Minister for Equalities invites Mridul Wadhwa to meeting to discuss LGBT+ hate crime

[Arran2024]

https://x.com/oliviabaileymp/status/2032154723512430645?s=20

The meeting features several trans women. Wadhwa famously applied for a job reserved for women at the Edinburgh rape crisis centre, told women who weren't happy with men in their support groups to "reframe their trauma" and was forced out after an investigation.

Love has no age.

Love is love.

So slogans! Much meaning.

Apologies to the pp, I didnt mean to make a cascade of cynicism to what was no doubt well meaning sentiment.

The problem we have is that laws are made out of words, and words are very easily manipulated.

Things can be called 'hate' in order to stop people from saying them. For example, an opposition politician could be accused of a hate crime for criticising government policy.

This did in fact happen - see Murdo Fraser.

'Love' also has an unfortunate history of being repurposed. Some of those slogans have been used by pro-paedophile groups.

Slogans and words can be dangerous, especially in a legal context.

Slogans and words can be dangerous, especially in a legal context.

And often a reason to switch off critical thinking and logic. Slogans are powerful linguistic devices precisely because they require no thought on the part of people repeating them.

As Joseph Goebbels was reported to have said, ‘If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it, and you will even come to believe it …

I agree @ArabellaScott and @DrBlackbird

Agree.

What is 'hate'? Define the term.

In court, it has oftened turned out to mean someone saying no, or refusing to co operate with being controlled. Or stating a normal, every day fact because it was necessary to protect their rights and their own beliefs. Or asserting their right to equality.

Is that hate?

And what's 'love' and 'kindness'? Unconditional enablement? Pretending? Sloppy sentiment? The courage to say something someone does not like hearing because it's not in their interests to be enabled? How do we split society into the ones who have to 'love' and 'be kind' and the ones who don't?

In terms of the refuges, was it 'kind' to expect abused women to enable men in their belief system regardless of their own needs, and to submit essentially to reprogramming in order to access help?

Was it 'kind' to require lesbians to accept dating men and 'learn to cope' with straight sex for a man's sake? Or is that 'hate'?

Lets be honest that much of the 'hate' recorded on T grounds has been misgendering, dead naming and failure to submit. Those words have been emptied of meaning and become marketing terms and fig leafs concealing things that are often extremely questionable.

The worst (for me) wasn't even Wadwha instigating the bullying against Roz Adams. It was Wadhwa "counselling" victims when he has no training and he was employed to be CEO not a counsellor, quite apart from being the wrong sex where inforned consent seemed not to be a priority. I was a trustee for a local charity for children with disabilities and their familes, and the CEO did not directly interact with clients except announcements, formal occasions, and dealing with complaints.

Wadwha abused his professional role to get access to rape victims. An arrogant egotistical man surrounded by handmaidens and enablers and with the power to shut down all disagreement from the charity workers and volunteers and a supine board of trustees.

'An arrogant egotistical man surrounded by handmaidens and enablers and with the power to shut down all disagreement from the charity workers and volunteers and a supine board of trustees.'

That is the best case scenario.

Oh but it was 'kind' to let him.

And 'hate' to mention the impact on others.

That is exactly how those words apply in this context.

Yep. Wadhwa said that women seeking single sex counselling after rape were bigots.

His employers supported this.

Its institutional abuse, plainly. An absolutely appalling situation for RCS to have put women into.

Imagine positioning yourself as a service to support women, advertising to vulnerable rape survivors, setting up a so-called safe space, bringing a traumatised woman into that space, and then describing and talking about her in the terms that he did.

We had people on this board seeking help who couldnt use that service and at the time had no other support. Someone had been 'counselled' by Wadhwa and described a shockingly careless and uncaring experience.

This man has used vulnerable women for his own ends - personal, political, emotional. He is an abominable man.

Didn’t he ask rape victims about their orgasms during the rape?

I couldn't believe seeing Wadhwa on the list of Green Party candidates in the Parliament elections in May. I mean, I know the Greens in Scotland are, frankly, awful but even at that I was astonished to see him being promoted by ANY political party. Thankfully stuff all chance of getting elected, but even so........

Yes, a poster who had received this “counselling” said on a previous thread how he’d just been playing with his phone the whole time.

It certainly sends a message.

I dont recall that. He did at one point said that rape victims sometimes orgasm.

I have definitybread on here an acccount of a woman who says she was counselled by him and he asked if she orgasmed during her assault.

it is one of the worst things I had heard about gender

Mridul Wadhwa has got a new gig as Director of Services at Gendered Intelligence.

That photo used for his new profile was taken a rather long time ago.

Yes, I heard that too. I think it's partly based on the horrible confusion between sex and gender. Men can ejaculate from pressure on their prostate gland. Whether you want to call that an orgasm is - well I wont go there because anyway women don't have a prostate.

I don't know what kind of sex education Wadhwa had but it might not have been a very good one.

I thought it was known that women sometimes orgasm during rape, purely for physical reasons. Then they can feel deep shame, as if part of them wanted or encouraged the rape, because of prevalent attitudes that women don’t orgasm unless the sex is consensual.

Whatever, Wadhwa should never have demanded a rape victim tell him about this, in what was supposed to be a therapeutic setting for her. It smacks of prioritising his own prurient interest above the woman’s wellbeing, and shows the danger of unqualified counsellors attempting to counsel traumatised people.

Maybe it'll turn out to be an own goal when the ordinary voter finds out the background of Candidate Wadhwa? Might peak a few...

Maybe not this time round but he's putting a marker down for the future and even now I don't feel very secure that he wont get elected. The Scottish parliament is much easier than Westminster because of proportional representation and the "list". As I understand it he doesn't need a majority in any constituency, just enough disaffected voters across the country who decide on Green.

I cannot find any references to it now but I thought there was a mini side-scandal about Mridul Wadhwa paying for a professional photographer to produce flattering portrait photos. Does that ring bells with anyone?

https://list.co.uk/news/violence-unseen-4662

Maybe this?

'portraits by Alicia Bruce commissioned by Zero Tolerance'

Good for BP. Could she please pass that wretched guidance now? And not send her lawyers to support our Jolyon in his ceaseless campaign against women’s rights?

https://aliciabruce.co.uk/violence-unseen/ilzgsimltgz256y95xcl22hrvolfzw