Parliamentary debate on Monday to ban gay conversion therapy

[rabbitwoman]

Morning!

I have been keeping an eye out for a thread about this but can't see one....

Banning conversion therapy was a key manesfesto pledge by this government. Of course, gay conversion therapy is appalling and archaic and I am amazed its still legal in this country so of course I am all for a ban. The government have been slow off the mark, though.

A petition to ban conversion therapy reached 250000 so it is being raised in parliament on Monday. Great! I signed it myself.....

But then closer inspection of the wording of the petition raised alarm bells - it doesn't say gay conversion therapy, but LGBT therapy......

The recent decision to re evaluate the use of puberty blockers for children has caused a lot of anger and debate amongst many trans rights advocates, and I presume that the main thrust of the debate will be around the treatment of gender dysphoric children.

The Keira Bell case very much highlighted the problems with the Stonewall advocated approach of complete and immediate affirmation of transgender children and it would appear that actually, a range of treatments may be appropriate, including therapy and counselling that may question a child's gender distress and explore alternative causes, helping a child to successful outcomes that may not include transitioning.

In many places this has been reframed as 'conversion therapy'. I am very concerned that the thrust of the argument in parliament will be much less about the abhorrent practice of using psychological and physical torture to supress same sexual attraction, and more about outlawing a range of therapies for children presenting with gender dysphoria.

This has happened in Australia and the USA, and it looks like a call to folow suit here, which would raise concerns from a safeguarding viewpoint, as well as directly contradicting the findings of the recent Tavistock review. Making it illeagle to explore what could be alternative causes of gender dysphoria and heading straight to transition is a worrying treatment model.

There is also a lot of compelling evidence from the Tavistock review that gay children had been pushed into transition by homophobic parents - Marcus Evans, Susan Evans and Dr David Bell have all said this in public interviews.

The wording of this petition, though, seems to be a deliberate tactic to lump together perfectly reasonable and watchful therapies with abhorrent and sickening practises. I am concerned that the nuance will be missed by some and the progress that has been made since the review will be lost.

It is possible to believe that gay conversion therapy is wrong on every level, but also to think that hormones and surgery is not an appropriate pathway for many children currently identifying out of womanhood. Providing alternative treatments for gender dysphoric children should not be lumped in with gay conversion therapy.

I have tried to raise this on twitter and the replies I got seemed to be willfully refusing to see the difference.

I will be following the debate with interest, though!

A suggestion that social media companies should ban discussion of conversion therapy on their platforms. Interesting.

How very 2021.

Is this a proper parliamentary debate or is this another of those funny bingo games where someone gets marks for most egregious shoehorning of tropes?

I don't know who's speaking at the moment, it sounds like she's a government minister, but what she's coming out with is largely sensible. Mainly I suspect because she's talking about measures to tackle the harmful practices that are actually taking place.

@nauticant

"There is no need for more research. We've already waited 3 years."

Said in the context of no one in the stream understanding that conversion therapy for gays and conversion therapy for trans people are very different in some respects.

I assume a Bill is going to come out of this. It's going to be a load of apparent sense with a great big Trojan Horse bolted onto it.

Scary.

3 new gender identity clinics to be opened this year. I think this could be a positive, so long as they don't carry out conversion therapy themselves that is.

Fucking fuckers.

Sorry, I'm not being very helpful. I used to be 100% for a ban, even argued for it on this board. But these bastards saying these things, glossing over what happened to me so they can do it under clinical cover to other lesbians as long as the use the right form of words. Fucking, fucking fuckers. This is not a ban proposal. It's anti-gay gaslighting. So angry.

It's interesting what is being said now, or rather, what is not being said - but there are too many people watching for anything to slip in under the radar, I reckon. Unlike other countries, we know what is going on here and we have legal precident to prevent it.

However this debate ends up going, it won't be the last of it, for sure.....

I don't understand it. I don't understand how they can decide that a cure for dysphoria is also conversion therapy, when a High Court has just been reading reams about 'cures' for gender dysphoria and know all about it.

It's like there is a left-hand and a right-hand thing happening.

And how telling someone who is gay, that they are the opposite sex, and therefore they are not gay, isn't conversion therapy. As testified by people at the absolute coalface in the Tavistock.

It's like there is a left-hand and a right-hand thing happening.

Some of this feels a bit like Wile E. Coyote still running in mid-air until Roadrunner points out that he's over the edge of the canyon so he looks down.

They're going through the pre-ordained motions scripted by the Dentons/Yogyakarta/Press For Change/Stonewall groups, but haven't noticed the changed situation.

Or that everyone is watching them.

Including the House of Lords.

Would this bill have to go through the HoL?

Including the House of Lords.

Yes, of course. I forgot that.

Is the baroness on the case, does anyone know?

And how telling someone who is gay, that they are the opposite sex, and therefore they are not gay, isn't conversion therapy. As testified by people at the absolute coalface in the Tavistock.

Sorry, I know I'm quoting my own post.

But this hypothetical person, will still be attracted to people of the same sex.

But now they have lost the words for, and the protection of, sexual orientation.

I assume a Bill is going to come out of this. It's going to be a load of apparent sense with a great big Trojan Horse bolted onto it.

Yes.

And there'll be a lot of people and organisations including the HoL going ooh look at that great big Trojan Horse. Let's unpack that shall we? Ooh look at the issues there.

It’s a petition debate. You can set up a petition on the Parliament website and if you get 100,000+ signatures, it will be considered for a Parliamentary debate. It doesn’t mean that there’s going to be a Bill. Eliot Colburn is a member of the Petitions Committee which is why he opened the debate. The Petitions committee selects the Petitions that will be debated.

Crispin et al want the Australian Victoria ‘conversion practices’ bill, which:

• makes it an offence for all but a narrow range of medical practitioners to refuse to support or affirm a person's claimed gender identity

• 10 years in prison and could be fined as much as $200,000 (£110,000)

Holly Lawford-Smith has warned the UK about this

Parliament need to hear the stories of de-transitioners. I hope de-transitioners ask for support on here and with the groups. crowdfund. write letters. campaign. petition. whatever it takes.

I think this debate is going nowhere. It's now an also ran, the only reason it is being debated is because of numbers as treats says. We all know that wait and see will produce positive results eventually for gay kids. TRA's don't want this, they want affirmation.

I hadn't realised this was a petition debate - that makes more sense now.

This sort of law has happened in other countries recently, but only because there's less awareness of what's going on.

The chances of passing it now with "gender identity" in there in the UK seem very slim to me (and I'm not naturally that optimistic).

Maybe Scotland might, given the state of the SNP... I guess maybe my optimism is founded on the Conservatives being in charge, rather than Labour.

We're going to have to hope - and try to make sure - that this stuff gets blown apart sufficiently in the next few years that Labour do not feel any remaining desire go all Biden/Sturgeon by the time they next get their turn at the wheel.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-56284422 - reported on bbc

Mentioned on 5 Live this morning (which was the first I'd heard about it ) and my ears pricked up at the presenter saying 'conversion therapy for sexuality and gender identity'. Big. Red. Flag.

I am confused - the terrible treatment suffered by some gay people in the name of conversion therapy amounts to assault and torture - these are already against the law. The offence of common assault would presumably cover even mild ‘conversion therapy’ and harassment charges would cover the prayer and other verbal problems.

So why do we need legislation specifically for conversion therapy? (Genuine question- I know people on here have personal experience and I would’ve interested to hear their feelings about it).

Is the legislation being proposed completely unnecessary (because it is all covered by existing offences) and is it being pushed forward now for one reason only? The people pushing this forward don’t seem to have much interest in the lives and welfare of gay people in general so why are they do bothered about this? The BBC mention arcane tortures like being strapped into a chair and electrocuted - is that seriously still happening in the UK?

It has been suggested upthread that this legislation is a Trojan horse which I agree with but I’m beginning to wonder if that is literally all it is?

*I am confused - the terrible treatment suffered by some gay people in the name of conversion therapy amounts to assault and torture - these are already against the law. The offence of common assault would presumably cover even mild ‘conversion therapy’ and harassment charges would cover the prayer and other verbal problems.

So why do we need legislation specifically for conversion therapy? (Genuine question- I know people on here have personal experience and I would’ve interested to hear their feelings about it*

The current situation relies on victim reporting. A good, strong legislative approach would outlaw advertising of services, discussion of CT as a 'good thing' by those who practice it (say on church blogs) and it would allow anyone to report, not just a victim. Plus, I'm not sure that a case has ever been brought/won using those mechanisms.

I prefer 'gay and lesbian people' as well becaise it does happen to women - I know a young woman who suffers PTSD as a result.

@highame

I think this debate is going nowhere. It's now an also ran, the only reason it is being debated is because of numbers as treats says. We all know that wait and see will produce positive results eventually for gay kids. TRA's don't want this, they want affirmation.

Yes. Unfoŕtunately they have a lot of influence.

www.transgendertrend.com/memorandum-of-understanding-on-conversion-therapy-full-expose/

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4139466-CAPTURED-The-Full-Story-Behind-The-Memorandum-of-Understanding-on-Conversion-Therapy

"The core working party of 8 included Meg-John Barker, then working in academia with an interest in gender theory, polyamorous identities, kink and BDSM.
Barker has co-authored works with Christina Richards and Darren Langdridge, both also in the working party. Dr Christina Richards is currently Lead Consultant Psychologist, Tavistock and Portman NHS Foundation Trust and a member of the BPS prescribing rights group. Richards, who is trans, openly uses activist language even when writing job specifications for the Tavistock clinic."

"James Caspian was also acting as a consultant to the wider group of organisations working on the MoU. He confirms that Stephanie Davies-Arai's letter was read out at the MOU review meeting in March when all the stakeholders were round the table, but that the atmosphere in meetings, dominated by activists, was toxic: " There are lots of activists within the LGBT community and I sensed that everyone was scared of them." Pressure to agree to the addition of gender identity was intense and he was subject to a long intimidating phone call by a member of Pink Therapy who demanded if Caspian was going to "block affirm."

The so-called 'gender identity conversion therapy' case that Elliot Colburn mentioned in the opening speech, concerning Carolyn, whilst horrifying, is from 1964. Rather disingenuous of him not to mention that:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49344152

Meanwhile, the delightful Crispin Blunt has a go at us and LGB Alliance. How dare we stand up for our rights!

parliamentlive.tv/event/index/5577ccbe-d3a1-4dd0-a1d6-81e81a3cea92?in=18:34:50&out=18:35:26