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?

The second reason we were not allowed to discuss Pakistani Muslim rape gangs was that the WRNS leader has a long history of supporting “Palestine” including bike rides. Perhaps she felt uncomfortable actually coping with the reality of how these men see & behave towards women.

Yes, it’s absolutely mind boggling & frightening what has been happening in Glasgow since it’s become a “ Sanctuary City “ and to mention it is considered “ racist” by some in WRN and beyond. It’s not “ racist “ to observe the statistics.

The worst thing that WRNS did was send a sweet woman in to talk to the members who wanted to discuss banned areas. I was horrified to find out that this kind young woman was telling her mates that I wanted to “take control”.
What utter bollox.

I’ve achieved more in my working life than being in charge of a rather controlled women’s group. So why would I want that?
If you don’t want women with skills (management, medicine, police, social work) to help your organisation flourish but rather see these women as competition, you’re looking at your careers not your job.

What bizarre language.

The thread has had women talking about being part of a network, and sharing information and objectives with other women, and then finding at a later date that what had appeared to be a network had been registered as a company controlled by a few women.

Some women made really insightful posts about how this had impacted them.

Now suddently there are these posts about someone who seems to think they are part of a business network and their business skills not being recognised and this indicates that everyone else is wrong for not recognising these skills which have no relevance to grass roots local feminist organising.

And then a really strange post about a young women who is really nice being "sent in" to do something or other.

But it is all wrong because this nice woman than implies the poster is being controllling.

Please dont reply, I dont care.

Is any of this relevant to whether WRN is "imploding"?

If so how?

Can you post a link to the statistics?

I am sure everything will come out in the wash at Filia 2027 in Blackpool

If Filia happens in 2027. They reporting themselves to the charity commission and I hear others also reported them too.

@IwantToRetire 'Is any of this relevant to whether WRN is "imploding"?'

Perhaps read through Niven's posts again.

I do not know how WRN calculate their active membership number
but I do very much hope that the women who wrote this fantastic report
were appropriately remunerated for their time.

https://017ee2dd-4ea6-4d7f-869c-a043485bcc87.filesusr.com/ugd/a86851_f6ac84e65c9747fbb18b96d79839d3a3.pdf

Wow, great report.

Going by the letters we have seen, the women who spend time and effort writing and designing these reports for WRN are likely to find themselves out on their ears if they cross the leadership. That’s the whole point of this thread.

I thought they are all volunteers in this organisation?

Have you read any of @ThimbleThiefs posts?

It was a tongue in cheek remark. I think the post was by one of the disciples.

Strangely enough I was going to post about this report because as usual is virtually pointless for the time spent on it as no one looking at the WRN website would know it had been written.

Although there are other reasons to compare WRN to Sex Matters, just compare the web site. I dont mean fonts and colours, but to be of practicaly use. On the Sex Matters web site you can immediately see what is new/

How would anyone visiting the WRN website have any idea what is new. What a waste.

Whether paid or unpaid it seems really strange to do all this work and then hide it.

Or is it just another thing that can appropriated to give credibility to a few?

Is that what it has turned into, however it got there.

To create a platform for a few to shine from.

(I had also hoped that the grown ups had return to the thread but apparently not)

It’s not fair to compare WRN to Sex Matters. sex Matters get millions in funding while WRN don’t. If course the sex matters website is impressive, they have more of money to spend on website, pr, staff etc

Allowances can be made for the WRN website due to funding, staff etc, but not for the Trans Widows Voices website? Your grudge is starting to feel a bit personal.

Do sex matters get millions of funding? I don't think there's thousands of women paying £10/month and there's no government grants.
maybe WRN should be transparent , needing money to run a website and pay staff is legitimate

Absolutely it should be transparent. But that will only happen if members demand to know the full accounts, and the witch hunts, immediate expulsion of anyone who speaks out and briefings against silenced members mean it’s not a safe environment to ask questions.

I am actually howling 😂
We were all toddling along under the impression this was a proper grass-roots, entirely voluntary set-up. You know, like the village hall committee but with more swearing and fewer jam tarts. Coordinators, members, everyone thought we were all just giving our time for free because ✨women’s rights✨.
Then someone points out the website still says this under “About our directors – Heather”:
“Heather lives in South London and took up the baton of women’s rights in July 2021, bringing together a number of local women’s groups which grew to become the (entirely voluntary) Women’s Rights Network.”
ENTIRELY VOLUNTARY. Their own words. Bold as brass.
Meanwhile the actual website hosting/domain fees have apparently been paid for years by the lady who built the website in the first place, as her personal contribution to the cause. Not one penny from member donations or the fighting fund.
And now we’re hearing about “staff costs”?? Oh, do tell! But hang on, there are no official staff listed anywhere on the site or in any comms. So… are these the anointed “chosen ones” in the inner sanctum, slyly pocketing fees disguised as “consultancy” gigs? What is this, a feminist Freemasons’ lodge where only the secret handshake crew gets the cash? Sounds less like women’s rights and more like a dodgy pyramid scheme, but with our hard-earned donations funding the top tier’s spa days instead of actual activism. Spill the tea – who’s getting paid, how much, and for what exactly? Because from down here in volunteer-ville, it reeks of “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” 🙄
So… we were all happily volunteering our evenings and weekends while being quietly led to believe the whole operation ran on fresh air and righteous fury… and now we’re being told “of course we need money for staff, it’s a legitimate expense”??
Right. Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.
If it’s all totally above board, maybe take the “entirely voluntary” line off the directors page before the next transparency lecture? Just a thought, from one daft cow to another 🐮
(Am I being unreasonable? Probably. But I’m also not the one running a “voluntary” network that suddenly needs paying staff while the website still claims otherwise.)

Another word for 'we're hearing about' is hearsay and there seems to be a heck of a lot of it on this thread.
No one is compelled to join WRN, and it's patronising to suggest the women who do belong are being hoodwinked in some way.
Structured organisations aren't for everyone. That's fine. Each to their own. But what a pity so much time and energy is being spent moaning about a women's rights group rather than on working to defend women's rights

You seem to have missed swathes of this thread. It’s hearsay exactly BECAUSE there is no openness! And the lofty ‘oh, anyone questioning anything is undercutting the fantastic work and playing into the hands of TRAs’ is a well-with tactic to silence calls for openness.

Bless your cotton socks, but calling it all “hearsay” is a bit like saying the kettle’s not black while it’s sitting there whistling away. 😂
This thread hasn’t been about moaning for moaning’s sake – it’s shone a proper spotlight on stuff that loads of us coordinators didn’t even know about. Hands up, I had no clue WRN was a limited company until this blew up! And don’t get me started on the funds and donations – many of us were in the dark about how they were actually being spent, assuming it was all above board and volunteer-powered. Turns out, asking questions isn’t “patronising,” it’s just… well, sensible?
And let’s not forget the narrative we were all spoon-fed: those women who got expelled? Oh, they must’ve been in the wrong, don’t question it, move along. No debate, no details, just “trust us.” Well, now the cat’s out of the bag, and it’s meowing loudly about transparency (or the lack thereof).
Nobody’s saying structured orgs are evil, but if you’re going to run one, maybe don’t treat the volunteers like mushrooms (kept in the dark and fed… you know). We’re all here for women’s rights, but that includes the right to know where our time and dosh is going without the side-eye for daring to ask.
AIBU? Probably not, but feel free to tell me I’m a daft old bat 🦇

Some of you are expressing an awful lot of glee in your attempts to enlighten the rest of us. That in itself is sufficient to make me suspicious of motives. If WRN switches to a subscription model then I expect some women will have questions to ask about spending. Until then, most of us will probably continue to work within the current structure which seems pretty successful from our pov.
If you are not happy, leave and set up the 'grassroots' organisation that you are so misty-eyed about. Lots of egos on this thread though, so I'm not convinced you could hold one together for more than a couple of months.