence] is ‘stranger danger,’” Wadhwa commented. “All messages are usually about being safe when you’re outside – and yes there is a minor risk for women to experience sexual assault from strangers – but the reality is that most of the time it comes from someone they know, including their acquaintance. The other myth is that your body may react in a physical way to sexual violence including an orgasm but that does not mean that it’s not rape because that’s a physical response. You can’t control how your body responds to violence.”

The work is incredibly emotionally draining, so Wadhwa has to be balanced and mindful of her own emotional state. The Student asked her what she does to take care of herself: “Well I don’t deal with individual survivors every day, so for me what I do in terms of self-care is a lot of avoidance. I do see survivors – four a week usually – who help me stay connected to the cause…but it’s important to keep it fun. We should be able to laugh and use humour at work. In terms of my team, I try to cook for them once a week or every other week.”

And a Mumsnetter said on one of the threads that she'd had one of these session with MW who was just scrolling through MW's phone looking bored the entire time while she spoke.

I wanted this post to be on this page and every page. Very good summary @RedToothBrush

I am both so relieved he's finally fukking out of a place he should never have been in the first place, but also angry this happened at all, and how long it took for it to be resolved. I was about to say women somtimes get treated as such second class citizens, but in this case I don't think women even get elevated that high, more like objects to be used. Much grrrr...

Lying by ommission. Does he think that makes it any better?

'looking in your pants'. Who frames a conversation relating to rape survivors with language like that?

DARVO and projection.

Also this from the Student interview:

'Most importantly, rape crisis centres are spaces for those affected by sexual violence, most of whom are women. The Student asked Wadhwa if she believes a man could be a successful rape crisis centre manager. She does not: “I don’t think men are ready to go out and set up services of this nature. Women’s aid organisations and rape crisis centres have been set up with the blood, sweat, and tears of women. It’s about the women’s experience of sexual violence. Our workforce is reserved for women only.”'

And thats the biggest travisty. No one stepped in and did anything about it. They all cheerled him on

This is it. He rose to where he is because of a whole culture in Scotland, which found leadership and political capital in the SNP and NS, that supported the misogyny of gender ideology.

Covered( sort of) on Woman’s Hour today. Woman interviewed spoke very carefully using them as MWs pronouns while Anita Rani blithely carried on calling him she, after all this.

The Student asked Wadhwa if she believes a man could be a successful rape crisis centre manager. She does not: “I don’t think men are ready to go out and set up services of this nature. Women’s aid organisations and rape crisis centres have been set up with the blood, sweat, and tears of women. It’s about the women’s experience of sexual violence. Our workforce is reserved for women only.”'

This is the validation craving, but self applied.
"Men no, me yes, therefore I am not a man."
"See if I was a man, I wouldn't be in this job because it's for women."
My grrr is not subsiding.

"I don’t think men are ready to go out and set up services of this nature."
Did Wadwah play any part in setting up the centre? Or is he stealing that too?

Mridul has a new gig in transportation. https://www.vahanomy.com/mridul-wadhwa

' I grew up to a spiritual outlook that don't have a concept of guilt in the same way I think that has been the biggest gift. I don't know what it feels like to be guilty or ashamed for who you are.'

From the interview with Fox Fisher.

Women’s aid organisations and rape crisis centres have been set up with the blood, sweat, tears, and semen of women.

Fixed it for him.

I see India Willoughby has been ranting about this today on X. Apparently it's all just a big conspiracy to get an innocent transwoman fired.

Pure gaslighting and power playing of the “How many fingers am I holding up Winston?” variety.

I see from that Vahanomy link that MW has also been an associate at the College of Policing.

Maya Forstater said a couple of days ago this ideology is like bindweed. She was bang on. It spreads underground and then entwines itself in the roots of another organisation.

We will be years digging it out.

There's a diagnosis for that

I see from that Vahanomy link that MW has also been an associate at the College of Policing.

Well that makes a lot of sense!

It's almost impressive how wrong India can be.

'Absolutely disgusting misgendering language from trans hate mongerer
@jk_rowling

• but sanctioned by all parts of the British Establishment. The only ‘crime’ the CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis committed was being trans in the UK - and catching the eye of the untouchable toxic Gender Critical movement. Once again, it’s the tiresome charade of Terfs targeting someone and screaming “women’s rights” - with an innocent trans person losing their job, and being publicly demonised. Let me give you a quick sketch of what this is all about: Mridual Wadhwa , who’s trans, got the gig as CEO at Ed Rape Crisis - cue UK media outrage. Terfs spewed usual abuse for months. A new terf starter infiltrates Ed Rape Crisis - starts trying to bring up Gender Critical themes. Staff immediately notice. Ed Rape Crisis start being deluged with calls (almost certainly from obsessive terfs doing an organised campaign) demanding to know the ‘birth sex’ of counsellors. Call takers and others rightly tell them that’s private info, which it is. It’s illegal to ‘out’ a trans person’s past without their permission. CEO stands up for her staff’s right to privacy - CEO gets fired, with UK establishment essentially saying being trans is akin to being a sex offender - ‘women’ have a right to know your past. Trans are not entitled to privacy. I’m guessing someone who doesn’t like Gay or Lesbian people can also now say “I refuse to be treated/helped by them” or “They refused to give me personal info about being Gay/Lesbian” and also be backed up by UK courts etc. Yes? Or once again, does this solely apply to the trans population?'

https://x.com/IndiaWilloughby/status/1834579640259596483

RedToothBrush · Today 11:56

Thank you for putting that in chronological order, all of those wrongs, just so that he could indulge his fetish and carry out his domineering behaviour and bullying. It's shocking to see it bullet pointed like that, it should be sobering for any trans acolytes to read and understand the precise implications of it.

I can only hope that the high ups, who enabled him in his well paid abusive behaviour see it, or something similar. Also, someone with the power to discipline and sack them.

Fuck it.

Absolutely disgusting misgendering language from trans hate mongerer

Mongerer is not a word.

@JKRowling

Oh, look, you've tagged JKRowling again, India. Did you mean to?

but sanctioned by all parts of the British Establishment.
The only ‘crime’ the CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis committed

He's committed a crime? What crime? He's been found to have discriminated against staff and badly mismanaged ERCC, but I wasn't aware he'd actually committed a crime?

was being trans in the UK - and catching the eye of the untouchable

That's an interesting word choice, India.

toxic Gender Critical movement. Once again, it’s the tiresome charade of Terfs targeting someone and screaming “women’s rights”

Screaming. Of course.

- with an innocent trans person losing their job, and being publicly demonised. Let me give you a quick sketch of what this is all about: Mridual Wadhwa

Mridul Wadhwa

, who’s trans, got the gig as CEO at Ed Rape Crisis - cue UK media outrage. Terfs spewed usual abuse for months.

Spewed. Of course.

A new terf starter infiltrates Ed Rape Crisis

Roz Adams was supportive of trans inclusion.

- starts trying to bring up Gender Critical themes.

RA tried to ensure a rape victim got the support she'd asked for, because RA's job was to support and help victims. I appreciate India struggles to understand this concept.

Staff immediately notice. Ed Rape Crisis start being deluged with calls (almost certainly from obsessive terfs doing an organised campaign) demanding to know the ‘birth sex’ of counsellors.

Evidence of this?

What am I thinking, of course not.

Call takers and others rightly tell them that’s private info, which it is. It’s illegal to ‘out’ a trans person’s past without their permission.

Bollocks it is.

CEO stands up for her staff’s right to privacy - CEO gets fired

Wadhwa stepped down.

, with UK establishment essentially saying being trans is akin to being a sex offender

Woah. Shark jumped.

- ‘women’ have a right to know your past. Trans are not entitled to privacy.

Shark does loop the loop.

I’m guessing someone who doesn’t like Gay or Lesbian people can also now say “I refuse to be treated/helped by them” or “They refused to give me personal info about being Gay/Lesbian” and also be backed up by UK courts etc. Yes? Or once again, does this solely apply to the trans population?'

Shark takes off into space, and dances with the aurora over Greenland.

IW seems more unhinged by the day.

RedToothBrush · Today 11:56

I hope you don't mind, but I've linked your post to the Woman's Hour Twitter post, I found it a very impressive summary and thought that it could do with a wider audience.

Can we please make every effort to be accurate in what we say.

Irrespective of what any of us on FWR feel there is a structure of how things work that we cant ignore.

And no MSM is NOT the place to get information to understand what is going on in the voluntary and charity sector of which RCs etc., are part.

1. As the EHRC confirmed in the recent guidelines, jobs advertised as women only can either be trans inclusive or not. (Admittedly effing hard for anyone without a legal background to understand.)
2. Roz Adams case is important because she put SERVICE USERS FIRST. She accepted TW as part of the organisation but insisted that service users had to be told whether someone they might have contact with was or was not a TW.
3. So the case that she won was about bad employment practice and ethical running of the centre as she was bullied for putting service users first.

Non of us may like it, but the case was NOT about whether it is appropriate for a TW to work at a RCs let alone run one.

4. This case has no bearing on Sarah's case in Brighton. The reference to accepted guidelines in the report commissioned by RCS are for those federated to Rape Crisis Scotland and Rape Crisis England and Wales. Brighton does not have a rape crisis centre. Brighton council gave money to the Survivor's Network which is not a women let alone feminist organisation, and so is not obliged to work by Federation guidelines.

5. More women's services, whether RC or domestic violence projects have lost funding because councils accept reports from council officers that point out they are expensive to run. So if anyone of this thread or any other thread on FWR is worried about the loss of women's services, the majority of these are nothing whatsoever to do with TW, but to do with the concept of women needing services specific to women's experiences no longer has traction in the real world.

6. Both local councils and funding trusts can choose who they fund. They are not obliged to work to guidelines that grew out of the politics of the Women's Liberation movement half a century ago. We might want them to, but thanks to the male back lash against WLM, followed by the reactionary 3rd Wave feminism and then hordes of students educated in universities where queer politics infected anything means that yes, many people think caring let alone agitating on women's sex based rights is only of interest to ageing dinasours.

I am not understimating the incredible pressure that for instance the SNP in Scotland had, but the power of trans activism is built of the existing and re-empowered men's rights activism.

And I suspect even if in some idealised world, more of us spent less time on FWR (joke) and instead monitored our local council, and complained about cuts to women's services, I dont think that saying women think this is wrong with have any clout what so ever.

Lets face it, it is only because the culture of MRAs (junior branch the Incels) that the concept that TWAW could take hold. It is only because men, male culture thinks that even what a woman thinks is irrelevant that the idea that a man could say he was a woman could take hold.

If men, the patriarchy, had any respect for women this would have been laughed out of the public sphere as a silly student prank.

This case has no bearing on Sarah's case in Brighton.

Happy to agree it has no direct legal bearing. But in terms of what is seen as accepted good practice surely this case clarifies some reasonable expectations? Such as that it's not acceptable to obfuscate and refuse to tell women who attend a survivor's group whether or not they might find themselves in a mixed-sex group. It clarifies that survivors should have a right to know what kind of group they are attending. Sussex were not being clear about that at all. And as you say, this was not putting service users first.