Mridul Wadhwa - Male CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis

Grannygravy yes, it's all about entitlement.

Well what you all seem to be saying is that the law no longer protects women. You are blaming transwomen for this. But here's the thing the law is not passed by transwomen. There are no transwomen in Parliament. There are few transwomen on any other body. So why are you blaming them? The only people benefitting from this split in the women's movement are the men who really conrol things. So why not apportion blame where it is due? To the sexist H of C which after 100 years of women being able to vote has still not equal numbers of men and women MPs.
And before you go on about trans activists and their power (which I really don't understand). How come a huge movement like Extinction Rebellion staging marches of over 10,000 people in London is largely ignored whereas a small number of activists from a community of an estimated 200,000-500000 people can apparently force organisations to change policies. And yes I know about Stonewall, but if they are so powerful how come the law remains as it does?
By all means insist the law is correctly applied but stop blaming transwomen because it isn't.

Doodledog good post, one which I totally agree with.

There are laws to protect women.

But in the case of Wadhwa, she lied to circumvent these laws.

She says so herself.

Do you agree with that, trisha?

Peasblossom

There are laws to protect women.

But in the case of Wadhwa, she lied to circumvent these laws.

She says so herself.

Do you agree with that, trisha?

Exactly this person lied by omission to get a job. Any other person doing so would have been dismissed when it was discovered/revealed gaining employment by deception

Good posts today Doodledog.
What’s the ‘blaming transwomen’ trisher. Have you not yet learnt the danger of generalisation?
As has often been repeated on here I don’t hold all trans-women responsible for the problems that are going on at the moment. They don’t even have to be ‘softly spoken and very kind’ for me not to see them as responsible for the problems.
I only refer to those who go out of their way to override the rights of natal women. Sadly, from 2 examples on here and from what I’ve seen at meetings and in the media, there are others who may or may not be transanything who are equally keen to erode the rights of natal women in order to promote transwomen’s rights.

trisher, again you are reading things that nobody is saying.

Did you see my post at 12.07 today? There is nothing in there about transpeople being responsible fo making laws. What is is about that post with which you disagree?

I agree that men are behind the trans movement. Where I do no agree with you is about why. I feel that if men can infiltrate the female sex (for want of a better way of putting it) then women's rights no longer exist. A single-sex right that is open to anyone is not a right - it has gone.

If the patriarchy is happy about a split in the women's movement, they will be delighted at the way in which some women have joined the TRAs and are helping to erode the rights of women.

Mollygo then why not target the men who don't apply the law or people who are actually causing harm, instead of one woman with 16years of working in the field of violence, with expertise in cultural matters and language that benefits minority women still suffering in society, who simply didn't say anything about the gender she had been living as for 20 years. It seems to me that targetting transwomen who are doing a good job isn't helping anyone.
I've yet to see any evidence that during her career she has harmed anyone. Or that there was any natal woman who would bring similar qualifications and experience to the job. We know that women in minority cultures are forced into marriage, suffer violence, are raped and murdered by family members. Shouldn't they at least be considered in this discussion?

Omission is not lying, if it was then loads of women who took a job knowing they were trying to get pregnant would be guilty. They are not. It's nobody's business unless the information would impact on your professional life and being trans hadn't for 16 years, why should it now?

I've yet to see evidence . . . . . . that there was any natal woman who would bring similar qualifications and experience to the job.
Of course you haven't! Why would women who applied for the job contact you? We only hear about people who do get jobs, unless unsuccessful applicants make their cases public, which hasn't happened in this case.

In what way are women from 'minority cultures' not being considered in this discussion? The discussion is about a transwoman lying about her trans status, not about women from minority cultures.

But if we are going to discuss them, please don't tell me that you are suggesting that only women who have experience of forced marriage etc should apply? A woman from a family where that has occurred is highly unlikely to have the qualifications and work experience that would qualify her to be considered for a CEO role.

Also, isn't it the case that women from more traditional minority cultures are more likely than most to object to being touched intimately by a male-bodied person?

If we are going to consider women from minority cultures we need to do so from a position of understanding of the impact of those cultures on many of the women within them.

Omission is lying. That is why the oath in your is to tell 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth'.

Sorry if I’ve missed something - but if ‘transwomen are women’, did Wadhwa actually lie?
In whose eyes did they lie?
Would there have been a ‘trans’ box to tick?

(I do not believe that TWAW btw)

Doodledog even if men are behind the trans movement (and really I don't count a few weirdos as being typical) why are they having such influence? Trans people are a minority. Yet institutions run by the state are failing to apply the law as it stands. Self ID was misrepresented to the general public who were persuaded anyone could just declare themselves trans which the community never requested. And a huge anti-trans movement is being whipped up by the media. Have you ever wondered why?
No feminist I know is eroding the rights of women. They are simply pointing out that actually it isn't transpeople who have the power here. They are a minority who have lived amongst us for years. They simply want the right to live happily as the gender they feel they are. They have been denigrated, assaulted, criticised and ostracised for a long time. It saddens me that women would turn on these people, misgender them and accuse them of all sorts of misbehaviour because of the actions of a few individuals. Most paedophiles are men but we don't associate all men with paedophilia nor do we deny them any rights.
As for the concept that most transwomen are accepted. You only have to read this thread, notice the misgendering, the inaccurate and false accusations and quotes, the inability to admit that actually MW might have a valuable contribution to make to the issue of violence to realise that isn't true.
The incident in the pub also illustrates how prejudice operates. A transwoman felt abused by a group of women and they were asked to leave, and she's the one at fault? How did women come to this?

If the job is open to female applicants only, then applying when you are not female (even though you identify as a woman) is a lie, is it not?

^
If we are going to consider women from minority cultures we need to do so from a position of understanding of the impact of those cultures on many of the women within them.^
Ironic isn't it that is exactly what MW can do. Raised in a minority culture in India, experience of migration, language knowledge, expertise on forced marriage, she brings personal experience, education and research to the task. But she's a transwoman so it doesn't count!

If a job is open under the law to female applicants only, then only females should apply. Let’s be clear, this was the law. An Act passed by an elected Oarliament who thought it was right and necessary.

Anyone who is not female, who applies and conceals that they are not female has decided that they can disregard a law fir their own ends.

So is it your opinion trisher that it is justifiable for anyone to disregard a law when they chose. Or is it only transgender people that do that?

Is a lawless society that you want?

Obviously transwomens rights are above the law according to Trisher Peasblossom

A sorry state of affairs, it’s not the Government or anyone else to blame it’s the men deciding they want to be women who are pushing this agenda, regardless of what women want or feel.

Further to my question upthread, what is the law regarding trans people?
Is a trans woman legally a woman?
It would seem that that is the case, with the many incidents of transwomen being put in Women’s prisons.
If so, then Wadhwa didn’t actually lie in the eyes of the law
(Apologies if I’m missing something, I cannot say that I’ve read the full thread.)

If someone breaks the law and does so without any consequences, is it that person's fault the law isn't applied?

Doodledog even if men are behind the trans movement (and really I don't count a few weirdos as being typical) why are they having such influence?
I think that men are behind the surge in TRAs, not that they brought about the trans movement. They (men) have influence because they are in positions of power, as you point out.

Trans people are a minority. Yet institutions run by the state are failing to apply the law as it stands.
Which law, and how is it being misapplied?

Self ID was misrepresented to the general public who were persuaded anyone could just declare themselves trans which the community never requested. And a huge anti-trans movement is being whipped up by the media. Have you ever wondered why?
No, because I don't think it is being 'whipped up by the media'. I think that there is comparatively little coverage of the debate in the media, probably because of fear that it would be seen as 'bigoted, discriminatory and hateful'.

No feminist I know is eroding the rights of women. They are simply pointing out that actually it isn't transpeople who have the power here.
You can't define feminism, or decide who is a feminist, just as you can't reasonably ask whether I have wondered why something is happening when I haven't agreed that I think it is happening. In my definition of feminism and feminists, I can just as easily say that no feminist I know is being discriminatory towards transpeople. They are simply pointing out that the direction that is being taken is leading to the erosion of the rights of women.

They are a minority who have lived amongst us for years. They simply want the right to live happily as the gender they feel they are. They have been denigrated, assaulted, criticised and ostracised for a long time.
I agree, and have absolutely no problem with this, and am, in fact, supportive of their rights to do so unmolested and accepted.

It saddens me that women would turn on these people, misgender them and accuse them of all sorts of misbehaviour because of the actions of a few individuals.
If you are suggesting here that I am turning on them, then we have an issue, as I am not. If you are speaking more generally, then I am also sad that the people you mentioned in the previous paragraph are being swept up in the battle for women's rights. I think that the TRAs are doing a lot of harm to the cause of transpeople who just want to live peaceful lives.

Most paedophiles are men but we don't associate all men with paedophilia nor do we deny them any rights.
True, but a false equivalence.

As for the concept that most transwomen are accepted. You only have to read this thread, notice the misgendering, the inaccurate and false accusations and quotes, the inability to admit that actually MW might have a valuable contribution to make to the issue of violence to realise that isn't true.
There are several points jumbled up here, but I'll try to unpick them. I would like to see transwomen accepted. I personally do accept them, but feel as I described in my post of 12.07 today.
You are using MW as an example of a transwoman who should be accepted. I disagree. Not because of her trans status in itself, but because she lied about her sex on the application form, because she knowingly applied for a role which was a protected female one, and because she is very clearly not suitable to be dealing with traumatised women, as evidenced by her assertion that a woman asking for a female therapist is a bigot who should reframe her trauma. I find that unconscionable.

The incident in the pub also illustrates how prejudice operates. A transwoman felt abused by a group of women and they were asked to leave, and she's the one at fault?

On this thread alone there have been two very different descriptions of what happened in that pub. One does describe the women as lairy abusive drunks, and I, for one, said that if that were the case the landlord was within his rights to remove them. The other description, which you are choosing to ignore, suggests that they were overheard expressing views with which he did not agree, and he decided that they were hate-filled discriminatory bigots and that it was he who became abusive. His language, in either case, does not paint him as a reasonable or neutral person, but as it stands, neither of us is aware of the facts.

How did women come to this?
Again, my answer to that question depends on what you mean.

There are no transwomen in Parliament.

Not yet, but make no mistake, this is all very political, particularly in Scotland. Mridul Waddya was an SNP parliamentary candidate until they overwhelmingly backed a law to allow victims of rape and sexual assault to choose the sex rather than gender of the person examining them. He flounced from there and went to the Scottish Green Party where his supporters are Maggie Chapman who just happens to be Edinburgh Rape Crisis' chief operating officer.

trisher

If someone breaks the law and does so without any consequences, is it that person's fault the law isn't applied?

Good grief. This is like something from the Moral Maze?

No, it is not their fault that the law is not applied, but that doesn't mean that they are not lawbreakers and that the consequences can't or should not be applied when their lawbreaking comes to light.

“Woman” is a gender Fanny

Male and Female are genetic terms, dependent up the X or Y chromosome and cannot be altered medically or socially.

If it states female applicants only it means a person with two X chromosomes. So a biological male cannot apply.

Unless she/he lies.

trisher

If someone breaks the law and does so without any consequences, is it that person's fault the law isn't applied?

Alright as long as you don’t get caught eh?

Chewbacca

^There are no transwomen in Parliament.^

Not yet, but make no mistake, this is all very political, particularly in Scotland. Mridul Waddya was an SNP parliamentary candidate until they overwhelmingly backed a law to allow victims of rape and sexual assault to choose the sex rather than gender of the person examining them. He flounced from there and went to the Scottish Green Party where his supporters are Maggie Chapman who just happens to be Edinburgh Rape Crisis' chief operating officer.

I am based in England, Chewbacca. Is this being covered adequately in the Scottish media, as there is very little being said about it here?

trisher

If someone breaks the law and does so without any consequences, is it that person's fault the law isn't applied?

Well, now that we know that she did wilfully and knowingly break the law, should she take the consequences?

Having applied for a post for which she was not lawfully qualified, should she not be removed now that we know?

Or should her decision to break the law be upheld because of her gender?

Which would mean some genders are outside the law.