To think JKRowling should be in the House of Lords

[Allthegoodnamesarechosen]

She is probably the best selling living author writing in English

She has given a great deal of money to charity

She has conquered the disadvantages of being an unemployed single mother by her own efforts

She is a great role model for women and girls

You're not listening. And you are not engaging with any sense at all of good faith. Just trying to find a series of "gotcha" moments that exist purely in your head.

Anyone who is genuinely concerned for women and children would be interested in all policies that affect women and children not just policies those related to trans issues

I can't speak for anyone else but I am interested in policies that effect women.

I'm particularly interested in the impact of the change in the meaning of the word women to include any man who says he is one on policies which affect women making them meaningless.

But nice try.

They'd also be prepared to say what a woman is. That's rather integral to identifying women's causes.

Surprise surprise, you answer the question as to what her causes and policies are and there's still a complaint that it's not broad enough. Are these people even trying?

Everyone knows what a woman is

Yes, which is why mostly everyone knows that trans women aren't women. You want to argue against that then give us your definition .

Anyone who is genuinely concerned for women and children would be interested in all policies that affect women and children not just policies those related to trans issues.

since you can see into all our heads: which ones are we ignoring?

Maybe the outrage that is the WASPI women?
Maybe forcing pharma companies to research the effects of pharmaceuticals on women as well as men?
Addressing the inequality that is inherent in how it is mostly women taking caring responsibilities and thus earning poverty wages followed by poverty pensions?
Requiring the FTSE100 companies to finally address inequality in their boardrooms?
The failure of our country to hold Iran to account for the outrageous way they treat women?
The way we abandoned women in Afghanistan to their sad fate with nary a backward glance?
The disproportionate way austerity policies affect women?

which ones are we not supporting, Oh Mighty Seer Of All The Truths?

Everyone knows what a woman is

Yes, and some are very talented penisists pianists.

Everyone knows what a woman is.

So tell us the answer if it's so obvious and uncontroversial.

I agree especially after the abuse she received,she's super braves to speak out

I agree it's more plot driven than excellent writing though but still!!

I actually thought passages such as how Harry felt visiting his parents' graves were beautifully written. She also has brilliant comic timing in her writing.

Regarding the HP books no matter what you think of the quality of the writing she has introduced many non readers to books.

So many children love the Harry Potter books who aren't avid readers. My two dyslexics loved the books when they were younger. Especially the :Stephen Fry narrations.

Both secretly hoped for a letter to Hogwarts!

Oh look Laura is here.

Fair enough if that's your view. In mine she gave away so much of earnings she stopped being a billionaire. I'd admire her for that alone.

Absolutely right OP, I love JK and all she has done and all she stands for. She is an inspiration and a wonderful role model to girls and women.

To add, she is versatile. The texts of Harry Potter books develop from definite children's style to young adult. Her other children's books are distinctive (The Ickabog has its own definite style), the inworld Potter books she wrote for charity read exactly as such books would do and the Strike novels read like someone else entirely. Though I do concede they are getting a bit overlong. Still enjoy them enormously though, and being overlong never stopped Stephen King.

I really do not agree that she isn't a technically competent and actually excellent writer, but I get that that is a matter of opinion.

HOL needs to go so as it's an antiquated system so YABU.

She could make a fantastic MP but why would she bother having already seen such great success. I'm grateful for what she has to say about women though whatever.

Pretty funny to see all the bitter little people whining "Right wing! Deranged! Unhinged! Rabbid [sic]! Ew! AND BAD WRITER!!!!"

Or it would be funny if it weren't so bloody scary that there are people this stupid out there getting their every thought and Correct Opinion from Twitter.

YANBU, she's brilliant. Endlessly patient in the face of all the tantrumming and violent rage thrown at her.

Ooooh, maybe she could run for, I dunno, Peterborough, and tell everyone that the reason they should vote for her rather than the local 'supercharged councillors' is because because she is sooooooo international and well known everywhere, and people will say to her, ‘JK Rowling, so tell me about Peterborough. Where is Peterborough?’ Because they may not know. And she can tell them.

Just like Miss Izzard.

Agree. And she should be Dame Joanne!

Anyone who accepts an 'honour' perpetuates inequality in this country and sinks themselves irretrievably in my opinion. I hope JKR would have more sense.

We have The House of Lords to thank for ensuring the word "Mother" featured in a maternity bill. They provide an essential extra layer of scrutiny and I am very glad we have them.

hansard.parliament.uk/Lords/2021-02-25/debates/DFB70DF3-ABA0-4168-8DBF-DBDA63BA4AEE/MinisterialAndOtherMaternityAllowancesBill

That statement doesn't entirely make sense. "...honours equally those mothers who do not own to the label "woman" ' - what does "own to the label" mean?

And couching the whole thing in terms of "honouring mothers" - well, that just shows what the Lords really think of women. The role of a woman is to be a mother - that is the choice to be "honoured". It shouldn't be about the choice of motherhood being "honoured" - what about all the other valid choices women might make?

I am not against the principle of having a 'layer' in addition to the House of Commons but I strongly oppose its being made up of 'Lords'.

And couching the whole thing in terms of "honouring mothers" - well, that just shows what the Lords really think of women.

What a strange interpretation. I don't see it that way at all in the context of the alternative being birthing parent or birthing person. It certainly isn't suggesting that women are not worthy if they are not mothers.

You may well not agree with the system of the house of lords, a second chamber made up of hereditary peers is certainly problematic but the whole point of the other sort of peers, those based on virtue is to remove it from being a hereditary base.

Either way under the current system a woman like JKR would be immensely useful in what remains a chamber made up disproportionately of hereditary peers & males,

That statement doesn't entirely make sense. "...honours equally those mothers who do not own to the label "woman" ' - what does "own to the label" mean?

It's a clear and excellent statement. It does not imply that all women are worth is being mothers. It does not denigrate the choices women make. It simply confirms the link between mother and female. It recognises that a minute percentage of women refuse to own that they are women, but, nonetheless, if they give birth they become mothers.

'Own' is used here in the sense of acknowledge. As in 'to own up'.

I am not against the principle of having a 'layer' in addition to the House of Commons but I strongly oppose its being made up of 'Lords'.

This whole issue of males trying to colonise women's spaces and vulnerable children being transed, has been an excellent demonstration of the need for legislators who can speak freely without fearing that they might lose the next election because they have upset the loudest screamers.

Perhaps ' legislators' is not the right word. A part of the legislative body that writes and passes our laws?