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?

I'm not "copping out" of anything...i'm simply commenting on what I see as the nature of groups..... which is why I tend to have an instinctive sense of caution around them.

i've no horse in this race as i don't belong to any of the groups involved but it is clear from the length of this thread and the heated nature of its contents that my observations have some merit. It doesn't matter how idealistic the nature of the groups involved...the dynamics remain the same. Look at the conditions surrounding the founding of 'Your Party' as another example.

A women of Scotland group would be good, although there are already other organisations that someone kindly posted earlier on in this chat which I'll have a look at.

Well, this is what I've said all along, and have observed over the 50 years I've been an active feminist and part of grass roots organisations. At some point, these kinds of groups need structure, and sometimes people don't like that.

It's a delicate balancing act, and I hope all the organisations manage it.

I'm of the view that the more the merrier - let a thousand flowers bloom, and so on.

https://forwomen.scot/ ?

Yes, structure becomes necessary in order to be effective and achieve anything - but then the structures inevitably involve the appointment of people with certain roles, spokespeople, charters or manifestos etc. When you stop being just an informal gathering of people brought together on an issue of common concern that is when the rifts occur.

For Women Scotland are not a membership organisation. Women can and do wholeheartedly support FWS by going to their rallies , following them on various platforms and helping crowdfund their very successful appeals. Donate to them , that is the key to continuing the pushback.

We are in talks. Watch this space.

The difference is that before we admit a new member to the Women of Wessex, we take soundings from the existing members. After all, if we expect them to expand their circle of trust and accept a woman they might not have met, they should have a say. The coordinators then proceed in the best interests of the group.

Before we admit a new group into our affiliated network, we seek feedback from our members.

Before we begin a new initiative, we seek feedback from our members.

Unanimity isn’t a requirement, but we do consult and we do seek consensus. That’s why the Women of Wessex are not afraid to voice their concerns. They know we will take note and might decide, for example, to carry out wider checks to put their minds at rest. This is also why our members are supremely relaxed about how we operate as coordinators. They know they are part of the decision-making process and they trust us to do the right thing for the group.

It takes a long time to build up that degree of trust, and if we get it wrong (it happens from time to time. We are human after all), we own up and apologise.

Whilst those generalisations do describe some issues that commonly arise with groups, they gloss over specifics of the WRN situation that take it out of the usual trajectory.

What is happening now, and what gave cause for LilyCraven and the women of WRN West Country to walk away, is not the result of an organic change in group dynamics.

WRN exists in a minefield of Heather's making, the first tripwires being laid by:

• her false representation of herself as "an ordinary woman" and her intended status being that of an ordinary member, just like everyone else
• the false reassurances of autonomy that she made to women in the "Shoppers Groups"
• her covert incorporation of Women's Rights Network Ltd. so that she could own WRN and legally avoid financial transparency.

Heather's actions in this respect appear duplicitous and her status depends on them being unknown, forgotten or overlooked.

I do not say this to be unpleasant but to be honest: Heather does not have the charisma, competence, management skills or personality to inspire loyalty.

She therefore demands loyalty. To enforce loyalty she requires total obedience to her will and fealty to WRN, punishing women who question anything at all or who dare to direct their time and energy to what she perceives as rivals, eg. SEEN groups. Hence the bullying, kangaroo courts, purges and smear campaigns.

This is "cult leader" behaviour, right down to the lack of financial transparency and secret payments to unknown employees and "consultants" - but women did not sign up for this. They signed up to contribute to and support all the amazing work done by WRN members. Many signed up because WRN purported to be a feminist organisation, which it has now disavowed.

There are, of course, a few women who aggressively defend the current regime and we have seen on this thread how they conduct themselves.

WRN might or might not dramatically "implode" but Heather's purges have weakened WRN, exacerbated by women walking away en masse when unable to tolerate her bad behaviour and authoritarianism. WRN might just shrink and either wither on the vine or persist as a core group of dedicated devotees, rather than as an extended network.

However, financial irregularities in Scotland and overall lack of financial transparency create a bad smell that will become more pungent if Heather seeks to set up a WRN Charity.

None of this is within the normal course of events due to a group growing in size.

Great summary which the remaining supporters can’t argue with.

This sums it up perfectly for me. There is absolute suppression of information and debate within WRN so most members are kept in the dark about the mass purges. With deliberate misinformation circulated that they were necessary because of unspecified breaching. And any questioning of that is disloyalty and giving aid to TRAs.

I’m reminded of this gif

@LilyCraven I really hope these new groups are productive & harmonious. I wish them all well, really I do, while remaining hopeful in that my own WRN group has none of the issues aired in this thread.

But I know (having chaired a different kind of grass roots/volunteer community group) that there are legal & structural issues that emerge as a group grows, and particularly if the group wants any financial and/or legal visibility. In the UK, groups increasingly are required to be established as a charity (a high bar) a CIC (like a charity but a much lower bar) or a limited company - a bit like a US non-profit. I've been involved in two organisations which used the two latter processes, each for different reasons. But both needed a legalised structure in order to run bank accounts, take money from members and the general public, deliver services, and generally act as financial actors/agents.

It's really nice to stay loose & relatively unlegalistic (in both cases we really wanted to remain so) but our organisations grew in activity and finances to the extent that we coldn't.

So good luck in staying flexible and local

Many clubs and societies have a bank account, you don’t need to be a charity or company.

In my experience of running one group and on the executive committee of another, this is not necessarily the case, particularly if the group becomes large, wants to raise funds, and wants to undertake significant public activities. Many banks & financial institutions are now clamping down on their "community" bank accounts. A small club, or an allotment group, or the like, might be OK. But the kinds of groups I was involved in running (several hundred members, large scale activities - quite similar to the kinds of organisations discussed in this thread) were required to become constituted much more formally.

Thank you for sharing your experience with grassroots groups and the need for proper legal structures as they grow. It’s a valid point, but it also highlights some serious concerns about how WRN has handled things so far. As a supposedly grassroots, volunteer-led organization, it’s alarming to hear allegations that donations from Scottish members were directed into a director’s personal bank account instead of official WRN channels. There are also questions about consultancy payments to directors and how income is being disbursed, all while lacking the transparency you’d expect from an group relying on member donations.
If WRN wants to maintain trust, especially as it grows, it needs to address these issues head-on rather than suspending members who ask questions. Formalizing as a CIC or limited company could help, but only if it ensures funds aren’t funneled in ways that benefit directors personally.

I'd love to be part of a new Scotland group. I still don't fully understand why I was kicked out of WRN Scotland, it wasn't fair and the whole data breach accusations had nothing to do with me. I felt a bit like driftwood to be honest, and I don't think I was alone.

My experience of working as organisational chair directly with solicitors re establishing a CIC, and as a committee member of the 2nd organisation, establishing itself as a limited & non-profit company with a broadly charity like remit, is that you have to write a legally cogent constitution, in which you outline the aim of the organisation, (including the principles of its political engagements, for example), and you have to have your accounts audited annually.

There is probably far more external & legal oversight, with the appropriate checks & balances, in a CIC or limited company, than the bank accounts for small clubs and societies mentioned by @TipsyKhakiJoker

Anyone who bought T shirts, Christmas cards etc or gave donations for leaflets to WRN Scotland could check their PayPal account for the name of the PayPal or Monzo account they paid into.

Thank you. However, we have no intention of getting into the business of raising funds or becoming a charity or CIC or a private company limited by guarantee. We don’t need to do any of that to attract interest from friendly journalists or other organisations. We use our own contacts.

We are volunteers, not a business. We don’t flog merch, we don’t ask for donations, we’re not interested in getting onto the Honours List. We give our time and effort, and that’s quite satisfying enough.

Lack of consultation ansd attempting to take credit for other people’s work.

https://x.com/Liznothankyou/status/2031880325219922065

We’ve all seen the letter detailing what the Bucks group did. Frankly it’s par for the course for WRN to claim credit. It’s no surprise to those of us with experience of WRN, that they will claim the work of volunteers as their own, and then eject the women who did the hard graft.

I’d jon a scottish group.

Reading this song and it becomes quite clear the wrn leadership were implicated in the murder of little matty groves