Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Conversion therapy uproar- can anyone explain this article for me?

32 replies

TeaSoakedDisasterMagnet · 11/03/2021 09:23

I know very little about the current trans debates/arguments/ whatever but I’m really confused this morning. I’ve just read this BBC article this morning and I feel like I’m massively missing out on all sorts of nuances.

Can anyone explain this situation to me simply please? As in I thought TRA would be pleased that conversion therapy is in line for being stopped, but I’m getting the impression they’re not happy about it.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56353313

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
MichelleofzeResistance · 11/03/2021 13:14

All of the above.

Put it this way: If it was LGB only requesting this, it would never have even reached parliament. This and the hate crimes bill are all about suppressing heretics and very little else.

TheRabbitOfCaerbannog · 11/03/2021 13:06

Yes! Trojan horse - Stonewall sticky fingerprints all over it. Stonewall members of the advisory panel saying go on you three, take one for the team (ahem, 2 weeks before we're all due to go anyway). Plant story with ITV - media brouhaha - everyone talking about gay conversion therapy etc What's to oppose?! Oh...

Datun · 11/03/2021 11:51

In other words, the approach as laid out Dentons.

Exactly. I'm not even on Twitter, and even I know that Stonewall have been hyping it for weeks.

Xanthangum · 11/03/2021 11:45

The collective wisdom on these boards is immense. I just want to say thank you to all previous posters for your thought provoking comments on this topic. I learn so much here.

nauticant · 11/03/2021 11:26

Make a huge fuss about conversion therapy, argue on the basis of horrible practices against LGB which everyone understand, bolt T onto this but don't discuss any details beyond Most Oppressed Ever™, hurry a law through Parliament having a vague and broad scope, and hey presto! anything other than afffirmation only is illegal and the Keira Bell decision is set aside as being overrruled by (new) statute law.

In other words, the approach as laid out Dentons.

Thingybob · 11/03/2021 11:16

It seems to be a given on this board, and elsewhere, that 'LGB conversation therapy' (not T) is wrong but I'm confused as to what it is and why LGB specific legislation is required.

Are I right that it covers 3 things?

Barbaric psychological practices like aversion therapy. I'm not sure that these would be permitted in the UK but if they are surely it should be illegal to perform these practices on anyone? Or is the inference that it is ok if someone is seeking psychological support for something like depression or an eating disorder?

Religious practices including weird exorcisms and others that are less extreme. Again I would question why this needs to be an LGB issue. I have known people that have been severally damaged by such practices but these were people presenting with things such as Schizophrenia, ASDs and even paraplegia.

Talking therapies denying someones sexual identity. Would any good Counsellor deny anything about someones lived experience? If they do they shouldn't but where is the line. Can there be any talking through of the implications if for instance a previously heterosexual married woman presented with angst caused be the realisation that she had strong feelings of attraction towards a female work colleague. Would this be treated in a different way to the same person presenting with strong feelings of attraction towards a male colleague?

I'm afraid I don't quite get it so would be grateful if anyone could explain what is being proposed and why?

horseymum · 11/03/2021 11:09

People also misunderstand that when a person becomes a Christian, they often talk about being "converted". This doesn't relate to sexuality at all but their standing before God. Some people will say they have left their gay lifestyle behind but are still gay. This is not conversion therapy, some Christians choose celibacy whether they are gay or not. The media has picked up some stories where gay individuals have talked about their conversion, but it is to Christ, not to becoming straight.

horseymum · 11/03/2021 11:03

It will also make much prayer, as requested by a gay person individual, illegal. For example, a gay Christian man asks his pastor for prayer to help him control his habit of watching gay porn or promiscuity, this may be reported as conversion therapy, yet a straight person asking for the same help would not.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 11/03/2021 11:00

That seems to be what the government response actually was!

NecessaryScene1 · 11/03/2021 11:00

If there's going to be a ban of conversion therapy, will the legislative process look at this, for example

All proposals I've ever seen are very careful to be specific that it's conversion from "trans" that should be illegal, not to "trans".

So no.

nauticant · 11/03/2021 10:50

If there's going to law about conversion therapy then it needs to look deeply into the various strands and not turn "conversion therapy" into an umbrella term and get some vague wibbly-wobbly thing banned.

If there's going to be a ban of conversion therapy, will the legislative process look at this, for example:

www.reddit.com/r/TransAdoption/

TeaSoakedDisasterMagnet · 11/03/2021 10:49

Scrub it you should be scrutiny

OP posts:
TeaSoakedDisasterMagnet · 11/03/2021 10:49

@AnyOldPrion that’s an interesting thought, thanks.

OP posts:
RozWatching · 11/03/2021 10:48

It's a paradox really.

Because it's possible to be gay and then transitioning makes you straight.

Or, alternatively, trans and straight and detransitioning makes you gay.

Exactly. Stonewall tried to fudge it by making sexuality about 'gender', but how does that help anyone?

www.thearticle.com/stonewalls-new-definition-of-conversion-therapy-raises-a-few-questions/
By Kathleen Stock (2018)

"Effectively then, biological sex-class is removed as the main locus for sexual orientation, replaced by ‘gender identity’. This has significant consequences for our understanding of conversion therapy. As noted, it’s a reasonable assumption that homosexual orientation – understood in the old-fashioned sense, as same-sex attraction – starts sufficiently early on in childhood that it would be pointless as well as inappropriate to try to convert it to heterosexuality later. In contrast, in the new paradigm, the gap between a ‘gay’ or ‘lesbian’ person and a ‘trans’ person is paper-thin, and it is entirely plausible that therapeutic intervention might easily convert one to the other.

To illustrate, Imagine a 14 year-old biological female called Margie. Margie’s becoming aware that she is sexually attracted to women (or at least, to females like her). Simultaneously, Margie is developing dysphoria: strong disgust for her changing body. She wishes her breasts and other curves to disappear: she longs to be straight-hipped, angular, muscular. She starts to tell people ‘I’m a boy’.

Such feelings are not unusual. Many feminists would say they are an unconscious response to the social imposition of sexist and heteronormative stereotypes upon females. Such ubiquitous stereotypes tell Margie to be passive, to conceive of herself as weak, to prettify herself up for men, to be more ‘girly’. Margie doesn’t feel ‘girly’ and knows she doesn’t fancy males.

How should therapists respond? Current guidelines tell them to avoid both kinds of conversion therapy just described. But here’s the rub: according to the terms set out by the new paradigm, you can’t avoid both. If Margie’s self-diagnosis (‘I’m a boy’) is questioned by the therapist, the therapist can be construed as failing to affirm, and so putatively ‘converting’, a trans child to a ‘cis’ one. If, on the other hand, Margie’s self-diagnosis is affirmed unquestioningly, the therapist is effectively failing to affirm Margie in a sexual orientation of lesbianism; something which also looks like conversion by omission.

A possible reply here is that therapists should take their cue from the patient. If she says she’s a lesbian, affirm that; if, alternatively, ‘he’ says he’s a trans man, affirm that. This suggestion assumes that both sexual orientation and gender identity are ‘inherent’ and fixed; and that the individual has some privileged, reliable knowledge of both. For instance, in this BBC report, we find Dr Louise Theodosiou of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, arguing that:

” Your sexuality and your gender ID are inherent and there’s no evidence base and no therapeutic treatment to change what is simply part of someone’s nature.”

This assumption is unfounded, however. Perhaps it gets a gloss of legitimacy from a point made earlier: that homosexual orientation (in the old-fashioned sense, involving same-sex attraction) gets fixed early in life. It also seems reasonable to assume that teens and adults can – at least, if unaffected by heteronormative social influences – identify their own sexual desires correctly, and so reliably draw conclusions about their orientations, in the older sense. But this point is of no relevance to what we should say in the case of Margie deciding whether she is a ‘lesbian woman’ (in the new sense) or a ‘straight man’. This isn’t a question about whether Margie exclusively fancies females, for this is a constant in both outcomes. There’s no prior underlying psychological story to give us the ‘real’ fact about Margie’s transness, or lack of it; nor to tell us why Margie would reliably know that fact. What Margie knows is that she’s dysphoric, and fancies females. But such facts alone don’t make you trans. Lots of now-proud and happy female lesbians report a past history of dysphoria.

So: there’s an inherent tension in new definitions of conversion therapy. With a same-sex-attracted person questioning her gender identity, therapists have to convert her, either by act or by omission. If they accept her trans narrative without question, they are converting her out of lesbian sexual orientation. If they therapeutically question that narrative, they are converting her (or rather, him) out of being trans. To this, one might well add: only one of those routes is connected with body-altering, life-changing drugs and surgeries, whose long-term consequences are unknown."

TheRabbitOfCaerbannog · 11/03/2021 10:47

@NotDavidTennant

I don't think you're read the article correctly.

This paragraph part way down explains why the activists are unhappy:

'But campaigners have said the government is "dragging its feet" and that all forms of conversion therapy - including courses and discussion groups - must be made illegal.'

We're saying the article is superficial at best and fails to understand or report the wider context.
TeaSoakedDisasterMagnet · 11/03/2021 10:47

Thank you for the responses. I’ll try to answer everyone if I can, but I’m supposed to be working.

@TheRabbitOfCaerbannog, I read those two threads but without knowing most of the background it was difficult to follow. That’s why I asked here for a simpler explanation.

@CardinalLolzy (great user name) yes, that’s exactly what confused me. I read the article twice, but the opening phrase seemed completely at odds to the rest of the article and I couldn’t figure out what was actually being said.

@NotDavidTennant I did read it properly. I read it through twice, and as above, the opening phrase and much of the article seems to be at odds with the bit you’ve quoted. They want to ban conversion therapy-ok i understand that. They think the govt are dragging their feet- yes I understand that, when aren’t the govt dragging their feet? But why all of the resignations if the govt are in fact saying to ban conversion therapy? That’s what I’m struggling with and I think the article is trying to skirt around something else but not knowing the background to it it’s hard to figure out what the something else is.

Thanks to all who have broken it down a bit more for me. I think I’m sort of grasping it now. There seems to be quite a bit of cognitive dissonance in this whole argument and I’m not sure all of the arguments from one side in particular is standing up to scrub it you or even common sense.

OP posts:
AnyOldPrion · 11/03/2021 10:33

I think there’s a genuine question to be asked over why this is so urgent.

My understanding is that attempts at gay or lesbian conversion are rare in this day and age. It is fully understood and accepted that the practice is unacceptable. Enshrining it in law at this point is largely redundant.

So then I ask again, why now? And I see transactivists pushing hard, insisting this is for gender identity as well as sexuality. And I conclude this is another Trojan horse (Trojan horses are horses) where unpopular laws are brought in under the radar alongside ones that have wide support in the general population. Technique outlined in the Dentons’ document:

www.rollonfriday.com/news-content/dentons-campaigns-kids-switch-gender-without-parental-approval

Xanthangum · 11/03/2021 10:26

That article in the OP!

LGBT+ organisations and campaigners have written to the equalities minister to express "deep concern" over her response to calls to ban "conversion therapy" in England and Wales.

She said on Monday that ministers did not want to make seeking "spiritual counselling" on sexuality illegal.

But the government has pledged to "work at pace" to "end" conversion therapy.

The "BBC" has a "problem" with 'so-called' "quotation marks", it "seems" to me.

NotDavidTennant · 11/03/2021 10:21

I don't think you're read the article correctly.

This paragraph part way down explains why the activists are unhappy:

'But campaigners have said the government is "dragging its feet" and that all forms of conversion therapy - including courses and discussion groups - must be made illegal.'

sleepyhead · 11/03/2021 10:13

As far as I'm aware from reading various accounts of both formal and informal conversion therapy in a trans context, that therapy mostly took the form of trying to change the behaviours.

So make a masculine presenting girl/woman more "feminine" by telling them to limit/change/removing clothing choices, activity choices, toy choices, preference to play/associate with one sex over an other.

Or making a feminine presenting boy/man more "masculine by the same restrictions to their innate choices and preferences.

But there seems to have been a sleight of hand move of discussion of the definition of trans conversion therapy away from these sorts of (abhorent) practices and towards the inclusion of therapy and discussion around the reality that someone can't change sex and there may be mileage in trying to come to terms with your sexed body while retaining all your natural likes and dislikes as a gender non-conforming person.

I'm totally against the former - it's absolutely cruel, but I just can't feel the same about the latter.

Helleofabore · 11/03/2021 10:13

Well, if you are confused, we are waiting for clarification of exactly what it means from someone who believes that any action that is not affirming is conversion therapy on this thread also.

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

CardinalLolzy · 11/03/2021 10:12

OP, I think that article is confusingly written.
It starts "LGBT+ organisations and campaigners have written to the equalities minister to express "deep concern" over her response to calls to ban "conversion therapy" in England and Wales."

It sounds like LGBT+ orgs don't want to ban 'conversion therapy', but really they're concerned about 'the response' i.e. that the govt is dragging its feet and saying that '"robust" laws were already in place to deal with the most troubling examples, involving violence and sexual assault.' and "the government did not want to stop those who "seek spiritual counselling as they explore their sexual orientation"."

MrsWooster · 11/03/2021 10:03

It is wrong to tell a gay or lesbian person that their sexuality is A. wrong and B. can be somehow ‘overcome’ or changed. This is what was always known as conversion therapy. It should be challenged and prevented.
Treatment for children who experience discomfort with their sexed body and believe themselves to be ‘trans’ has two options:

  1. Watchful waiting and compassionate, therapeutic exploration of where these feeling might stem from-sometimes from genuine dysphoria which will lead to a lifelong trans identity and sometimes from repressed homosexual feelings, or from a flight from sex stereotypes, from trauma, or from neurodiversity.
Option 2. Unquestioning affirmation of the child’s trans identification, with social and often medical intervention towards permanent trans identity.

Trans activists have chosen to label option 1 as being ‘conversion therapy’, cuckooing into the natural repugnance that decent people have for conversion therapy.

The government (who many people associate with bigotry, section 28 etc) are treading an uncharacteristically nuanced path, trying to outlaw conversion therapy while not throwing the gender non conforming babies out with the bath water.
Trans Activists have, characteristically, spat the dummy.

Datun · 11/03/2021 10:01

It's a paradox really.

Because it's possible to be gay and then transitioning makes you straight.

Or, alternatively, trans and straight and detransitioning makes you gay.

But all this is only in the language of gender ideology where your sexual orientation isn't conditional on sex and changes with transition or changes back with detransition. Or vice versa.

CuriousaboutSamphire · 11/03/2021 09:59

Just listening to news and I was a bit taken aback by it.

Government says it won't ban conversion therapy as it could have all sorts of unintended consequences (and we're certainly battling a few of those in courts at the moment). But they will do everything up to that to stop it.

TRA reaction, initially I didn't understand why the person speaking didn't agree with the above, but then realised they were saying "they didn't do exactly what we demanded so they completely ignored us".

Didn't hear an LGB voice at all!!!

Same old same old, it seems.