To believe that Parents must have the right to tell their children they are not “in the wrong body” and children cant be “transgender”?

[DoubleMM]

The government wants to bring in a law that threatens anyone including parents with up to five years in prison for denying a child’s or an adult’s “transgender identity” -. The draft Bill is in Committee stage. Labour have committed to making it law. Surely this is just bringing back the Scottish Parliament’s vote that everyone has to agree? That men are women if they say they are? This time parents are in the firing line if they dont agree to their child being “transed” at school or elsewhere? The Bill proposes that the courts should be able to make an order to enforce compliance on parents. Surely this can’t be allowed to go through without a fight?

5% reported being offered conversion therapy in their lifetime, and 2% reported having undergone it.

This is extremely disingenuous. This ‘lifetime’ can easily encompass the time before 1967 when homosexuality was decriminalised.

Laws and the social landscape have changed monumentally since then but strangely, the majority of the anecdotes we see are from older men who lived through those times and suffered from gay conversion therapy 40 odd years ago.

The dishonesty of supporters of this bill is striking. If there was any intention at all to prevent normal parents wishing to protect their children from gender ideology and making irreversible decisions, it would have been explicit in the bill.

It isn’t.

The sole intention of this bill is to enshrine the concept of gender ideology in law. They have failed in many other ways and this is just another attempt, piggybacking on the past suffering of gay people. It’s quite disgusting really.

Interesting that you characterise the highlighting of an attempt to remove parental rights as ‘shit stirring’.

Why do you think that?

No, quite frankly. It’s pointless. You cannot transition. It’s physically impossible.

It doesn't make any sense. Applying proposed anti-conversion therapy law to transgenderism would be in direct contradiction with the Supreme Court's confirmation that, according to existing UK law, a person does not change sex when they transition, and therefore they do not have the right to use single sex spaces designated for the sex they wish to be identified as. It would also contradict the same law that states that you do not have to pretend belief in another person's belief. Lack of belief is protected just as belief is protected.

Whether or not you believe in transgenderism, this would be a disaster, a legal mess.

I would like all medicine to be evidence-based and to operate within an ethical framework. I am not a medic or scientist but I know enough about this to be very concerned that hormone treatment and surgery on the genital area for gender purposes have extremely poor results. If there hadn't been this big ideological push to get doctors to prescribe these drugs and carry out these operations they almost certainly wouldn't be available. The hormone treatment can lead to increased risk of cardiovascular issues for both sexes. Women on high doses of testosterone can end up with horrendous bladder problems, a permanently and painfully enlarged clitoris and infertility. The deepening of the voice and increased hair in areas women don't usually have hair stay even if a woman stops taking testosterone. The results of surgery do not produce something even remotely like normal genitals. There is a high risk of infection and total loss of ability to orgasm is common. Obviously if you have your reproductive system removed, whether you have it remodelled or not, you lose your fertility.

We don't allow surgeons to remove a limb or any other body part that an individual has come to believe doesn't belong to them (Body Integrity Dysphoria). Why is it different when someone has what has to be a psychological issue and wants extreme body modifications that are going to shorten their lifespan, very likely destroy their fertility and sexual response, and not give them an improved quality of life - usually the reverse?

Can you name another psychological issue where the treatment is surgery? What about the fact that the great majority of young women who want to 'transition' are on the autistic spectrum or struggling with their sexuality or trying to process a major trauma, or all three? What about the huge rise in numbers in recent times, which most people can see very clearly is a social contagion, something that disproportionately affects girls and young women, as has been known for centuries?

Also, why are activists so keen not to mention that a great many men who transition are doing it for sexual reasons? It's been known for decades that some men develop all manner of fetishes, which often include finding it extremely arousing to cross-dress. We don't regard fetishes as a human rights issue in any other context. What makes this so different?

What exactly am I side stepping? I don’t believe in your ideology.

Not one person has ever changed sex. If thats what you mean by 'transition'.

If not, what do you actually mean and how does one know that someone has 'transitioned?

For those truly mentally ill and unhappy with their bodies, as adults they can take whatever hormones and have whatever surgery they like. As long as they don't pretend they have changed sex.

Why is it only 1% of men who actually go through with surgery though ??
The evidence seems to suggest that it isn't actually body dysphoria at all, but rather playing dress up and entering women's spaces.
Almost like a misogynistic fetish.

If an adult (over 25) wants to transition thats up to them but the NHS should not pay for any of it or for the medical consequences of taking cross sex hormones or surgeries that cost should be wholly born by tge person wanting the cosmetic surgery

A child is not an adult. The story of why they feel their body is wrong matters. Are they struggling with puberty? Are they gay & having to navigate being same sex attracted? Are they trauma experienced eg: sexual/domestic violence & wanting to dissociate from being associated by sex with victim/perpetrator.

There is no ethical scenario I can envisage where a child, who by their very nature, have not concluded developing should have their identities fixed at a point in time - by any adult. Not when they haven’t fully worked the issues underpinning their distress and been afforded the respect of time & space to understand their sexed bodies & recognise that there is no one set way to be a man or a woman.

‘Transition’ is not really a realistic concept. No one transitions into the opposite sex as it is impossible.

Some people choose to use drugs and surgery to cosmetically alter their bodies. It causes long term harm to health. In my opinion no so called ‘gender affirming’ procedures should be available on the NHS and any private providers should be forced to provide free aftercare to deal with the sometimes life altering consequences of these procedures. The bar to receive this kind of medical intervention should be extremely high.

Yes and the language doesn’t help. ‘Transition’ doesn’t exist, no one is changing sex. Also ‘gender affirmation’ or other euphemisms.

Children should not be exposed to any of this in any case. Including the language.

I think it would be possible to conclude that there appears to be an assault by this government on the family and their rights and protections.

It might just be authoritarianism / totalitarian, thinking 1984 is a manual? But maybe they really don't want happy, healthy family relationships and a stable, happy workforce? Perhaps they think miserable dysfunctional people are more likely to vote for them? It's weird. Maybe they're just a bit thick.

Many parents of children with SEND and homeschooled children (who may also have SEND) are very critical of the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026 and say it is overly draconian and may result in children with SEND whose parents took them out of school as a safeguarding measure given the distress it was causing them being forced back into school. Without there necessarily being appropriate support in place.

Again, there is a suggestion this will criminalise parents and force them into situations where they have to harm their child and not do what they believe is in their child's best interests. I believe (from what I've read) local authorities will be able to force children back into school against parental wishes without any rigorous, independent or robust risk assessment on the basis of what the LA deems unilaterally is in the 'best interests' of the child and without suitable provision in place to support SEND etc. I see a theme emerging. Though happy to be corrected as not totally up to speed on this one.

I'm not that well read around this issue but I believe there is a legal challenge / judicial review going ahead on human rights / parental rights / right to family life grounds. Not sure if it's been granted a full JR yet.

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle: "That’s not the way legislation works (as you probably know)"

Maybe so but the way the law does work is that it normally provides "statutory defences".

Gay Men’s Network Response to the Draft Conversion Practices Bill 2026

The absence of statutory defences on the face of the Bill and medical carve out

79. Criminal Law in England and Wales often provides for statutory defences with a section of an act reading “It is a defence for the accused to prove...”, “It shall be a defence...”, “A person is not guilty... if...” or similar formulations29. The draft Bill contains no such formulations and no statutory defences. This is concerning particularly given that parents and those in loco parentis are likely targets of this Bill.

80. Clause 1(3) contains the following provision (emphasis added):

Clause 1

(3) Conduct which—

(a) is carried out by a person towards an individual with such an intention, but

(b) is carried out in the course of providing health care services to the individual concerned,

is not a conversion practice unless the person acts in a way that falls far below the standards reasonably expected of a person in their position.

This provision creates a further element of the offence the Prosecution must prove, rather than a statutory defence. We are concerned that the Bill in any event targets one area of healthcare for potential prosecution and believe it to be self-evident that cautious healthcare practitioners will simply refuse to see young patients with distress over their sexed body rather than risk prosecution.

81. We are fortified in that conclusion by the Gallop report approvingly cited by the Minister which says this of “psycho-medical conversion practices”:

“These practices were frequently offered, organised or forced upon clients by others – often parents or family members. One trans+ client “disclosed parents want to take him to counselling ’to convince him he is a female30 (Client L6)”

Client L6 appears to be the same example as was cited in respect of use of a new name and pronouns. Gender healthcare following The Cass Report emphasises open, exploratory therapy over medical intervention or an “affirmative” model whereby a child’s cross sex ideation is unquestioned and reinforced. We question the degree to which therapy aimed at reconciling a child/teenager to their body might be presented by a prosecution in the terms adopted by Gallop.

82. Beyond the question of the chilling effect in medicine, it is notable that the Bill contains no defences for:

• Parents acting in the best interests of their children
• Those in loco parentis doing the same
• Persons exercising free speech
• Persons exercising religious freedoms
• Persons running organisations such as businesses complying with civil/employment law such as the codes of practice around single sex spaces

We note with concern that the former Minister has turned her mind to the question of a “parental carve out” and decisively concluded one is inappropriate prior to pre legislative scrutiny31. This could produce the absurd position where a doctor or therapist is free not to use pronouns or a new name or to question and challenge a “transgender identity”, but a parent may not do so. We think this inconsistent and illogical.

83. The absence of statutory defences is a concerning feature of this legislation, particularly given its breadth and ambiguity. As we will go on to develop, we take the view this raises Human Rights issues.

© 2026 Gay Men’s Network
September 2026

cdn.prod.website-files.com/6a3cfe99e7bc27bb9c952b62/6a9c0cce5b7c62baf895c4fb_GayMensNetwork_DraftConversionTherapyPracticesBill_Response_2026.pdf

It might just be authoritarianism / totalitarian, thinking 1984 is a manual? But maybe they really don't want happy, healthy family relationships and a stable, happy workforce? Perhaps they think miserable dysfunctional people are more likely to vote for them? It's weird. Maybe they're just a bit thick.

Good questions. Perhaps a combination of the above. You omitted the category "people who want to carve out a category of children who the parents will struggle to safeguard". They may well be a minority among the fans of this Bill but they will benefit from it.

Another one of Labour’s waste of time and money policies by the sound of things. What a ridiculous policy at that. I think 1984 was the blueprint. Look at us now with our listening devices in our homes, the erosion of our freedoms, terrifying news stories every single day in the news….

At least you don’t live in Scotland where the Scottish Green Party have gone one better than the horrors of this act - and are campaigning for polyamory to be given a legal status.

Of all the things to give your time and effort to...

Oh no, you're absolutely right. This is the group it benefits the most by far.

A bit like the grooming gang victims where parents trying to safeguard their children met resistance from police / SS / state

And the activist therapists alienating children from their parents for trying to safeguard. Who's more likely to care for a child long term? Someone who's zealously pushing an evangelical belief and has met them twice or the child's parents? I watched a really sad series of talks from some US detransitioners (several who are suing their medical transitioning hcps, some of whom I think have won / settled in their favour) about this precise issue. Most of them had found their way back to their parents, one had truly abusive parents and was incredibly eloquent about how creating parental alienation for genuinely caring parents is one of the worst bits of gender ideology. Will try and look it up, was a while ago.

I feel sick.

I think the underlying theme might be "2+2 is 5 if we say so, and we know better than you even if we're obviously transparently wrong and seem to know sweet FA about the law, the interaction with existing legislation or child development / wellbeing'.

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle: "Extensive research, data collection, and independent reports from both government agencies and LGBT+ support charities demonstrate that conversion practices do actively happen in the UK."

No they don't.

Conversion therapy: still not illegal – or still not happening?

"Instead of reflecting on the evidence from Galop’s almost silent helpline, the government has doubled down on the idea that tens of thousands of people are experiencing conversion therapy in the UK each year.

It has now come up with an even bigger number, drawing on a survey commissioned by Stonewall.9 Carried out by Opinium Research in January–March 2024, this involved interviewing 2,000 adults online who identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender. It came up with a ludicrous figure of 10% for the proportion of LGBTQ+ people in the UK who have undergone an exorcism, and 2% for the proportion who had undergone an exorcism in the previous year alone.10 As mathematician Dr John Armstrong has pointed out, this would imply that clergymen in the UK are performing 24,600 gay exorcisms a year (for comparison the number of religious weddings in England and Wales in 2022 was 41,915).11

The government plucks from the Stonewall survey the number who said they had been told to ingest “purifying” substances (11% ever and 2% in the past year) or who said they had been given “pseudo-scientific counselling” to try to change their sexual orientation or gender identity (12% ever and 2% in the past year). It adds these figures and multiplies the sum by the number of LGB or T people found in the most recent census to conclude that “approximately 75,000 to 93,000 people each year in England and Wales experience conversion practices based on their sexual orientation or gender identity.”

"These figures are fantastical"

(aka "There are lies, damned lies and statistics". Mark Twain)

https://sex-matters.org/posts/publications/conversion-therapy-still-not-illegal-or-still-not-happening/

MyrtlethePurpleTurtle: "For example, the UK Government’s National LGBT Survey: In a self-reporting sample of over 108,000 LGBT respondents, 5% reported being offered conversion therapy in their lifetime, and 2% reported having undergone it."

More "Lies, damned lies and statistics" 🤷‍♀️

What does the National LGBT Survey show about Conversion Therapy?

"The frequency of reporting of experience of “conversion therapy” falls across the age groups from older to younger people suggesting in particular “gay conversion therapy” is largely a historic practice in the UK. "

(I have seen interviews with older and elderly men in the UK who now identify as women and who report that they were subject to extremely abusive "trans conversion therapy" in their youth. This is a disingenuous, ideologically motivated reframing of the psychiatric profession's historical, horrible treatment of gay men. Gay conversion therapy was a thing and was awful. "Trans" was not a thing. There were transvestites but nobody was trying to "convert" male cross dressers and transsexuals by giving them electric shocks when they were shown the Lingerie section in the back pages of the Littlewoods Catalogue.)

"The survey reached a self-selected sample, thus it is subject to sample bias and is not likely to be representative of the population of lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans people in the UK."

(So the 5% and 2% cited tell are highly likely to be misleading over-estimates in terms of the general population.)

"The proportion of lesbians to transmen falls from 22:1 in the 45-54 age group to 3:1 in the 16-24 age group supporting concerns that young lesbians are increasingly identifying as “straight” transmen, which if undertaken under pressure could be considered a form of conversion therapy."

⬆️ ⬆️ ⬆️ THIS is the homophobic "conversion practice" that should concern everyone!

https://sex-matters.org/posts/updates/is-there-evidence-of-an-urgent-epidemic-of-conversion-therapy/

Most trans people acknowledge their birth sex and don’t believe they can literally change sex and are happy to refer to themselves as transwomen/men. They just want to live as the other sex. If you really cannot stand the thought of that then you need to ask yourself why.

What does 'living as the other sex' entail other than using single sex spaces without consent and excluding women with trauma, religious women, and many other women.

Is it dresses? Since men and women both wear trousers I wonder what 'living as a man' is. Is it liking football?

Basically regressive sex role stereotypes.

Keyboardkaties: Just look at what happened before FWS.

Naomi Cunningham KC reckons that the Draft Bill would consign both Forstater and FWS judgements to the dustbin of history.

"It's difficult to overstate how important it is to defeat the proposed Conversion Practices legislation.

The draft Conversion Practices Bill is trans activism's attempt to reverse the gains of Forstater and For Women Scotland. It will encourage and enable trans activist bullying that will make what we've seen so far look trivial.

Parents will be threatened with criminality for attempting to protect their children from harm. Teachers for any attempt at good safeguarding practice. Clinicians for exploring the causes of gender distress. Women for defending their everyday boundaries.

There may never be a successful prosecution under it, and doubtless proponents know that. Convictions aren't the point: the point is to terrify us into submission.

It will work. Even without the threat of criminality, and even with the protection of Forstater and For Women Scotland, it takes real courage to dissent at work from the demands of gender ideology, or to point out its harms.

This is our Battle of Britain moment. Labour has a huge majority and can force this repressive legislation through if they choose. They must be made to fear the consequences of doing so."

"Raise awareness. Talk to anyone who'll listen: parents at the school gate; your GP, your dentist, your hairdresser; your children's teachers; members of your sport or social club or your choir.

Badger your MP.

This is an attempt to wind the clock back to before Forstater — only worse, because under the threatened law, dissent will be punished with criminal sanctions rather than mere loss of livelihood.

Now's the time to make sure you'll have a good answer when your granddaughter asks you "What did you do in the Battle of TERF Island, granny?"

We have to win this one."

Thread on X
https://x.com/LoudBonnet/status/2108654293863874826

Threadreader
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/2108654293863874826.html

Archived - archive.ph/my6oM

What does that mean?

How do you live as the other sex?

Actually there are Bills like this which have been approved in Australia and there are cases in the states where parents have lost custody of thier children for refusing to affirm a child's wrong- sex belief. The objection is because there is no objective test for trans, no-one has been able to prove how a "gender" is born into the wrong body, and plenty of children who went through "gender affirming care" when they were below the age of consent are now de-transitioning and finding that the physical effects are not reversible and in fact are life long and debilitating in one or more ways. Parents need the authority to protect their children from harmful ideologies.