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?

It's quite astounding how callous these women have been.
I know women aren't cuddly, lovely, snuggly comfort blankets, I'm perfectly capable of being mean and rude and aggressive myself. But there's a time and a place and a rape crisis centre is most certainly not either of those. Then again, this is a world where a rainbow dildo butt monkey is deemed suitable to read to toddlers so what the fuck do I know.

Good question @lechiffre55 .
Who are the commissioning management?
Unless it's an incestuous self selecting board, there will be a hierarchy.

One could even step further back and look at the 'queer' theory espoused and promoted by Brindley's partner (academic working on 'queer law') and ask how undermining norms and boundaries might have this kind of effect on an organisation. On a government. On a whole society.

I feel for all of these women, tbh. They all are working within an incredibly unhealthy and dysfunctional dynamic. The organisation needs to be taken in hand, by someone with a clear sighted and balanced view that understands boundaries.

One of the points of the RCS report was Wadhwa overstepped the role. Another was the failure to centre victims. Thus if this is an employee rather than a survivor its irrelevant too. If its a service user it raises concerns about inapprioprate relationships and potential grooming and coercion.

Literally no explanation of the multiple emails to the newspaper is healthy nor good.

The newspaper clear has thought it odd enough to comment on it. Its peaked their interest.

That doesn't strike me as a bright move.

Is it appropriate for someone with these views to be in the same orbit as the head of rape crisis scotland, never mind the same bed???

It makes me wonder a HUGE number of things.

As a rule its healthy not to agree with your partner on a lot of things, but the scale of this one and the nature of the job just make you think the Head of Rape crisis scotland MUST agree with the concept of relaxation of sexual assault laws and not necessarily believing and centring the victim. ESPECIALLY given that they back Wadhwa and didn't see a problem with a whole pile of things that were going on.

Regardless of the scandal at ERCC, Sandy Brindley's position seems hugely at odds with her beliefs if that is the case. They aren't really compatible with the job.

Its rather like have having a vegan managing an abattoir.

There's a clear conflict of interest here.

It's quite astounding how callous these women have been.
I know women aren't cuddly, lovely, snuggly comfort blankets, I'm perfectly capable of being mean and rude and aggressive myself. But there's a time and a place and a rape crisis centre is most certainly not either of those.

This. And it's astounding how many of these women are working in the women's sector, worldwide. Even if they disagree politically they shouldn't be letting that get in the way of supporting victims of rape.

Failures of leadership and governance.

These are always involved.

All too often, also cronyism.

This is Denton writ large.

Isn't the esteemed Nancy Kelley of 'sexual racist' fame a lesbian in a long term relationship with a woman? It's all a bit, it's OK for me, but not for thee.

Many of the lesbians enabling this are. See also Ruth Hunt, Linda Riley.

Agreed for the high-profile lesbians.

I'd be profoundly disappointed if the majority of lesbians-without-a-high-profile supported such actions or perspectives. Seldom heard, seldom listened to.

Aunt Lydia is real, and she is legion.

That character even managed to parasitise the woman who created her.

It’s incredible to see how seductive being cruel to women can be for righteous women.

Cowan's paper cleverly slippyslides, starting from a case about a transman being unduly harshly punished for untruthfully claiming to be a man and thus having sex with a heterosexual woman compared with punishments for men who have sex with women by fraud. Allison Bailley has framed this as the result of homophobia in the legal profession against lesbian sex. But Cowan slippyslides from actual cases about women and lesbian sex to draw conclusions about "trans people" of both sexes without mentioning transwomen and the resulting non-consensual heterosexual sex by fraud.

Cowan's paper does not address the question of what happens if a transwoman claims to be a woman to have sex with women. If transmen are getting unduly harsh sentences then that Cowan reason that therefore "trans people" - both sexes - are already being treated unduly harshly as a result of transphobia and homophobia. Even if the result is a man having sex with a woman who doesn't consent to have sex with a man, otherwise known as heterosexual rape.

Cherchez les hommes.

There's an article in the Times about Brindley

https://archive.ph/TaG7i bypass paywall

www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/rape-charity-chief-faces-growing-calls-to-resign-t6wh8q8tw

Barbara is singing again.

Thats a great article. Its really weird seeing actual feminists being quoted in The Times! Strange days.

On Sunday Brindley was attacked by Rowling after being accused of canvassing sexual assault survivors for testimonials in a bid to save her job.
Brindley had told the Sunday Mail she had no knowledge of calls for her to quit and has been backed by some survivors.
But Rowling wrote on X: “Asking rape survivors to get you out of massive self-inflicted PR problem is unfortunately right on brand for the head of Rape Crisis Scotland.

I don't categorise that as an 'attack by Rowling', but an accurate and plausible set of suppositions about the chronology of the events. But I suppose that I would…

Ooof that article doesn't hold back.

Brindley should absolutely be facing this for what happened on her watch, enabled by her.

However I cannot help noticing yet again the sex based differences in who gets to slide away and take no responsibility or consequences, and who is being made to answer to the press.

It's rather like the sex based difference between who had to stand and carry the can on the stand in court and who got to stay at home behind the human shield.

I agree with you @Anastomosisrex and perhaps women like Brindley should take some time to reflect on this.

Great article, thanks Icake.
MW as the scapegoat/sacrificial ram.
We have an eclipse tomorrow, traditionally the time for changes and rolling heads. A timely resignation will do.

In my more depressed moments I think we are going to see women returned to official, legal, justified subordination in the western world, as lesser citizens than men, with accepted lesser rights and lost equality.

And it will happen in part through a lot of women who won't bother to notice or act or take the risk of not being nice until it's too late, but also in large part through women actively enabling men to do it.

Whether it's 'do it to Julia', or a bid for pats and cookies, or mad internalised misogyny, or vengefulness on other women, or an enjoyment of power over and harm to other women, who knows.

It's not unlike the sex based difference between who was and was not the primary focus of the women's rape crisis service.

Was it Ellen MacKenzie who, like McCavity, was never there but the invisible hand behind much of the CGD | Forstater foment?

Why are these people never front and centre but using others as their human shield? Why do the shields go along with it?

It's not Brindley's first rodeo

https://tfn.scot/news/leading-scots-charity-ordered-to-pay-51000-to-employee-it-unfairly-dismissed

Refusing to acknowledge she's done anything wrong seems to be a pattern.