Most Britons want conversion therapy banned, including that aimed at transgender people

The new law in 2003 was specifically to stop children being taken abroad for such a procedure.

Thanks, I didn't realise that. I thought it also created a new offence in the UK in an attempt to simplify prosecutions.

For FGM we needed a law because it was a significant problem which was wasn't being prosecuted under existing law (although the new law didn't fix that, so arguably, was it needed?)

The new law in 2003 was specifically to stop children being taken abroad for such a procedure.

Generally, laws only cover their own territory - so a new specific law was needed to say "no, you can't take your child somewhere this is still legal to do this to them".

‘So any mother saying "you're not going out like that " or any school teacher saying " that's too short " is preventing someone expressing their gender ?’

If you banned this form of coercion against children, yes. But we call it parenting, so we don’t ban it for children.

OTOH adults can wear what they want.

‘I don't thin any sane person would object to that as a concept but why do we need a law against something which is already illiegal?’

I fully agree actually. I’m more trying to make that point: nobody is trying to prevent anyone from transitioning.

What these proposed laws do is try to prevent others from disagreeing, and that goes against the freedom of belief and expression.

If the action is coercive, that’s already illegal. If it’s not (if it is speech expressing someone else’s feelings about the transition), I might think it’s not very nice (I might think it’s fine), but it’s not illegal and shouldn’t be.

Is the OP returning?

A definition might be: a ban on activity to forcibly prevent, through violence or other coercive practices, an adult seeking gender reassignment or social transition of their gender (their ‘gender expression) MTF or FTM.

I don't thin any sane person would object to that as a concept but why do we need a law against something which is already illiegal?

For example:

• For upskirting we needed a law because it wasn't actually illiegal.
• For FGM we needed a law because it was a significant problem which was wasn't being prosecuted under existing law (although the new law didn't fix that, so arguably, was it needed?)

What you describe is illiegal. I'm not aware of any evidence for it being a big problem in the UK.

The difficulty is that trying to persuade someone to dress differently (which definitely could amount to conversion bullying) is difficult to make sensible laws about, so unless there is a very compelling case of harmful practice existing a new law could do more harm than good.

So any mother saying "you're not going out like that " or any school teacher saying " that's too short " is preventing someone expressing their gender ?

‘That would need to be clearly defined or we would quickly find behaviour included. Behaviours such as above.’

Sure. It could be defined that it had to do with physical reassignment and physical presentation.

Can we objectively identify what transgender is?
Can we prove it was attempting to change someone's identity without knowing what they identify really is ?

Back to the anorexic question - we know the person isn't fat so it's ok to try and make them see that

No, ‘gender expression’ is presentation. What you wear. Make up. Etc.

tabby 'gender expression' like men being able to enter women's sports? Be place on female hospital wards or in women's prisons instead of men's prisons? Ticking the female box for data collection?

If we agreed there should be a ban aimed at violent or coercive practices to prevent adults transitioning, would that be a version the activists would accept?

A definition might be: a ban on activity to forcibly prevent, through violence or other coercive practices, an adult seeking gender reassignment or social transition of their gender (their ‘gender expression) MTF or FTM.

Can anyone (on either side of the debate) explain why that would be an issue, or why it wouldn’t be good enough?

@Fishwishy

As a PP pointed out, when you provide the general public with accurate information (eg, that the vast majority of TW have a penis [& that proportion is only increasing]) they very much agree with MN.

Thus I would be fascinated to know what they’d make of the fact we do not know (as per my previous post) if anyone in the UK has ever been offered, much less undergone, conversion therapy for being trans gender.

This is the government’s research & analysis on the prevalence of conversion therapy in the UK. Yes, a 2021 paper used the answers to a couple of poorly-written questions in a 2017 survey. They were in a rush to try to push this through to tie in with the now-cancelled conference (which was going to cost an obscene amount & on which huge sums of taxpayer money have already been wasted)*.

As you’re clearly one of the people who IS for the ban, would you mind answering** as to which category of supporters of the Bill [as it was proposed] you fall into? Of course, should you feel I have somehow missed a fourth option which in fact describes you, please explain.
• You don’t see/understand the inherent contradiction in the ban on LGB conversion therapy & the ban on T conversion therapy when the latter meant an affirmation-only approach should an individual question their gender identity. Affirmation only = effectively a form of LG conversion therapy.
• You completely understand affirmation-only therapy for trans people = conversion therapy for lesbian & gay people; & that [in children & adolescents, in particular] it may lead to irreversible physical damage & serious health problems - but consider their lives to be completely acceptable collateral damage.
• You don’t, in fact, understand the issues at play here, but are choosing to express your support for banning trans conversion therapy (which, again, the research for the Bill didn’t ACTUALLY find evidence of) & thus de facto - & I do not think this can be emphasised enough - Are. Supporting. Gay. Conversion. Therapy… Because Reasons. (Right Side Of History? [Social] Media told you to? You trusted Stonewall?)

Seriously, if it’s the last one, I’d desperately like to understand, because it speaks a lot to the power of propaganda - but is it also peer pressure, the phenomenon of outsourcing thinking - perhaps combined with [AI-generated] echo-chambers? Of course on the surface “Ban Trans Conversion Therapy” sounds like a no-brainer. But as soon as you look into the inadequate research; the text of the Bill; & the simple fact it was not a good piece of legislation by virtue of its being forced through Parliament at such a rate & with such an agenda behind it… to blindly support it is to advocate for trampling on the rights of other groups; & to demand sub-standard care for young people questioning their gender identity.

• I currently have a free subscription to The Telegraph hence including that link; perhaps unsurprisingly most media aren’t covering this angle but a non-paywalled article is available at The Daily Mail ** It wasn’t phrased as a direct question in my original post, but I very much wish to know.

How many days (seconds) do you think it will take before exclusion from single sex spaces of the opposite sex is deemed 'conversion therapy'? The problem is not just children.

I saw this article the other day on the apple news app:
apple.news/AE5WlglKkTDaUhHhgP9K3rQ
(It’s in Dazed magazine and titled “The dark reality of trans conversion therapy” with the subtitle “‘It was just normal therapy – except my therapist was a TERF’”)
If this is what is being pushed at the public - not sure how the stories on the app are chosen - then it’s no wonder we end up with these so called statistics.

So you are saying there are three parties q who can be bullying / manipulative - yip that makes sense

The person themselves
A trans ideology promoting person / group
A person /group who is not convinced about the individuals transgender identity ( independent of what they think about transgender ideology)

No wonder it's hard to write this correctly

So we end up in a situation where it’s obvious that the ‘targets’ of this ban are:

- things that are illegal already
- things that shouldn’t be illegal

Exactly. And the latter snuck in with the former, Trojan horse style. Again. It's just another TRA tactic. Instantly revealed with one or two questions.

Not to mention the risible and rank hypocrisy of seeing how the entire TRA lobby have relentlessly tried to enshrine legal conversion therapy for heterosexual women.

Trans widows are not lesbians, it's awful to think that their husbands want to 'turn' them into lesbians when they are only attracted to men confused

‘Well there is a grey area where people can try to bully / coerce people with just words that I also think is wrong.’

I do, but in order for it to be considered illegal (with an adult) there would have to be a coercive control-type situation.

The complexity there is that we could see grown adults insisting on living with their parents and being funded for surgeries or sex hormones, but trying to suggest they are allowed to control what that parent is allowed to say. They could then accuse a non-affirming parent of “coercion therapy practices”.

Now the parent can obviously kick them out (or could, unless they were being bullied themselves, in which case the coercive control relationship would be reversed). But the trans activist crowd are trying to include such “practices” as making a trans person homeless in the ban.

So unless we are very careful, a ban on coercion “therapy” might be brought in that regulates what people are allowed to say in their own homes. That is dangerous.

Random problem sorry

Well there is a grey area where people can try to bully / coerce people with just words that I also think is wrong

But without a real problem way to detect trans it's pretty hard to see who is doing the coercion- the people who say are you sure or the people who say you must be trans

I'm not sure if it's still on there but Netflix had a documentary called Pray Away which is about conversion therapy.

A child or young adult vocalising sex confusion or distress - one consideration is abuse (sexual, emotional etc). Why tor to keep these young people away from therapists when teachers (unqualified therapists) can set up groups and become like a ‘parent’ in school (using new names and pronouns)?

‘Is conversion therapy the type of thing you read about with electric shocks, forced vomiting etc? Because I'm 100% against that. It's barbaric.’

It’s already illegal.

‘Or is it a therapist exploring options with a person before they set off on an incredibly long and difficult path? Because if it's only talking then I think we owe it to trans people to provide them with that option.’

Here, you have to differentiate between children and adults. Children were the subject of the proposed legislation.