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?

You will be aware that M was on the Alloa programme presenting an update on the WRNS sexual assaults in hospitals report. Mary has today been informed by the organisers that her presence has been cancelled. This appears to be a result of allegations from women who have engaged in a year-long campaign of accusations and harassment of some WRNS Coordinators. No opportunity was given to present a rebuttal of the accusations, actions sadly reminiscent of what happened to Sandie Peggie.

I'm trying to understand a specific comment from the Women's Rights Network (WRN) about the Sandie Peggie case. From what I've seen, WRN made a statement comparing their own experiences of "cancellation" (like events being shut down or de-platforming) to the treatment Sandie Peggie received during her employment tribunal – things like her suspension, the long investigation, and being bullied into silence after objecting to sharing a women's changing room with a trans doctor.
Can anyone explain the relevance or context of this comparison?

Playing the ultimate victimhood card!

There is no relevance and it’s insulting for them to make the comparison.

If anyone is interestedin coming out of the TERF "peaking" (radicalisation) pathway let me know. I do a class

LOL.

Do you also teach how to get drunk in public and annoy even Peter Tatchell, as well as showing quite a lot of your fat arse through badly fitted clothes and ragged fishnets?

Perhaps you could direct me to where that quote was made?

Thre WRN quote about being cancelled from Alloa and comparing it to Sandie Peggie didn’t materialise out of the ether. WRN wrote it and sent it to their members. That’s it. That’s the source.

Proof? Just you saying so doesn't make it true. I've read a lot of utter nonsense on this thread regarding WRN Scotland.

I'm sorry what utter nonsense have you read? I'm not lying, I was removed as a member from WRN Scotland last June, it really upset me at the time, it was the first time I'd plucked up the courage to join a women's group, I didn't have anything to do with the behind the scenes issues that caused the rupture in the first place, it was a shock at the time. I explained what happened on multiple posts on this thread. I am not a liar I have no reason to lie about this and I do not appreciate the insinuation that I am a liar and what I experienced was "utter nonsense".

I’m getting loads of adverts for Alloa now. Have people cancelled their ticket? Might just be am
algorithm thing

I didn't ask you for proof, I asked for proof of the quote about Alloa from someone else. Perhaps read more carefully?
Why do you think I'm referring to you when I talked about the utter nonsense? I didn't mention you, and FWIW it wasn't anything you wrote that I was referring to.

This is a weirdly aggressive response to @HagsRule who has shared a personal experience of being badly treated by WRN Scotland, and her own emotions about that.

I am no longer a member of WRNS, I too, like others was very badly treated by them and have lost all respect for their leadership.
I have seen a screenshot the wording is the same.
I appreciate you only have my word for that, but that’s all I have for now.
Unless anyone can provide full details including from and to headers maybe ?

Not aggressive (perhaps look in a mirror to define aggressive?), just factual. I wasn't asking her for proof. I hadn't accused her of lying. I hadn't even mentioned her.

With respect, people screenshotting outwith closed groups is part of the reason this whole sorry mess started in Scotland nearly a year ago.
As a current member, I have seen no such message, so perhaps you can understand my suspension of belief.

That’s interesting, thank you.
I was not involved in the screenshotting episodes, but left prior to that.

With respect right back at you – if you're genuinely a current member of WRN Scotland, then you'd have zero grounds for "suspension of belief" because the post about the Alloa cancellation (and WRN's statement on it) was right there in the WRN Scotland announcements chat for all members to see.
It's not some shadowy external screenshot job; it's internal comms that any actual member would have clocked. So either the announcements chat has mysteriously bypassed you, or... well, let's just say selective memory seems to be doing some heavy lifting here.
If you're being truthful about your membership, pop back into that chat and have a scroll. The statement's not hiding. Otherwise, this whole "I haven't seen it" line is starting to sound a bit convenient.
(And yes, screenshotting closed groups kicked off plenty of drama in Scotland last year – but pretending internal posts don't exist when they do is a whole new level.)

Without respect for you, because frankly you are not quoting what was written, Sandie Peggie was mentioned, but not compared the way you wrote it. The only parallel drawn was "no opportunity to present a rebuttal of the accusations", not the ongoing fantasy rant you've just written.
Tell me, why are you so determined to bring down an organisation that is continuing to do FOIs to hold those in power accountable, to try and force change?
Other than having hurty feeling because you or your cohort were caught sharing information that you shouldn't have and thereby caused a lot of women to suffer consequences of your actions?

Oh darling, drop the theatrical "without respect" preamble – it's giving desperate deflection, not moral high ground. And please, let's not pretend we're all suddenly sticklers for verbatim quotes when your entire previous post was built on "I haven't seen it so it didn't happen." Convenient amnesia is a choice.
You admit Sandie Peggie was mentioned and a parallel was drawn – specifically the "no opportunity to present a rebuttal of the accusations" bit. That's literally a comparison. WRN Scotland's announcements chat (visible to every actual member) explicitly linked their Alloa cancellation experience (no chance to respond) to Sandie Peggie's drawn-out suspension/investigation nightmare (also no fair shot at rebuttal before the hammer came down). It's right there in black and white for anyone bothering to scroll. So yes, it's a parallel. Not a "fantasy rant," just observable reality you seem allergic to acknowledging.
Why call it out? Because claiming "current membership" while playing the innocent "haven't seen it" card is peak gaslighting. If you're really in the group, the statement didn't evaporate into the ether – it's in the announcements chat, plain as day. Pretending otherwise isn't clever; it's transparent.
As for the motive-smearing extravaganza – accusing me (or anyone pointing this out) of trying to "bring down" WRN because of "hurty feelings" over screenshots? 😂 Projection level: expert. Nobody's clutching pearls over leaked chats or "consequences" here; we're just over the selective outrage and the martyr complex. WRN can keep FOI-ing to their heart's content – good on them if they're holding power to account. But that doesn't grant immunity from basic scrutiny when their own internal words get memory-holed the second it's inconvenient.
If the organisation is the flawless accountability machine you paint it to be, why the frantic whataboutism and ad-hominem pivot instead of just... admitting the parallel exists? Go on, have another scroll through that chat. I'll wait. The statement's still there, love. Unlike this "I didn't see it" defence, which is crumbling faster than a house of cards in a wind tunnel.

Could you be any more passive aggressively clichéd🙄?
I absolutely hadn't seen it, hence why I asked. I then looked, read it and responded to the extraordinary fairytale that you wound round about it.
Regarding the Scottish exodus, you know perfectly well that the actions of a very small amount of vitriolic women (and I include you in this) created a situation that forced ejection from WRN on a lot of other entirely innocent women. But I fully understand that you can't admit that.
Apart from anything else, it was 10 months ago. So get over it and move on.
This women's rights fight is about protecting women and girls from men. I have no idea why you waste so much energy attacking women who are actually achieving results. It's beyond petty.

Before you all clutch your pearls and faint dramatically onto the fainting couch, let's remember one inconvenient truth: WRN has approximately zero respect for its own members. They'll boot you out and slam the door faster than you can say "loyal service," whether you're a tireless ground-level campaigner or a director who's given years of dedicated work.

We all know the sacred rule: sharing screenshots outside the group is an express ticket to the gulag. So here I go, bravely committing the unforgivable. Are they planning to yeet every single woman from the Scotland group and make them grovel for readmission? Will they cheerfully nuke the very communication channels connecting them to the women they clearly value so little, yet who do so much of the actual work? Or, wild plot twist, might they actually address the concerns, offer a genuine apology, and let women speak without reaching for the mute button? More transparency, perhaps? Or will we just get steam pouring from ears, more deflections, and the usual "truth"? Or are they, poor lambs, simply the latest victims of the infamous Sandie Peggie Treatment?

Now, the Alloa Women's Festival saga is serving fresh drama. There's conflicting intel on whether WRN nobly withdrew themselves (perhaps dreading awkward questions or a spot of protest) or whether the organisers gave them the old heave-ho.

For those still lacking imagination, or who haven't yet received their own personal Hail Mary exit package and therefore refuse to believe it happens, here's their own post as Exhibit A.

• If *WRN* pulled out voluntarily (stage fright? Fear of being asked difficult questions?), then claiming otherwise to their loyal members starts to look an awful lot like… lying. Women deserve better than that. They have every right to know the facts and perhaps redirect their precious time, energy and efforts toward women’s groups that actually value and include them.

• If the festival organisers cancelled them, fair play, WRN is currently imploding in spectacular fashion and treats women appallingly. Why on earth would any self-respecting festival platform that kind of chaos? But then the organisers saying "we didn't cancel them" would be… also not entirely truthful.

So which is it, ladies? Mutually assured deception? A secret third thing? Or is this simply the opening act of WRN's long-awaited grand finale?

Place your bets: is this the beginning of the end for WRN? 🍿

What is your take on what happened to the 80 women who have been treated like dirt by WRN? Are they overreacting? Do you take issue with anything that ? Or are you unaware of what happened there ? If that is the case , perhaps you can have a look back over this whole thread to clarify the issue in Bucks. Oh and WRN do not have the monopoly on FOI , lots of women are doing the same thing, as unpaid volunteers do.

I havent read the full thread ( sorry, I hate it when people do that I know!) but just wanted to say Im glad I followed my gut instinct and decided not to pursue my application to join.

Ive never been any sort of activist but was feeling very strongly about the way women’s rights, voices and safety were being actively destroyed that I thought I would join. To say the experience was a farce was putting it mildly. It made me think that if they couldn't even get that right , how effective could they be in general.

So I backed out and Im glad I did!

Oh look, classic DARVO in full swing – textbook abuser playbook, but for a women's rights group. Let's break it down, shall we?

• Deny: "I absolutely hadn't seen it" (until magically you did), then downgrade the explicit parallel in the announcements chat to "not compared the way you wrote it" and call the whole thing an "extraordinary fairytale." The post linked their Alloa no-rebuttal experience to Sandie Peggie's no-fair-process nightmare. It was a comparison. It happened. Denying/rewriting it doesn't make it vanish.
• Attack: Cue the personal smears – "vitriolic women" (me included, apparently – aw, thanks for the spotlight), "hurty feelings," "beyond petty," wasting energy on "attacking women who are actually achieving results." Because questioning inconsistencies and gaslighting is now an assault on the sisterhood. Nice deflection.
• Reverse Victim and Offender: Flip the script so they're the poor persecuted heroes doing FOIs and holding power accountable, while critics are the nasty villains stirring up ancient drama and causing "innocent women" to suffer ejections. "Get over it and move on" – said the side that keeps dragging the exodus into every reply to shut down scrutiny.

Spot on DARVO: Deny the problem, attack the messenger, reverse roles so they're the real victims. Textbook manipulation to dodge accountability. So, are they actually going to address any of the concerns raised here? Like:

• Why pretend internal announcements don't exist when members (supposedly) see them?
• Why draw even a limited parallel to Sandie Peggie's treatment, then memory-hole it?
• And most pressingly: why are donations and fees for WRN Scotland being requested/solicited straight into a director's personal bank account? (As alleged in multiple posts here and screenshots floating around – not exactly screaming financial transparency for an org fighting for women's rights.)

If the fight is truly about protecting women and girls, start with basic openness about money and stop the DARVO dance when legit questions get asked. Gaslighting your own side isn't a good look – it just breeds more distrust. Ball's in your court. Address the points or keep proving the pattern. 😏

Do read back, the actions of a few vitriolic women sharing screenshots caused the fallout that forced a security issue in the larger group of women. ALL were offered the opportunity to ask, air their grievance and attend a zoom to clarify, but a lot didn't bother. Others have come back.
This actual thread, having a screenshot from a private group posted shows exactly why it was correct to fling the wrongdoers out. Yes there were women caught in the crossfire, but as the actual guilty parties won't fess up, and the less bright that believe them, it drags on and on.
I don't know about Bucks, I wasn't in that group. So I won't speculate. I also know you weren't in Bucks either so no idea why you're speculating.

I wouldn’t have wanted to attend a zoom struggle session either, to be fair.