Conversion Practices Bill : unintended benefits for trans widows?

As ever, many of us are 💐

I appreciate your concerns, but the phrase throwing the baby out with the bathwater comes to mind.

It's a terrible Bill, incredibly dangerous and no small silver lining can negate the need for across the board opposition from as many groups and individuals as possible.

Anybody who knows your contributions on this board will not think anything of the kind. The very last group of people who are 'alright Jack' are trans widows, who have seen their lives ripped apart by this ideology.

And your support is really interesting, because it's support that points out one of the many (presumably) unintended consequences of a poorly drafted piece of proposed legislation. Perhaps if this applies to trans widows, it could potentially also apply to kids who rethink their gender identity, allowing them to have recourse against adults who pressured them into taking on an identity in the first place.

I hope you get the protections you need and that, simultaneously, legislators put some thought into the other unintended consequences that could prove harmful for so many families.

I have to admit I'm in the "oppose at all costs" camp, but I can entirely understand where you're coming from on this, although the cynic in me suspects that the committee would try to amend the bill to remove those bits you think are beneficial if you brought them to their attention. If I understand Dennis Kavanagh's evidence the other day correctly re private prosecutions, it could end up with the ridiculous situation of both parties in a marriage trying to prosecute the other for conversion practices.

I’m not sure how they could do that without it being fairly blatantly double standards. Hopefully the media would pick up on it.

What would they say? “Women married to “trans women” won’t actually be real lesbians because “trans women aren’t women, they’re men, so no “conversion” has occurred and this doesn’t apply”? Maybe they would, but I can imagine it wouldn’t go down well with TRAs.

Totally understand your angle Tinsel, and thank you for reading things and understanding them. I am of the opinion that this bill is SO bad that it criminalises anyone taking any side in this debate when a real person is involved. Anyone can report anyone for anything.

It is utterly deluded but at least when they push this through, which they will, it will bring some measure of light in this darkness for women who are married to one of these men.

Not so much that, more that they might actually be bothered to tighten up the incredibly loose drafting once they realise that it could be used against the people they claim to be trying to protect. Ironically that would probably end up protecting the rest of us from frivolous prosecutions, but wouldn't put the transwidows in any better position.

As I say, I’m not sure how they could do that without blatant double standards. And trans widows are certainly at risk of frivolous prosecutions as well. I absolutely think it needs to be worked through, and hopefully scrutiny on them will help.

I absolutely think it needs to be worked through, and hopefully scrutiny on them will help.

Political Reality 1:

The only thing that is going to help is Andy Burnham and the Labour Whips getting cold feet and arranging for this Draft Bill to be quietly shelved before it gets anywhere near Parliament.

Political Reality 2:

The Scrutiny Committee does not need to make concessions and the Bill that pops out at the end of the process does not need to make sense.

It is Manifesto Commitment and the Government has the votes to push it through against any opposition. Not that it needs help but it can also rely on TRA MPs in other parties to back the Government.

The Scrutiny Committee is packed with TRAs and there have been oral submissions from two Conversion Practices Victims who have told the Committee in no uncertain terms that the Draft Bill does not go anywhere far enough:
https://parliamentlive.tv/event/index/5adf4d53-df49-41eb-88bf-47590da34a94

Political Reality 3:

Unlike the Assisted Dying Bill, the House of Lords can't help because the Bill is a Manifesto Commitment.

Political Reality 4:

If the Bill gets introduced to Parliament it will be the GRA all over again:

• movers of amendments will be given false reassurances
• they will withdraw their amendments rather than have them voted down
• the Labour Government has got the votes to steamroller it through the Commons, just like the GRA, and that is what will happen.

House of Commons

Labour (incl. Labour Co-op) 404
Conservative 118 Official Opposition.
Liberal Democrat 71
Independent 12
Reform UK 8
Scottish National Party (SNP) 8
Sinn Féin 7 (Abstentionist — they do not take their seats.)
Green Party 5
Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) 4
Plaid Cymru 4
Your Party 2
Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP) 2
Traditional Unionist Voice (TUV) 1
Alliance 1
Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) 1
Restore Britain 1

Total: 650.

The Government has 404 seats against 246 others and some of those those others are TRAs and will vote with the Government.

Absolutely Tinsel should put in her submission and have it on record. We all need to put in submissions and have them put on record. Just hope that those submissions will help to convince the Government that this is a Vote Loser come the next General Election.

The two witnesses yesterday might help with that. They spent a lot of time talking about Religious Conversion Practices. They focussed on Christianity because that was their experience. However, other Religions would be equally affected.

One outcome, if this Bill gets into Parliament, might be that Labour (and other Parties that support the Bill) will see erosion of their "Muslim Vote" to the benefit of Independents or perhaps even the establishment of a sectarian, homophobic, misogynistic "Islam Party".

If the possibility of that unintended outcome is foreseen by the Labour Whips then maybe that will be enough to tip them over the edge and bring them to their senses.

It would be great if @TinselAngel is right and transwidows are protected by the Bill from husbands stating they are both women and lesbians now (sexual orientation conversion).

But am very concerned about the Bill giving transitioning partners/ husbands/ dads the right to make conversion allegations against any wife who fails to submit to all their demands ('affirm' everything ) because of the catastrophic power it gives abusive men. Family members- whether children or partners- must be allowed to tell/ recognise reality about sex. And linked to that is wives need to be able to have normal conversations with their husbands eg about basic things like family budgeting, or their child's welfare- or any concerns - without being arrested!

Wives and children will pay the cost as this Bill is so unbalanced. if a dad triggers a safeguarding investigation into the mother - kids will automatically go into care (or worse still to the father). They won't even be able to go to safe relatives as abusive dads can male similar conversion allegations against them too. It will wreck lives.

Thank you, this is all very important to bear in mind.

Im a widow. I don't think its disgusting at all for women to refer to themselves as trans widows. I feel it's an appropriate description.

Yes, I agree that’s awful.

if a dad triggers a safeguarding investigation into the mother - kids will automatically go into care (or worse still to the father). They won't even be able to go to safe relatives as abusive dads can male similar conversion allegations against them too. It will wreck lives.

Given what Transwidows have told us about these men and the family dynamics they manipulate and abuse, sadly this seems a far more likely outcome than that a Conversion Practices Act will protect Transwidows and children of transitioners.

I am also wondering if an allegation by a Transwidow would prompt an investigation by Social Services if there are children in the home who might have witnessed the abuse or have been subject to similar abuse themselves?

Perhaps @spero could comment?

From what I can remember, where a mum reports domestic abuse, it triggers police telling social workers to protect the children. So the mum will be told she has to eg leave the house (or the male abuser does) to retain child custody/ safety.

Think if the Bill passes it will DARVO/ reverse victims and offenders- if the male perpetrator says he's trans he can get the female victim arrested instead- if she reports DA the perpetrator will say she's the abuser for refusing to submit to his demands/ gender belief he's a woman. So much for the government wanting to address VAWG.

You can see how biased police are dealing with these issues here: https://childrenoftransitioners.org/the-college-of-police-and-cps-domestic-abuse-guidance-is-a-danger-to-women-and-children-like-us/