Conversion Therapy and a Survey of 25,896 LGBTQ youth

I can't see a link in your post to support these allegations.

I'm on my mobile phone. Will be more than happy to link to numerous accounts of users here using the same arguments later.

Gender identity is a person's own innate sense of what sex they are. The scientific consensus is that it's biological in origin. But you don't need to understand what it is in order to observe that attempts to force people to change whatever it is are harmful.

Have you read this article which 9toenails posted a link to earlier in the thread?

arcdigital.media/what-is-gender-identity-10ce0da71999

Could you address the points I made in an earlier post about this article, and those of 9toenails which I quoted in my post:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4187324-Conversion-Therapy-and-a-Survey-of-25-896-LGBTQ-youth?msgid=105555777

Using the APA's definition of gender identity (which is the same as the definition when it was originally defined by Stoller in the 1960s), a person's 'gender identity' must, by definition, match their physical sex, since it refers to the knowledge of what sex they are (apart from in a small number of cases of intersex people in which it is only an apparent match - this is not relevant when discussing transgenderism).

If you disagree with this definition, please will you define clearly what you mean by gender identity and how this can be objectively observed in an individual. If such a person is to have their 'gender identity' changed, there must be something called a gender identity which can be objectively observed, so that it would be clear whether the conversion therapy had, in fact, succeeded. How would this be verified?

If it is not something which can be objectively observed, and amounts only to statements a person makes, such as 'I am a woman' or 'I am a man', and perhaps their own thoughts (which obviously can't be observed) is conversion therapy actually simply attempting to restrict that person's freedom of speech and thought?

The US is a very religious country - I don't think you can apply their stats on conversion therapy to the U.K.
we have enough societal problems without getting embroiled in US ones, especially as there are enoughof a population without us and they won't give a monkeys what other countries think.

It includes any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change

Could you post links to some personal accounts of gender identity conversion therapy of the kind that you would like to see banned, as experienced by trans people in the UK?

No-one is advocating any of those interventions for trans people. Therefore, the OP's request that we provide proof these interventions are not harmful is redundant.

Do tell if any of this sounds familiar with arguments used towards trans youth here:

What leading “gender critical”therapists recommend: isolate them, cut them off from support, don’t use their preferred name or pronouns, deny their identity, try to make them accept and love being female, and attack the “delusion”.

Never use their preferred name or pronouns.

They looked for anything they could blame for being transgender.

“Your birth gender is female so you’re a female.”
“You’re just saying this because you think it makes it easier to pick up women.”
“Going by different pronouns isn’t allowed here.”
"You're insecure because you're fat."
“You’re claiming to be trans because you like girls.”

Withholding privileges if they're not cooperative enough, such as denying food when found wearing a binder.

Shizuku:
Amazing how thousands of doctors and scientists are able to study this mysterious thing isn't it. But as I said a few posts ago, you don't need to understand what it is in order to observe that attempts to force people to change whatever it is are harmful.

The thing is, I read something like this, and think, well, you do not understand ... but then, I recall, past attempts to explain have gone nowhere, and generally you have been unwilling to engage at all. So I stop trying.

The best explanation of your behaviour is that you have no wish to engage, but just wish to be a nuisance. As I said, this is an ugly sight seen up close.

No-one is advocating any of those interventions for trans people. Therefore, the OP's request that we provide proof these interventions are not harmful is redundant.

This thread is beginning to feel abusive - as if women have been carefully and meticulously stating their cases with nuance and a great deal of patience and OP has been coming in, not listening, riding roughshod and stating we are wrong because we are not playing their game.

I agree.

It is enlightening, isn't it? If the intention was genuinely to engage, I am sure by now that between us all we would have had a really interesting discussion. But instead, I think that there has been a display of prejudiced thinking that seems to block the nuance.

I, for one, am not going to keep pointing out what has been said and should be clear here.

You haven’t clarified what conversion therapy includes, what it entailed for the people in the survey, how many people in the survey who reported it were doing so for gender rather than sexuality, nor what gender identity is to be sure we know what is meant to be being “converted”.

Trans conversion therapy uses identical methods as gay conversion therapy does. It goes from, and isn't limited to, "talk therapy",

• using any negative experience a person had in the past, and any diagnosis they have, as the 'reason' someone is trans or gay (such as fabrications that someone diagnosed with BPD only claiming to be trans because they want attention, or someone diagnosed with autism only being convinced they're gay because they're confused about friendship and relationships), and how recovering from trauma (even if the person wasn't or is no longer traumatized or the trauma is irrelevant to their orientation or gender) will 'cure' them from being trans or gay,

• cutting them off from support, isolating them, denying them any thought that they are their sexuality/gender, forcing them through stereotypical activities to reinforce their sexuality/gender, otherwise attacking the 'delusion' that they are their sexuality/gender.

To wilderness programs in which LGBTQ+ youth are dubbed to be "troublesome", forced to physically straining activities under constant badgering until they relinquish the "troublesome behaviour" of existing as an LGBTQ+ person,

Electrocutive torture, involving electrocuting someone while displaying 'unwanted' images or narrating 'unwanted' behaviour to them so they'll associate any thoughts regarding their sexuality or gender with trauma.

Shizuku:
Conversion therapy is a very simple concept, but let me give it to you again - it's any attempt to force a trans person's gender identity to change

Still no acknowledgement of or response to criticisms that 'gender identity' remains scientifically uncheckable and hence unsuitable as a foundational concept for scientific enquiry. Or, indeed, come to think of it, reasoned responses to any criticism of her posts and references.

This thread has, indeed, been salutary to follow. The OP seems to want to epitomise the very worst aspects of unreason and anti-scientific posturing on the internet. It is an ugly sight to see up close like this.

And it comes across very clearly. I doubt readers cannot see it.

Absolutely. So please keep this thread up for future reference.

There. Not their!!

I had noticed that their is a history of deleted threads lately.

Again, it is a style of posting that doesn’t do anything but shine light on the intentions of the poster. And it comes across very clearly. I doubt readers cannot see it.

posted on Twitter that no one could answer their vague question after the thread was deleted, thus “proving” that there is no evidence to back up the GC argument.

I'm inclined to think the OP's best bet at this point is provoking enough problems on the thread that it gets deleted, and I've just seen about 10 posts in a row from them, so I would gently suggest all other posters to disengage now.

I'm not sure we can reach page 40 without incident, and even if we could I don't think there are 14 pages of value to add.

It entailed any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change.

Like what?

It includes any attempt by someone to force a trans person's gender identity to change.

Like what?

And just read the cross posts. The nuance of this thread is still not apparent it seems......

This thread is beginning to feel abusive - as if women have been carefully and meticulously stating their cases with nuance and a great deal of patience and OP has been coming in, not listening, riding roughshod and stating we are wrong because we are not playing their game.

I'm out because I know what this looks like, sounds like and walks like.