Women’s Rights Network Scotland has imploded

[rogue2025]

Hearing all sorts about things kicking off at WRNS.

Women being accused of ‘security breeches’.

Scores of activist women chucked out with no warning or right to reply.

It seems that the Scotland admins don’t want women talking to each other without permission.

So much for being a ‘membership’ organisation.

Why do so many feminist organisations end up in power trips like this?

The gender fight is hard enough without ‘mean girls’ turning on other women.

Power really does corrupt.

Some links or references would be useful.

Where are you hearing this, there’s not a single thing of this nature anywhere?

Many members have had their membership revoked due to an internal issue. Links, screenshots etc cannot be shared as it could breach confidentiality of women who joined.

It's a shame as it was a great network to be involved in.

Edited to say many members, not all. A decision taken a month or so ago that caused disquiet (as it wasn't voted on, just decided by admins) has resulted in a different group being set up to continue the original status quo (which a lot preferred) but unfortunately someone within that group over reached and it's resulted in most of the members who moved into the new group (which was a separate chat set up not a challenge to wrn, just a place to chat) being removed as members from wrn. Which nobody wants. However that's it done now. I'm hoping once the dust settles everyone involved can have calm conversations to rectify.

“Someone over reached” sounds quite deliberately vague. What was the nature of the over reach? My experience of WRN is that this sort of action is never taken lightly.

Watching...

Interesting first post…

I agree it can be admins or whatever over reaching themselves, but sometimes sadly just not understanding which tech is being used.

I tried to join a facebook group once that looked like it might be interesting, but never got accepted because I dont use an image for my facebook account. And they didn't know they had set this as a default but when this was pointed out they thought having an image would ensure someone was a real person, so wouldn't change it. (Dont even begin to try and understand that logic).

And WRN have taken other weird decisions about their web site and who can and cant contact them.

I can absolutely see they would who dont want to be identified online should be confident this wont happen.

But if a group is seriously trying to be a campaign group that is going to grow they did to create a space where as it were more casual members / followers can get news, leave a comment or whatever.

This how you build support as a campaign and help get your campaign purpose views etc., into the public domain.

In addition to that a campaign can also provide a private members area which is safe for those using it.

I dont know which is worse. Admins who are out of their depth (think about how some "admin" decisions on FWR have caused total outrage) and make a blunder - which can happen but should be possible to say oops! sorry lets try and put this right. As opposed to an admin thinking that admin means they are a policy and rule maker.

But maybe I am wrong to think of it as a campaign, and that as a network its primary function is to allow members to network.

And if those who haven't joined dont know what's going on that isn't an issue as what is going on is for the benefit of the network.

This is not true. No one set up another group to undermine/bypass WRN Scotland. Someone set up a chat group so all of us in Scotland (including those who had left WRN or had never been members) could talk to each other informally with no restrictions re subject matter.

... someone within that group over reached and it's resulted in most of the members who moved into the new group (which was a separate chat set up not a challenge to wrn, just a place to chat) being removed as members from wrn. ...

If your not with us you are against us?!!!

Tbh those of us in the new chat don't actually know for sure why or what actually happened. The general consensus is the new group chat think the admins didn't like the fact that a separate chat had been created. There was a person still loyal to the admins on the new chat who (we suspect) basically screenshotted everyone details on the new chat and sent it to the admins then everyone was expelled from the official website and WRN chat. Everyone is upset as the new chat was not a challenge to them it was simply set up to continue to chat nationwide. The new set up of regional groups upset people as no one got to vote on it. Felt forced upon everyone.

I joined WRN for a short while but watched a member get bullied out for a difference of opinion. I too left when they refused to look at my view on a subject and I felt they were very close minded women.

It's incredibly heavy handed. Women who have done nothing wrong except chat to other feminists in Scotland have been punished for being in the 'wrong' group. I'm so disappointed in them. I don't want them to 'rectify' it, I don't want to be part of a group that treats its members like property. Women need to be free to have open and honest discussions with each other.

There was a person still loyal to the admins on the new chat who (we suspect) basically screenshotted everyone details on the new chat and sent it to the admins then everyone was expelled from the official website and WRN chat.

Seriously?!

This doesn't even seem "political". This is someone with personal issues or a need to display "loyalty" to what the original idea or admin.

This sounds like one of those obscure left groups who never did any thing but endlessly purged each other in pursuit of totally purity. Or just good old fashioned cliques.

I uderstand women needing to feel safe when sharing online, but this over the top.

Makes the MN FWR seem like a well adjusted compromise.

So sad.

But not unique to feminists.

A friend who is a WRNS member in Glasgow tells me that a number of women have been removed from the local chat and various working group chats and then comments turned off so that remaining members can't ask questions.So they've started another chat of their own to discuss it, which means they'll probably get booted out as well for having such temerity.

She's hearing that around 60 members have been thrown out without warning; WRN has procedures to deal with disciplinary issues, but WRNS hasn't followed these.

A decent organisation would have spent a bit of time wondering why such a large proportion of its local membership was unhappy, but it seems that the four women at the top aren't capable of reflection.A pity, as WRN has done some brilliant work.

I’ve been pushed out, but I’m not fighting it.

For those of us not in London, WRN was a lifeline back in the day. It was the first set of local groups. If it hadn’t been, it wouldn’t have taken off. Covid helped with its initial popularity too.

Now that we have our established networks of local women, we don’t need WRN anymore. Good riddance as it’s eaten itself.

Think the key word here is "hearing". I am always wary of rumour, particularly when it comes to a group defending women's rights
As we've all seen, WRN does some amazing work, and will no doubt be the target of activists — so they have to take security seriously.
We've all seen how women are targeted for expressing lawfully held opinions, and there will no doubt be many within WRN who are fearful of being outed.

There will be a lot of hurt people.

Maybe it’s inevitable- things naturally change which in itself causes friction, as many of us are resistant.
Then systems need to be put in place to manage or support changes.

Some people want systems to preserve the original core purpose and structure. Others want systems to allow change.

Pop.

I’d be really wary of using this against ‘feminists’ or talking about ‘mean girls’.

That’s buying into patriarchy.

I think the ReSisters were local groups before WRN.

I don't know anything about what's kicked off in Scotland but do think that nationally, WRN has run excellent campaigns and produced powerful reports eg hospitals, prisons and women’s sports.

I think it's amazing how it's grown in a comparatively short time to become an organisation that is approached for comment by the BBC, listened to by MPs etc.

I love my local group. We all get along very well. We've had plenty of online disagreements because there are women with different political views but it's always a debate rather than an argument and nobody's ever fallen out with other members.

I support other groups as well: I go to LWS when I can; have been to some 12 of 5 actions; am a supporter of Sex Matters and really appreciate the resources that they produce.

I think that it's brilliant that Terf Island has so many women's groups and like to think of them as complementing each other rather than competing against each other.

Feminist groups are frequently targeted by TRAs who have screenshot chat and photos and doxxed women. WRN has many members who can’t afford to be outed because of jobs, family members or safety. It seems WRN Scotland has taken a security decision to shut a chat group and that members affected are able to rejoin. Not sure that rumour and speculation here does anything other than undermine.

As a WRNS member, I understand that some of us have a great deal at stake. From my perspective, the account presented here does not fully reflect the reality of the situation—I wonder if there may be other factors influencing how events are being portrayed.

It's reassuring to see that the security of the group is being treated with the seriousness it deserves.

Women being accused of ‘security breeches’.

Are those like sturdy pyjamas?

The chat that WRNS shut down (without consultation) was the Scotland-wide group. Some of those who missed having a national group created a new non-WRNS group. Someone in that group shared the list of members with WRNS admins, who then threw all the new chat group members out of WRNS without due processes being followed. So it seems that WRNS has exploited a data breach of another group - not a good look.

Something to bear in mind, is that people generally think they are doing the right thing. Few people deliberately intend to mess things up for others.

Whatever your stake in this, the others were trying to achieve something they viewed to be positive. It will have made sense from their perspective.