Seán Ako 🇮🇪

So JK Rowling who maintained for years it’s not about being anti trans, it’s about being pro women, is now offering to fund anti trans groups run by men?

In which case, you were part of the movement that created the monster. Your denouncement today is to be appreciated, but let’s not pretend there was ever a time when Amnesty was not politicised by the Fabian left and focussed upon replacing British democracy with international human rights mandarin governance. A properly truthful position would be to say Amnesty is wrong now, and I was unwise to support it in the past. It has not fallen from nobility, it has followed precisely the trajectory you would expect of an organisation designed to override British democracy with international socialism.

This is a fascinating exposure of the poverty of the hidden political landscape beneath team GC… JKR will fund ‘women’s organisations’ and even extends her funding to ‘gay men’s organisations’ too, despite her fund being expressly set up for women. However, she has not extended her offer of support to the safeguarding orgs, the family charities, the Christian orgs and (most certainly not) those orgs which are pro life or perceive marriage as between men and women - despite the fact that, of course, they all mean to support women too, in their own ways, whether or not one agrees with their approach. So it seems now we know who this feudal lady will save from the gulag list; those she agrees with politically. This personal partiality is why, thrilling as it seems to have a powerful champion for ‘women’s (and, as it happens, gay men’s) rights’, politics by billionaire’s whim is not as good as principled self governance and the rule of law, before which we are all equal. JKR is of course entitled to fund whoever she wishes to take private legal action, but do you see the political divide and the structural problem of seeking justice not by proper democratic process but by lawfare? Do you see the lack of principle to stand up for a true freedom of conscience for everyone, when they are ear marked for cancellation from civil society - even if you deeply disagree with them? Think about it… if she would not fund SPUC then I presume she would also not have funded Ann Widdicombe, had she been defamed and libelled on the Amnesty blacklist. Beneath all the GC feminist posturing for ‘women’, the GCs really only care about ‘socially liberal women’ amongst whom they include the gay and transvestite men who are their friends. As I said before, this is dinner party philosophy, not true moral or even classically liberal principle. If one was blessed with the great wealth JKR has been, and found one’s organisation listed in this nasty way, one should stand up for everyone who has been libelled or none, imho. Justice is not only for head girls and the rich. But the best course of action here is not to play Olympian goddess, sprinkling money magic where one likes for litigious outcomes, it would be to call for a charity law overhaul to cut out this nasty kind of politicised activism by Amnesty altogether, for the proscription of the illiberal far left and to repeal the gender laws and international rights governance through which Amnesty was trying to assert its nasty blacklist. We have to choose principle over power, and universalism over sectarianism. This is not the time to assert abortion politics, it’s the time to defend anyone and everyone from growing totalitarianism. I stand with every org on that list, regardless of their wider position, specifically against the nasty action Amnesty took towards them.

Gay men's organisations named on the list are welcome to contact me through my website. While the JK Rowling's Fund was set up to support women, JK Rowling herself is more than happy to donate to your legal fighting fund.