"Near silence" is debatable.
Hamas and other Palestinian armed groups flagrantly violated international law and displayed a chilling disregard for human life by carrying out cruel and brutal crimes including mass summary killings, hostage-taking, and launching indiscriminate rocket attacks into Israel, Amnesty International said today.
AFAICT, pro-Israeli NGOs have been railing against those orgs since then allegedly for their “demonization and tokenism” against Israel for the subsequent stances on the Israeli armed response. But mostly against HRW it seems, which saw fit to remind at length of the Israeli violations of human rights on their Oct 9 position piece.
That's probably also related to later stuff HRW said like
Fast forward 18 months from Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine to the new escalation of hostilities in Israel and Palestine. On the weekend of October 7 and 8, the United States and European countries quickly and rightly denounced the brutal Hamas-led attacks against Israel in which Palestinian armed groups killed more than 1,400 men, women, and children and took almost 200 hostages. They also quickly and rightly called for those responsible to be held to account and for hostages to be released.
But the reaction from Washington and – with a few exceptions – from European capitals to Israel’s actions in Gaza since October 7 has been muted. Where is the clear condemnation of the cruel tightening of the 16-year closure of Gaza that amounts to collective punishment, a war crime?
... effectively comparing Israel's actions with Russia's. Which TASS relished on, I might add. (They didn't mention there Russia banned the group along with Amnesty International.)
Anyhow, pro-Israeli NGOs contend that the volume of Israel condemnation by HRW etc. far exceeds what is due, and that in contrast Hamas' deeds should be the focus. Generally speaking, those [two] organizations have long irked Israel and friends, e.g. some US Republican politicians walked out in June when those organizations were testifying. (The beef was over words like 'apartheid' then, it seems.)
That goes for "international human rights [...] organizations". As for "women’s rights organizations", I'll let someone else figure out which are the notable ones worth checking out in this context.