JK Rowling putting her money where her mouth is

Wouldn’t you think that people who believe they are women, would be really glad that another support place has opened up for females who have been abused by males.

And perhaps think that it would be abusive males who won’t like it and will try to shut it down?

This is a quote from the link posted by grannydarkhair. In case anyone hasn't read the article, this explains the reason behind JKRowling's decision to open and fund this safe place.

Edinburgh’s one Rape Crisis is currently already over subscribed and somewhat controversial. Its stance that survivors may need to be re-educated about trans rights as part of recovering from trauma does not suit many of its users. The idea that survivors who have “unacceptable beliefs” should have their prejudices challenged, begs the question of who the service is for.

This pushing of a political view onto a woman at a time of profound trauma and crisis does not feel appropriate? Is it ethical? Professional? Many survivors do not feel comfortable about all this and repeatedly ask to be cared for by women. And by women only. Some may even refuse this service as a result.

This, as well as Sturgeon pushing through her bill on self-ID despite a powerful intervention against it from Reem Alsalem, the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women and Girls, may well be seen as part of the current backdrop to this new centre. But it has obviously been many months in the planning. 

As an aside I had to fill in a medical questionnaire today.
There was a part that said For women only, are you pregnant
Brave souls 😄👏👏👏👏

Lathyrus

Oh wow. Not only did the Twitter anti say the refuge wouldn’t be a safe place, but now we have a poster saying “it doesn’t come from a completely wholesome place”.

Not safe, not wholesome.

What else I wonder in an attempt to bring down this female safe space.

I think we all know why.

Why doesn’t it come from a completely wholesome place VS?
Please explain what you mean VS.

Who could possibly make it unsafe?
(No need to explain that.)

^ What else I wonder in an attempt to bring down this female safe space.^

You’re right, we all know why.

Its stance that survivors may need to be re-educated about trans rights as part of recovering from trauma
And how do the people enforcing that stance feel about the actions of the Chinese?
They force people who don’t agree with their stance to undergo months or years of indoctrination and interrogation aimed at transforming them into secular and loyal supporters of the party.

Sounds much the same to me. But if you agree with the one, why not support the other?

Wasn’t it that TiM Mridul Wadhwa who coined the phrase about rape victims reframing their trauma?

Obviously I can't speak for JKR, but wrt the spiteful comments about her virtue signalling, I would say that she doesn't need to do so. She is well known, and is clearly prepared to stand up for her feminist beliefs even when they make her unpopular with those who centre male needs. I can't see how funding something like this can be called virtue signalling - publicity-seeking yes (with good reason); but she doesn't need to tell people that she is doing something pointless in an attempt to make herself look good.

Letting it be known that she is funding a women's refuge for actual women will draw attention to the idiocy that means that some are not. Being famous must be a pain in the proverbial a lot of the time, but if you want to publicise a cause it comes in handy.

Oh, and what 'list', VS?

Thanks Glorianny for understanding I was not making a "nasty sideswipe" at anyone.

Rosie, those of us who have spent years working for and with women who have been abused or have been abused themselves or have family members who have been abused know that there are nowhere near enough support services or refuges for those who need them.

As an aside I also think it's true (but irrelevant to my question about visibility of celebrity) that some services and some refuges were/are better than others.

I have been reading this thread and now can't tell when people say VS/vs do they mean you VioletSky?
#confused

NotSpaghetti

I have been reading this thread and now can't tell when people say VS/vs do they mean you VioletSky?
#confused

Probably 🙂

You'd think so Lathyrus but I'm sorry to say it doesn't surprise me.

Well done JKR.

NotSpaghetti

Glorianny and others - why do we need to know who has funded it like this? I understand she wants to do this but we don't need to know it's her project, surely.

I may have missed something obvious here?....

Ultimately, the funding source would more than likely become public knowledge - if Rowling had kept it 'quiet' as you suggest she should.

Which would inevitably lead to questions being asked about the "secretiveness" of her anonymity which would lead some to suggest that she was covertly funding an anti-trans outfit.

JKR has made her stance clear. She wants a safe-place for women and girls. Anyone who goes there will be in no doubt that it is a safe place - because of her reputation on this issue.

That is probably what you are missing.

NS, VS is a poster, vs is virtue signalling. If the two things appear together . . .

DoodleDog thank you for this clarification about JKR.

Letting it be known that she is funding a women's refuge for actual women will draw attention to the idiocy that means that some are not. Being famous must be a pain in the proverbial a lot of the time, but if you want to publicise a cause it comes in handy.

Dickens Ultimately, the funding source would more than likely become public knowledge - if Rowling had kept it 'quiet' as you suggest she should.

Which would inevitably lead to questions being asked about the "secretiveness" of her anonymity which would lead some to suggest that she was covertly funding an anti-trans outfit.

You have more clearly made the exact points I tried to make at 14.56 . There is no way her funding of this project would have remained a secret.

She is amazing. Lots of people on Twitter hate her because she has money and therefore there is bugger all they can do to shut her up. Its fabulous.

Gloriannie can you give evidence of this comment you made ?
‘ The HP books are her greatest achievement and much in them was taken from other writers.’

From my experience of mainstream publishers (my son writing for Penguin/Puffin) they are rigorous in their editing with at least 3 people checking on all aspects of the manuscript.

I decided to google the Edinburgh Centre, its clearly offering a wide range of services (its does include trans but also men and the only "Education" I could see was altering attitudes towards violence against women. So what am I missing?

www.ercc.scot

It seems to me that JKR is offering an actual place to stay and it complementary?

I'm willing to be contradicted, but where is the "Re-education" stuff posters have been talking about in posts above?

Best tweet today!
twitter.com/crit_gen/status/1602325165429374976?s=61&t=HKdO8MPq1jvIr2Ezl_khkg

Wyllow3 Google Mridul Wadhwa, he is a self identified transwoman (Trans Identified Male or TIM) who is the CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre. After he took up the post, included amongst other remarks he made, he said that “rape survivors should reframe their trauma”.
Since he took over at ERCC, many abused women have been unable to access their help, hence why the wonderful JKR has done what she’s done.

grannydarkhair

Best tweet today!
twitter.com/crit_gen/status/1602325165429374976?s=61&t=HKdO8MPq1jvIr2Ezl_khkg

Wyllow3 Google Mridul Wadhwa, he is a self identified transwoman (Trans Identified Male or TIM) who is the CEO of Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre. After he took up the post, included amongst other remarks he made, he said that “rape survivors should reframe their trauma”.
Since he took over at ERCC, many abused women have been unable to access their help, hence why the wonderful JKR has done what she’s done.

“rape survivors should reframe their trauma”.

... here's the remainder of the sentence... "and have a more positive relationship with it."

And this is the rest of the podcast by Mridul Wadhwa...

Wadhwa said of the work being done at ERCC that "sexual violence happens to bigoted people as well. But these spaces are also for you."

"But," Wadhwa went on to say, "if you bring unacceptable beliefs that are discriminatory in nature, we will being to work with you on your journey of recovery from trauma. But please also expect to be challenged on your prejudices."

... the "bigoted people" are apparently the women who've been raped and want to be dealt with by other women.

... just what you need after the trauma of rape... a man with a dick who identifies as a woman telling you to reframe your experience so it doesn't offend TW activists.

There is a valid use of the term, " “rape survivors should reframe their trauma”.
forwomen.scot/10/08/2021/the-real-crisis-at-rape-crisis-scotland/

This article explains its valid use as in women not feeling its their fault/blame during genuine counselling, its certainly happening for me currently as a survivor of longterm co-ercive abuse, a reframing.

so it's problematic to use as an example here grannydarkhair as THE phrase to condemn

However I'm not entirely clear what Mridul Wadhwa means in practice. How do her challenges take place, in what form, and on?. There is a very good speech included in the article by Karen Ingala Smith

Wyllow3 That was the only phrase that I instantly remembered. That’s why I said to Google. I’ve read so much over the last few years that has horrified me, but certain phrases do stand out.
As Dickens said “a man with a dick” calling women who have been raped “bigots” - is it any wonder women decided they couldn’t access ERCC?

As Dickens said “a man with a dick” calling women who have been raped “bigots” - is it any wonder women decided they couldn’t access ERCC?

Since MW got his job by pretending to be female, implying that he thought a male could do the job better than a female, his bigotry against females is perfectly described here.
Bigot a person who is obstinately or unreasonably attached to a belief, opinion, or faction, especially one who is prejudiced against or antagonistic towards a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group

Just as an aside. Yesterday I went to the public loos. Just before I entered a man went in so I waited outside for him to exit. Now it could be that he used the Ladies as the Gents was boarded up but I wasn’t going to risk it.

NanKate

Just as an aside. Yesterday I went to the public loos. Just before I entered a man went in so I waited outside for him to exit. Now it could be that he used the Ladies as the Gents was boarded up but I wasn’t going to risk it.

That's what we have all been taught to do from childhood, NanKate. We trust our instincts and know that men in a Ladies' loo are best avoided. Even if they have good reason to be there, we assume otherwise until we find out - it's self-preservation. We also instinctively suspect people who are 'not as they seem'.

Asking women to forget all of this info - to call men 'she', to pretend not to notice an obviously male body in a dress, to agree that women is a class that can contain all-comers, so basically doesn't exist - is gaslighting, and dangerous to children and young people, who |(if this continues) may never learn fairly basic survival skills.