Women’s Rights Network imploding

[NameChangedWren]

WTF is going on? There are letters circulating with members alleging bullying, and anyone who asks a question is suspended and comments deleted. The leader calling everyone to urgent meetings with bizarre messaging: ‘there is no letter, and if there is it’s full of lies, and you can’t see the letter just trust us, and ooh look, something shiny!’ Should I cut my losses, cancel my standing order and just follow Let Women Speak?

Me too! I met loads of wonderful women I'm still in contact with now.

I must confess to a bit of fangirling behaviour

Women need to pull together rather than apart.
The effective (at a national level) organisations have fairly autocratic leaders
Kellie-Jay, Lisa Marie , Maya, Heather

If one does not like the setup of a particular variant, move on.
Ideological purity is not long term

bitching about what you do not like
helps only the men

Yep, that was the letter I received. It was received after I saw that I'd been removed from all the groups, so I was quite confused and shocked at first.

I decided not to contact them, and just haven't joined any further groups since.
Also, as an aside after reading more posts on this thread, I'm not a hundred percent sure if Niven is the woman who was quite outspoken in the main national chat (before it was moved into three regional chats without any real consultation). That woman wanted to focus on the rape gangs and the cultural issues with the men from these countries, which was constantly vetoed by the coordinators and the leaders of WRNS. I can understand that from both sides, not to focus on one issue or to add too many issues to the list, but also I think there did seem to be underlying tension with these women that I wasn't party to, it felt like something else was under the surface a bit, some sort of power struggle, or issue? I'm not sure, I was mostly a lurker. Rural and not really knowing many women in real life who wanted to fight for women's rights. Talking about it is quite intimidating in Scotland as our politicians and education system and public sector is so captured. It's a risk to talk about it so that's why I'd initially joined WRN. After what happened in June last year I just don't have the energy to try again...

"Women need to pull together rather than apart."

Indeed.

"Pulling together" the Heather way:

• mass expulsions

"bitching about what you do not like
helps only the men"

Indeed.

"Bitching about what you do not like" the Heather way:

• slandering individual WRN members who have stood up to her, to protect other WRN members from infiltration by known bullies? (See Lily Craven's posts in this thread)
• lying about whole groups of WRN women? (See comments detailing Heather's response to the Letters from WRN North & South Bucks)
• smearing women who call for agreed Grievance and Disciplinary processes to be followed (see previous points)
• censoring internal discussion, thereby driving women to go public with their concerns if they have any chance of being heard.

You seem very keen on victim blaming, excusing bullying and chastising women using derogatory sexist slurs, ie. "bitching".

WRN used to claim to be a "feminist group with one main focus: to defend the sex-based rights of women."

Who Are We?
We are a feminist group. We are a network of women from England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland with one main focus: to defend the sex-based rights of women.

archive.ph/WNg0d

Not any more:

Who Are We?
We are a network of women from England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland who promote the human rights of women and girls.

www.womensrights.network/about-wrn
Archived: archive.ph/3GTg5

Which is is handy for you, I suppose, that WRN is not a feminist organisation.

• Do WRN members and donors know that WRN is no longer a feminist organisation and that it is no longer focused on defending the sex-based rights of women?
• Does the fact that WRN now generally promotes "the human rights of women and girls" mean that members in Scotland are now allowed to discuss the Grooming Gangs?
• Were these changes, in your words, "autocratic" decisions?

Who is Lisa Marie

“Women need to pull together rather than apart”
= “Do as your betters tell you”

Have you read the letters?

Bad organisations need criticism. WRN clearly has problems.

Yet the most effective criticism is organising something BETTER. That doesn't mean women should shut up and say nothing. You can't plan to make better orgs without looking at the issues. So this thread is important and needed.

The bigger picture is this.

Of course the pro-women side is going to divide and argue. We have people with personalities, with issues, ambition and greed. That is inevitable.

I know some TAs are reading this thread and thinking oh the evil Terfs are falling apart great.

Reality Check- Women's activism has a huge unedifying history of massive internal discord with women treating each other awfully, seizing control of organisations, splitting groups, playing status games etc.

Yet, none of this stopped them WINNING! Read a history of suffrage in the UK. Why were there a lot of different groups and incredible rows over tactics and aims? They lamented it at the time. Likewise in 60s/70s.

Yet it didn't stop them from achieving key parts of their GOALS. Women have the vote,women can go to work, they have legal protection etc.

Personally I think either through biology or culture [argue forever about which is more important who cares] men find it easier to form groups and aim to do things together and unite behind leaders. Remember the dynamics of the schoolyard.

Female psychology seems to be different. That doesn't make it worse.

So to any TAs reading this don't celebrate. Reality is women can be massive bitches to each other AND still win their rights. It has happened before it will happen again.

The TAs problems are way bigger. Because their aim is male supremacy they have to compete with other male dominated gangs. The males they are supporting are dysfunctional in the first place, they find it difficult to fit in with other male groups and that is going to come back and hurt them. In America the TAs have no solution to Trump, because he is a better male egomaniac than they are. Likewise in the UK they are having to team up with sexist male Muslims who are not reliable. Men were never going to let the TAs control sports. Sooner or later that was going to fall apart.

Also the key and arguably most effective section of the TA alliance is the handmaiden section. Guess what a load of those women also implode TA orgs through their egos and ambitions alongside their failure to understand the reality of human bodies.

Keep an eye on the prize, understand human frailty and keep moving forward.

She is one of the bosses of Filia

Elvis's daughter.
Soz, couldn't resist

She is THE boss.

I agaree that if there are problems they need to be explored, examined and hopefully solutions found.

I am sure that if WRN members had felt they were being listened to, and maybe a survey or something for members to get their views across might have helped sort out the structure, ways of working etc..

But this didn't happened.

I think it says quite a lot about FWR that as a result of being totally excluded expelled, etc., some members felt save enough to come here to discuss it.

It is also informative for those who aren't involved to perhaps be a bit more critical when joining something. Something really simple that if it claims to be a network does everyone have an equal voice.

I dont think it is any different to a male dominated structure where there appears to have been a take over.

The difference maybe that women are prepared to admit whatever network it was actually meant something.

And to all those, and this came up on the WPUK thread, it is because some complaining have real values and view points that have been run rough shod over. It is hard to feel betrayed.

Anybody who feel threads like this and the WPUK one (where I have had my rather naive view of LWD dented) are just women being critical for the sake of being critical, do you think that about Labour MPs who complain about Starmer? Why when women put forward a valid position are they basically being told you are just being bitchy.

Women have strong view points, and in expressing them shouldn't just be dismissed as shit stirring.

How to make friends and rub shoulders with heroines by giving them a platform. Also provides many, many photo ops. And why AGCL hardliners see this as an easy project to infiltrate.

Ahh, so the buck stops with her regarding the invitation to the appalling anti Jewish women’s group to Filia last year then…?

No she "owns" the concept but hands over the politics to others. Just so long as it includes enough stars for her to rub shoulders with.

That's why I said it was such an easy target for AGCL.

https://www.filia.org.uk/our-team

Should add that I am not totally sure that Trustees set the agenda.

There may be a separate team put together to do the actual organising - and set the agenda(?)

In theory it is also meant to be a "learning" experience for local women in which ever city it is, but hard to think that having this "experience" actually allows any of those women to contribute to or influence the conference agenda.

Lisa Marie is a trustee and the chief exec and a highly paid contractor of Filia
(as published in the accounts)

Sex Matters properly segregate trustees and paid executive staff like Helen and Maya and Fiona.

WRN appear to have no paid staff, but being a Company rather than a charity do not have the same disclosure rules. The four directors are named on Companies House.

LWS / PoW is a series of companies run by Kellie Jay.

I don't understand. How can you be an employee and a contractor?

How much does Lisa Marie make? How much do they all make? Can I look this up?

So WRN is for profit? Heather and Mary get dividends?

Its on the Charity Commission web site.

I haven't looked at them but try this link
https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/-/charity-details/5061464/accounts-and-annual-returns?_uk_gov_ccew_onereg_charitydetails_web_portlet_CharityDetailsPortlet_organisationNumber=5061464

No. It is a Private Ltd Company without shares so there are no shareholders and no dividends.

There is a clause in the Articles of Association “Profits not to be distributed” (article 39) that applies the company’s income and property to “the Company’s objects and activities” and prohibits distribution of profits to members, subject to defined, limited benefits for directors and others. (HB is the only "Member".)

There is also a dissolution clause (article 40) which prevents distribution of surplus assets to members (ie. HB) and requires transfer to another body having similar activities. It also prohibits distribution of income and property.

It is basically a not-for-profit company and it would not take a lot of tweaks to morph WRN Ltd. into a charitable company.

However, Directors are eligible to be paid and it has been alleged in this thread that some if not all Directors have charged "Consultancy Fees" to WRN Ltd. The financial records are not publicly available so it is impossible to know if this is true or not.

There have been some questions about financial arrangements raised in the thread relating to payments of donations from Scottish women into the personal bank account of the Scotland Director rather than to WRN Ltd.

All the the info about WRN Ltd. is on the Companies House website here:
https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/14041486/

(Edited to add extra info that I realised afterwards was relevant to the question.)

Have you got bored with lecturing women on the WPUK thread for not being nice enough to AGPs?

Aren't you interested in ranking those women according to how nice or nasty they are to AGPs? Surely that is more important than how much money they might be making?

I see what’s left of WRN Scotland were out this evening, all 10 of them with the Labour apologist Karen Ingala Smith