Draft Conversion Practices Bill - published

Most women and most gay people do not support your movement.

Many women have always argued against women's rights and prefer rule by men. They have a right to their (dumb) opinions, but that doesn't mean they are going to win in fact they consistently have lost over time.

As for the gays, the actual gays, a solid number our our side, many others don't care that much actually. Then of course we also have a solid number of secret "trans" supporters too who don't care about being misgendered, or what toilets they use. They just are self sufficient. They don't need state authority to give them validity in fact they are suspicious of it.

I agree with you in as much I don't think people with a deep seated sense of gender confusion are ever going to disappear. What is going to be defeated is the type of person who bursts into tears because JKR says things, whose identity is dependent on everyone on the planet recognising it and needs the government to enforce it and also is desperate to ensure that a free pass given to male sexual predators who label themselves as some form of LGBTQ. Instead we are going to have actual conversations.

Anyway we will see what happens. The genderists have academia and huge chunk of the media plus a lot of corporate power on their side. When you are up against that amount of corporate authoritarianism and sexism defeat is always possible.

The great thing is we get to talk about it. That is the the real threat to this thinking long term.

Nobody wants to see extreme and cruel practices imposed on trans people either.

No one decent, anyway.

Your definition isn’t the “accepted definition”. The law doesn’t cover “gender” other than the legal fiction of the GRA. However as you are well aware that definition doesn’t extend to the Equality Act or the workplace regulations.

You're entitled to your opinion. That doesn't make your opinion fact, nor does it change the accepted understanding or definition of terms, nor does it influence what the law says, and nor should it.

"This proposed law" doesn't force you to believe anything at all, it just requires you not to force your beliefs upon others with the intention of trying to change their sexuality or gender identity.

The reason I’ve entered into this discussion @Zoonosiswas your straw man contention of gender critical feminist beliefs around gender identity. Gender identity is not what I understand as “gender”. Gender is simply the social framework based on sex stereotypes. I wholly refute that it’s an uncontroversial fact that we all have an innate sense of gender identity that goes any further than knowing what sex we are.

Being gay isn’t a disputed concept, in that people might think it’s wrong, but they don’t actually deny that the concept of innate same sex attraction exists.

I think you'll find you're wrong about this, there are certainly people who believe being gay is unnatural and not innate and that gay people are misled, mistaken or corrupted in some way. But there's no reason the lawmakers have to actually pay attention to those people, any more than they have to pay attention to people who believe the same about trans people.

There's nothing disingenuous about pointing out that the law relies on people to self-report their sexuality, this is precisely how it works, and it can't really work any other way, unless you want to argue that gay people should have provide material proof that they had sex and enjoyed it before they can be protected in law.

But being male or female isn't an "internal sense" - it's a physical reality. A male person can't claim to be a woman just because he has an "internal sense" and the rest of us shouldn't be forced to believe that he is a woman, which is what some are trying to force us to do, including through this proposed law.

You’ve made a lot of claims, not all of them strictly relevant to this draft bill.

We're discussing the problems inherent in trying to include 'transgender identity' in such a bill.

Nobody wants to see the extreme and cruel practices often imposed on same sex attracted people if their particular community cannot acceopt their sexual orientation.

No one's saying you have to believe anything. Forstater vs CGD does not conflict with this legislation, especially given that the judge in Forstater made it explicitly clear that a "protected belief" does not give a person the right to harass or discriminate against others.

At issue was your disingenuous example of “self reporting” gender identity as nothing more or less than when someone says they’re gay. Being gay isn’t a disputed concept, in that people might think it’s wrong, but they don’t actually deny that the concept of innate same sex attraction exists. Many people completely reject the suggestion of innate gender identity and have other explanations for people’s claims.

Not at all. I've personally met, and also read the personal accounts of, many detransitioners and regretters. And they themselves say, that destransition or expression of 'regret' is taboo in the 'Queer' community; and that people who 'leave' are often completely cut off and unsupported.

Why do most kids who think they are transgender desist?

There are loads who never even make it to the gender clinics let alone any waiting lists or medication or surgery to regret. Why do they change their minds?

But we don’t have to believe a man is a woman just because he says he is, or that he’s any different to any other man. We have a protected right to disbelieve in gender identity ideology. Forstater v CGD 2021.

This legislation has nothing to do with "imposing a worldview" on anyone, in fact it's supposed to stop people "imposing their worldview" on other people. It you are neither a conversion therapist nor a victim of conversion therapy this legislation doesn't affect you at all and you don't actually have to worry about it.

Same sex attraction can be a case of self reporting that is otherwise unmeasurable ( and sometimes denied even to oneself), but it does become measurable, and observable, once someone becomes involved in same sex relationships and finds that they are only/or mainly attracted to people of their own sex.

But legal protections don't kick in only when someone has had sex, gay people who have never had a sexual relationship and even people who never will have a sexual relationship are still legally protected from discrimination. Judges aren't asking gay men for proof of their body count before they'll hear a discrimination case from them.

And we can't actually even "measure" someone's sexuality even if we observe them have sex, because we know gay people can have heterosexual sex and that straight people can have gay sex. If you look at the glossary of terms accompanying this legislation it defines sexuality as "emotional, romantic or sexual attraction." You can't observe someone's emotional or romantic attraction and realistically you probably haven't observed them have sex either, because why would you have, so how do we know who is gay for the purposes of the law? We have to just believe what people tell us. (and that's not even getting into the fact that discrimination law is often based on "perception" meaning it doesn't actually matter how the person views their own sexuality, it just matters how the person discriminating viewed them).

Yes, it’s reasonable to think people know their own sexual orientation. It isn’t reasonable to impose a worldview of “innate gender identity” on people who don’t believe in it.

Can you define how gender identity was discovered? What scientific experiments were conducted that discovered the existence of gender identity?

Do some people have a Ford identity whilst others have a Ferrari identity?

I don't have a gender identity, not because I'm some nullsexual (or whatever term you're going to create), but because it doesn't exist.

And before you start with your next argument trans people exist. Denying the concept of gender identity does not mean that a physical person who is defined as trans suddenly doesn't exist.

The thing is with forms of neogender ideology is it can't accept that OTHER ways of thinking about gender exist and always will. That is why it needs government laws to enforce it.

Nothing about this legislation prevents you from holding your personal beliefs, or affects you at all unless you are a conversion therapist.

Women's groups plus gays are decent number of people.

Most women and most gay people do not support your movement.

Same sex attraction can be a case of self reporting that is otherwise unmeasurable ( and sometimes denied even to oneself), but it does become measurable, and observable, once someone becomes involved in same sex relationships and finds that they are only/or mainly attracted to people of their own sex.

Gay marriage equality recognises this fact. In fact the GRA was originally established to allow people of the same sex as each other to marry - before gay marriage equality was established. It is something of a relic.

Gender is a social construct..That means all its different facets it is always going to be contested.

The thing is with forms of neogender ideology is it can't accept that OTHER ways of thinking about gender exist and always will. That is why it needs government laws to enforce it.

Are we going to stop this bill? Possibly not however I think we can defiantly water the bill down and amend it seriously. The thing is we are not fighting alone and we are prepared this time. Women's groups plus gays are decent number of people. We have a bunch of supporters inside Labour. We have the Tories too, and Reform.

Key to this is that the Muslim bloc are going to put huge pressure on Labour and the left it is very difficult for them to defy them because the left are reliant on their votes hence the whole Gaza thing. Plus Black evangelicals as well.

Anyway we can look forward to months of open debate on the topic. Which is long term poison to gender absolutists.

"The research doesn't say what I want to it to so it's flawed"

It doesn't need to be a protected category for the purposes of this legislation. Protected characteristics are a function of discrimination law; this legislation isn't about discrimination law, and there is no explicit or implicit requirement for something be a protected characteristic to be covered by it.

Self-reporting

"Self-reporting" is exactly the same mechanism by which we know who is gay. We can't "see" it, we can't prove it, we just generally understand is it reasonable to accept that people know their own sexuality - and we continue to accept this even though we know that sometimes people might be mistaken about what their sexuality is.

The available research is clearly very flawed. People have not been monitored for long enough. Many gender surgeons, especially in the U.S, do not even provide follow up care. There are countless accounts of people who have regrets about their trans identification, especially if it involved invasive drugs/ or surgery.