JKR offers to fund any nurse or female patient legal fees

He is a fell runner but also holds a park run record

Is that Parkrun? Thought he was a fell runner.

His name is Lauren jeska

What? Really? That’s shocking.

It’s 2026, which is presumably why there are APPGs for other religions, and indeed non-religious MPs and peers.

Grown-ups generally allow pluralism of thought and belief. I appreciate that may blow your mind.

okay then - for the 117 groups (or whatever number it is) listed by Amnesty International - you should have no problem showing for each of them how their one and only purpose is being anti-trans

okay - let's make it easier - for any 1 of those groups - prove that their one and only purpose is being anti-trans...

come on - can't be too hard...
sorry, you are mumbling - can't hear you properly
what is that you are saying?
Ahhh - you can't - not surprised...

I think you will find it is 2026 - where despite your dislike of it - tolerance and free speech is allowed - the idea of a group of Christians in parliament in a 'Christian country' is hardly all that surprising.

Ruth Hunt, ex-head of LGBT charity Stonewall (well to be precise it was LGB when she first took over but then the T was added under her leadership - lobbied by groups such as The Beaumont Society - an org. for cross dressing men and their wives), is a member of that very Parliamentary Christian Group. She's in the House of Lords now after undermining the very rights of women (including lesbians) like her, and coming close to destroying Stonewall.

Obvious anti-trans bigot, right there, eh?

This seems like a good reminder for when posters make claims about anti-‘rights’.

https://x.com/thearbourist/status/2034625446784958710?s=46

“When one group’s ‘rights’ require another group to surrender privacy, fairness, or conscience, the conflict is no longer about equality. It is about power.”

”The smartest move activists made was rhetorical: they stopped arguing for contested demands and started calling them “rights.” After that, dissent could be recoded as cruelty, and ordinary objections could be treated as moral failure.”

“Female spaces were not built out of bigotry. They were built because sex differences are real, and privacy, safety, and fairness matter. Calling those boundaries hateful does not refute them. It just bullies people into silence.”

“A demand for equality says: leave me free. A demand for compliance says: you must affirm, yield, and rearrange your world around me. Too much of this debate is presented as the first when it is plainly the second.”

This is part of a longer read.

https://deadwildroses.com/2026/03/19/boundary-violations-rebranded-as-rights/

Do you not think that Christians should be allowed to have a group in Parliament? There are groups representing a huge range of faiths, beliefs and interests. Is it that you have a particular gripe against religion or do you just not think Amnesty should support freedom of conscience any more?

Are you maybe posting from outside the UK and assuming that this group is led by the religious right? The religious right isn't really a force in UK politics.

Marsha de Cordova is one of the three officers of the group. and she has voted to de-criminalise abortion and to protect those accessing clinics from harassment and is a prominent member of the Socialist Campaign Group. I think she is also generally regarded as a trans ally.

Leaving all that aside, if you are surprised that there is a Christian Group in Parliament, you will be flabbergasted to learn that there are actual Church of England bishops in the House of Lords, and they voted against decriminalisation of abortion (despite being generally regarded as left wing and 'woke' these days).

https://www.churchofengland.org/media/news-and-press-releases/abortion-law-changes-bishops-take-part-house-lords-debate

But this actual structural power was completely ignored by the Amnesty report.

They also mysteriously black listed English and Welsh Catholic Bishops (although Catholics famously not part of UK government), but ignored Scottish Catholic Bishops. (Are they now pro-choice?)

Anyone genuinely concerned for Amnesty's reputation would want to understand how such a flawed report came to be written.

I think that might count as one and a half so far!

Ooh. Yes. Good shout! (FFS, don't mention the bundles!) 😬🤣

Out of interest, why do you feel it's JKR's responsibiity to fund provisions for trans people and not organisations like Stonewall and Pride and Mermaids and a myriad of smaller groups who have collectively taken millions of pounds in donations and grants specifically to support trans people either specifcally as trans charities or collectively within LGBT support?

I mean, look at cancer charities. Among many other things like research they literally fund and provide cancer support in NHS hospitals.

Got to admit, given the incredible high visibility and media, goverment and corporate support LBGT and trans causes have had for the last twenty years or so, if TRAs think they will do better asking their bete noir JKR for help than their actual charities, that gives said charities a very strong You Had One Job vibe!

ah yes, Amnesty Int. called groups whose one and only purpose is being anti-trans, anti-rights groups. Like it or not, they aren't wrong and I don't see why they should be on their knees begging Jo for an apology (almost as if Jo is getting a power kick out of using her money to threaten lawsuits).

"It's just the all party Christian Group for people in Parliament"

What year is this again? 2026 or 1956?

.

I am all for suing an institution that was complicit in the rape of a mentally ill woman, by placing her in a male psychiatric ward, because she said she was a man. I'm all for them facing the actual consequences of their slavish adherence to ideology, not what is in the best interests of a patient:

"An NHS trust deliberately obstructed a police investigation into the rape of a transgender patient on an all-male secure psychiatric ward. Male patients chanted “no Adam’s apple” when the 5ft 3in biological female arrived on the ward and within an hour the victim was raped in a cupboard. The South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust ignored dozens of requests for records from detectives investigating the attack. Staff accidentally forwarded an internal note saying “don’t give them any more”. The obstructive behaviour meant a mentally ill patient wrongly stood trial for the rape."

https://x.com/ProfAliceS/status/2057004208499339659

Because Mummy Should Fix It.
Trantrum 101.

This from @akkakk is so astute and clear, I think it deserves to be said again:

the decision to be in the place where an organisation is breaking the law is that organisation's decision

And this is why we should, and we will, sue. If things don't change drastically in the next 15 years, I fully expect to be one of those who use JKR's fund to take a law-breaking NHS or NHS-supported care org. to court.

If they don't want to be sued, whoever they are, the solution is very simple: OBEY THE LAW.

(BTW this is something that everyone understood until about 10 years ago. Now it's just "so complicated." Bullshit. People who use their phones while driving know very well they're breaking the law, but they do it because they think they'll get away with it.)

I think you might need to catch up on Amnesty's more recent activities.

Leaving aside the hallucinated information on Beira's Place et al, Ruth Hunt, ex CEO of Stonewall is a member of one of the black listed organisations. It's just the all party Christian Group for people in Parliament, but presumably the report writer just saw the word 'Christian' and assumed they were malign. It's a sloppy report that wouldn't pass muster as a school project.

This matters not just for the organisations affected, but for Amnesty who by attempting to bury this incident undermine all their other operations. Why take them seriously on torture in other countries if they can't even google 'Christians in Parliament'?

Beira's place has asked for an apology, that the report be withdrawn, and an external investigation.

Do you not think that that is the minimum that Amnesty need to do to protect their reputation?

For example more Unisex toilets in addition to men's and women's which trans people could use?

Trans people can already use men's and women's toilets. If they are permitted to use to opposite sex toilets the toilets just become mixed sex. You could attempt to segregate toilets by gender, but as gender is a personal concept, you wouldn't be able to exclude anyone, so they would just be mixed sex.

You could make all toilets mixed sex, but you would have to change building regulations. If you are interested in understanding why we have public single sex toilets, you should look up posts by Keeptoiletssafe

Is JKR taking Parkrun to court? Do you not think that if they are providing comparative data, it should be of as much value to women as to men?

@TransParentlyAnnoyed

"You approve of taking money from an institution which can't pay for sexually abused kids to have psychiatric counselling?

Which practices corridor care because there's no cash to pay for extra staff?"

I had a relative who killed himself while on a psychiatric ward. The local NHS trust was sued by his close family. I absolutely approve of 'taking money from' organisations who don't safeguard the people they are supposed to be looking after. HTH.

“This is also cartoon-villain territory at this point. "I'll sue the NHS and the world's largest human rights org to spite those trans people and I don't care if people who need them get harmed!".”

Fuck yes it is cartoon-villain territory… that you made that deplorably false statement about what she has actually said.

It is so ridiculously your own cartoon-villain prejudice misrepresenting what she has said, it is quite absurd.

She's donated buckets of money to the NHS.
Why is extra toilets her responsibility?

I was thinking more of the bundlemeister myself 🤔

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

more hilarity - this really is the thread that keeps on giving...

So, that will be Amnesty International who labelled 117 organisations as anti-rights when most of them are more pro-rights than Amnesty themselves...

Amnesty International who have an agenda to intimidate smaller organisations

Amnesty International where the granddaughter of the founder says she will donate no money to them - horrified at what they are doing: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/amnesty-founder-s-granddaughter-refuses-to-donate-after-blacklisting-jk-rowling-s-organisation/ar-AA293iZ0

Ms White said her grandfather would be "appalled" by the charity's current position, saying it contradicted everything Mr MacBride stood for, The Times reports.

Ah yes - that Amnesty International which thinks that Beira's Place is 'Anti-rights' because it cares for women who are most in need of that care in a single-sex environment and won't allow bullying men pretending to be women to join in!

So that will be girl guides who are happy for girls at their most vulnerable age to go off on camp believing that it is a single-sex environment, only to find a boy undressing and sleeping in with them?! Remove the 'let's be nice to trans' argument and that has safeguarding red-flags all over it...

So that will be Park Run who are happy for men to pretend to be women and take away the pole positions for women in the competitive leaderboard - men who wouldn't rank amongst other men, but have realised that by pretending to be a woman they can suddenly start to win things...

So that will be the NHS where some management are so captured by trans-ideology that they will swear that x=y (man = woman) despite being the profession of medics who beyond all others should know the difference between a man and a woman and that one can't change to the other! The NHS which allows vulnerable women to be placed in danger through their ideology. The NHS which allows male doctors to bully women and change in their safe spaces because they claim to be a woman

JKR isn't taking money from anyone - the decision to be in the place where an organisation is breaking the law is that organisation's decision - let them be grown ups and own the consequences - or is their no longer any accountability for the decisions people make? If someone choose to break the law / takes their organisation into a place where it is breaking the law - then they should get the consequences for that choice - otherwise, we become a lawless society. At present senior managers in these organisations can take these decisions with no personal consequences - we need to see more activity in prosecuting the individual for making illegal decisions - once they start to see a personal accountability being enforced upon them, they might start to comply with the law.

JKR is not doing this in an attitude of 'I don't care if people who need them get harmed!' the very opposite - she is doing it to support the people who need these organisations who are being actively harmed by a few malicious people... the nurses who are forced to have men in their changing room, the girl guides who don't want boys in their loos / changing areas / bedrooms... the women who train hard to succeed in sport, only to have that success removed from them by some inadequate male pretending to be a woman... The charities attacked by Amnesty international all of who are out there to look after people - and whose work is threatened by such attacks...

Crack on JKR - one of the few people standing up to the bullies and doing what is right.

That Park Run record is not just held by a man but a man currently in prison for stabbing a UK Athletics official who questioned his sex