Conversion Therapy and a Survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth

Shizuku · 2021-03-09T12:15:44+00:00

*Trigger Warning - this post discusses suicidal feelings.* As the banning of conversion therapy is currently being debated, it might be useful for members of this group to see a survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth which found that 57% of transgender and non-binary youth who have undergone conversion therapy report a suicide attempt in the last year: [[https://www.thetrevorproject.org/survey-2019/?section=Conversion-Therapy-Change-Attempts]] If anyone reading this is experiencing suicidal thoughts, please know that suicide is preventable, and that support is available. Here is a link to the Samaritans: [[https://www.samaritans.org/]]

Voteinvain · 18/03/2021 19:57

Sorry to hear this LipstickLou - sad that you feel you can’t get the help and support you need in the U.K.

LipstickLou · 18/03/2021 18:27

@Voteinvain

Can someone tell me whether expressing dismay that their child wants to have a double mastectomy, and having lots of discussion with that child to ascertain whether this is the answer, or whether anything else is going on (which might also account for their ED and self-harm which started precisely at the onset of puberty and after their father announced that he was leaving the family home to set up life with another woman) That’s a hypothetical scenario by the way but do you get what I’m getting? Does it mean any thoughtful, gentle exploration of their over all mental health before prescribing hormone blockers or T?

Because if that’s what they mean by ‘conversion therapy’ when it comes to Transgender aspects of the Bill then that’s outrageous and dangerous. And how does one convert an ‘asexual’ person? They appear to be prominent in this Lobbying to get the ban.In the case of my children I think any parent would let their child work that one out for themselves. If they don’t want to have sex or feel no sexual attraction that’s their business - if this involves them wanting hormones and surgery I’d certainly want to be able to discuss and explore this.

It’s very confusing. I might write to Liz Truss and ask her what the definition of ‘conversion therapy’ is. It’s down to definition and language again isn’t it. We need to be singing from the same song sheet.

I understand your first paragraph exactly. And I expect I will get trolled for it so I have not put up my own questions. I had to join an American Facebook group to get some help and understanding for my child.

NecessaryScene1 · 17/03/2021 16:47

I hate to bump this thread, but seeing as it's the place those messages were discussed...

Jesse Singal is now publicising those messages (as a counterpoint to the accusations coming from a bunch of TRAs about him), and Glenn Greenwald is also chiming in.

Glenn's getting increasingly fed up with the nonsense.

Datun · 17/03/2021 10:31

It's surreal. A parent of a kid who suddenly says they're trans checks out ROGD.

And a TRA is blaming Fionne Orlander?

The desperation to deny ROGD is pretty pointless, imo. Clinics everywhere are overwhelmed by it.

MaudTheInvincible · 16/03/2021 23:44

It must have been quite shocking to see those messages, but Fionne dealt with it very coolly indeed!

I think I would report these as attempted blackmail or something. Surely they don't come under 'legal' in anyone's book?

Thelnebriati · 16/03/2021 23:38

Tweet Replying to
FionneOrlander
''If this person has genuine evidence of child abuse and is withholding that from the authorities, is that not a crime in itself?''

Conversion Therapy and a Survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth

30PercentRecycled · 16/03/2021 23:34

I am sad that this happened to Fionne.

I am glad that she put the DMs out into the public domain.

The sterilising effect of sunlight.

It is kind of a shame I oppose the police misuse of non-crime hate incidents to log offence felt by people not directly involved in an altercation. If I did approve then I would report this.

MaudTheInvincible · 16/03/2021 23:10

Oh, I didn't realise they we one of our recent visitors! Well.

NotBadConsidering · 16/03/2021 22:45

The person sending those messages to Fionne is the same person I remembered earlier in the thread who started a thread asking for “evidence of the GC argument” which was similar in tone to this one.

Helleofabore · 16/03/2021 20:30

Oh no. Those are horrific threats to Fionne.

But look at the tweet Femme Loves posted giving another example. femme love’s tweet is from one of the recent visitors to this site.

merrymouse · 16/03/2021 20:26

@Shizuku

I've had a quick skim. Still don't see any science being posted that suggests that conversion therapy is either harmless or beneficial to trans people rather than harmful, so I'm going to conclude that we are all in agreement that the best science we have suggests it is harmful and that a ban on conversion therapy for trans people should be included in upcoming legislation.

I’ve had a quick skim too. You still haven’t explained who is forcing people to behave in a gender conforming way, unless it’s people like Brandon Boulware.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting his behaviour was acceptable, particularly not on this site.

Erkrie · 16/03/2021 15:45

That is horrific bullying of Fionne. And seemingly obvious whose doing it.

MeltsAway · 16/03/2021 15:25

Good Lord! that is appalling bullying of Ms Orlander, who is a bit of a transheroine. (Uses male loos, wears lovely dresses).

30PercentRecycled · 16/03/2021 14:01

Looks like the monitors have decided it is time to get some abusive conversion therapy stories out into the world.

If there has been any then I welcome hearing about it and fighting against it.

I have a sneaking suspicion that their examples of literal abuse will include a lot of parents saying to their children
"I don't believe in gender identity and thus I believe you would be making a grave mistake to damage your body" and
"Binders damage your growing body, you are not allowed to wear one"
"I think you have ROGD not permanent trans identity"

What will follow? It's abusive to say the following?
"No you may not get a tattoo"
"No smoking, if I find cigarettes, you will lose your phone for a week."
"You are 12, you are not allowed to use Tumblr or go on adult websites."
"No you are not allowed to have a 23yo as a boyfriend when you are 14."
"You are 11, I will check your phone and you'll be in trouble with me if you have been acting inappropriately or accessing inappropriate material for a child"

MaudTheInvincible · 16/03/2021 13:40

Fionne Orlander has reported today recieving rather strident messages from someone about allegations of parents reading GC sources and consequently telling their recently trans identified children they suspect ROGD may be involved becoming abusive. https://twitter.com/FionneOrlander/status/1371717074821734401?s=20

AdHominemNonSequitur · 16/03/2021 12:54

Also recommend.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p08yr4dk

Lily. A Trangender story on BBC3. Lily is really sweet young adult who has fully transitioned. More power to her, but as a boy, Lily was expected to follow her father into the harsh, physically demanding outdoor life of a Welsh hill farmer. As a girl Lily was free to stay indoors and focus on feminine things. I wonder how things would have been without the weight of gendered expectation from a young age.

AdHominemNonSequitur · 16/03/2021 12:46

This is interesting.
Brandon Boulware. A homophobic dad who tried to abusively force his gay child into rigid male gender steroetypes, could not accept him as a gender non conforming boy, but was just fine with having a trans daughter.
twitter.com/ACLU/status/1371497868268212227

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1371713528869060610.html

The ACLU thinks this proves their point. All I can see is the inflexible narrow remit of what is acceptible for a boy.
Trans the gay away. Like in Iran where it is illegal to be gay but acceptible to transition.

NecessaryScene1 · 16/03/2021 12:29

The answer to "would you agree to a law banning X?" is always going to be "depends on the exact wording of the law". For any X.

Actually, the answer could of course be a straight "no". But I don't see how it could ever be "yes".

NecessaryScene1 · 16/03/2021 12:28

it does seem a far better jumping off point for discussion

Absolutely. If someone wants to propose a specific law, then I can point out specific objections. We can't really respond to vague hand-waving - and it's up to the people wanting the law to make the specific proposal.

The answer to "would you agree to a law banning X?" is always going to be "depends on the exact wording of the law". For any X.

cocoapopfan · 16/03/2021 12:06

This was on yesterday - worth a listen as an example of how some of the issues are being conflated.
www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000sz1y

stuckinatrap · 16/03/2021 11:59

@NecessaryScene1

NotBadConsidering - as such things go, that seems reasonably constrained, but notable omissions from the examples seem to be "helping someone to come to terms with their sex", "investigating why someone is not comfortable with their sex" and so on. The only example for "not affirming" is the bland "pointing out surgery risks", not something deeper like digging into "what do you think 'woman' means - why do you think it doesn't apply to you"?

And "encouraging the person to believe being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex is a defect or disorder" is a bit too open-ended for my taste.

"Being transgender" isn't a disorder any more than "being a goth" is a disorder. But being uncomfortable with your sex to the point you're seeking treatment (either psychiatric or physical) is.

The total lack of the word "sex" in that document is remarkable. It only occurs in "sexual orientation" and "intersex".

It looks like the law did have a good attempt at tightening it up, but I fear there may still be a bit too much wiggle-room for activists there.

You are right that it's not perfect, but it does seem a far better jumping off point for discussion than: 'Conversion therapy is harmful, and no I won't define it beyond the most vague and general of terms that could mean absolutely anything' which is what has been asked of us so far.

30PercentRecycled · 16/03/2021 11:59

You know when somebody says things that suggest a tenuous grip on reality? I am coming to realise it is often a sign that the person has indeed only a tenuous grip on reality.

Like when someone tells you Bill Gates is microchipping people through covid vaccinations. You might spend ages pointing out the flaws in their frankly ridiculous statements. They call you a sheeple. Then they go to the next person and tell them Bill Gates is microchipping people through covid vaccinations.

So long as they are not in a position of influence it is OK.

Ideally social media would put fact check warnings on such theories. They don't currently but I am confident they will one day, quite likely due to regulatory enforcement in the not too distant future.

Must do some gardening today. Green shoots are coming up all over the place. I shall help them.

NecessaryScene1 · 16/03/2021 11:56

NotBadConsidering - as such things go, that seems reasonably constrained, but notable omissions from the examples seem to be "helping someone to come to terms with their sex", "investigating why someone is not comfortable with their sex" and so on. The only example for "not affirming" is the bland "pointing out surgery risks", not something deeper like digging into "what do you think 'woman' means - why do you think it doesn't apply to you"?

And "encouraging the person to believe being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex is a defect or disorder" is a bit too open-ended for my taste.

"Being transgender" isn't a disorder any more than "being a goth" is a disorder. But being uncomfortable with your sex to the point you're seeking treatment (either psychiatric or physical) is.

The total lack of the word "sex" in that document is remarkable. It only occurs in "sexual orientation" and "intersex".

It looks like the law did have a good attempt at tightening it up, but I fear there may still be a bit too much wiggle-room for activists there.

stuckinatrap · 16/03/2021 11:54

@NotBadConsidering

and that a ban on conversion therapy for trans people should be included in upcoming legislation.

Well the Australian Medical Association Queensland successfully campaigned for clarification and changed to the bill that was passed, to clear up some of the many, exhaustive queries made on this thread.

healthlegal.com.au/current-news/conversion-therapy-banned-queensland/

Conversion therapy is a practice that attempts to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity. Examples include a practice attempting to change or suppress a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity by:

• inducing nausea, vomiting or paralysis while showing the person same-sex images;
• using shame or coercion to give the person an aversion to same-sex attractions or to encourage gender-conforming behaviour;
• using other techniques on the person encouraging the person to believe being lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender or intersex is a defect or disorder.

[to which every single poster on Mumsnet would say “hear, hear!”]

Notably, conversion therapy does not include a practice by a health service provider that, in the provider’s reasonable professional judgement:

• is part of the clinically appropriate assessment, diagnosis or treatment of a person, or clinically appropriate support for a person; or
• enables or facilitates the provision of a health service for a person in a manner that is safe and appropriate; or
• is necessary to comply with the provider’s legal or professional obligations.

The following are examples of the types of practices to which conversion therapy does not include:

• assisting a person who is undergoing a gender transition; or
• assisting a person who is considering undergoing a gender transition; or
• assisting a person to express their gender identity; or
• providing acceptance, support and understanding of a person; or
• facilitating a person’s coping skills, social support and identity exploration and development.

In addition, the above exclusions will protect practitioners who, acting reasonably, in good faith and in accordance with professional standards, treat a patient in a manner that could be perceived as not affirming or supporting their sexual orientation or gender identity, for example by advising a patient of risks of having surgery when they have a pre-exiting medical condition. [My bold]

I think this is pretty reasonable overall.

Is this what you have in mind?

This is incredibly helpful. This is a clear definition of both what conversion therapy includes and excludes.

I think we could all get on board with that.

Is this the consensus you would like to see Shiz?

Sophoclesthefox · 16/03/2021 11:41

I’m not sure “La la la, I can’t hear you” has ever really taken off as a way of convincing people that you’re right. People can make their own minds up, it’s all laid out here. I find it very beneficial when people discuss what can and can’t be shown by particular studies, and when someone can’t discuss what they actually show, won’t acknowledge flaws and limitations, but just shouts IM RIGHT NER NER NER, then I draw conclusions from that.