Fair Play for women have got the conversion therapy consultation extended

[Clymene]

This is amazing news

fairplayforwomen.com/government-forced-to-extend-public-consultation-on-conversion-therapy-after-fair-play-for-women-threatens-legal-action/?fbclid=IwAR1G5wZH42TzmnfcN1dH0-kNf-DGCgQDEiyX2a2u4HhtJ015E17Ypfr5KZ4

It is. Is there official confirmation somewhere?

Well done Nicola and colleagues.

Reported in the times but not officially announced yet

Not on the website to respond yet

equalityhub.citizenspace.com/government-equalities-office/banning-conversion-therapy/consultation/intro/

@PaleBlueMoonlight

Reported in the times but not officially announced yet

Good spot

Here's a link:
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/675b42b4-58aa-11ec-81f2-17f963b74220?shareToken=fd1d44e2acf3ee63999f125b4dc0ed099_

Not been updated on gov.Uk yet but it's a bit early for the wonks

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/conversion-therapy-ban-will-face-tough-opposition-k55vmtc7m anyone got a share token that works

This is in the law section of the Times this morning. The UK has seen an explosion of child referrals to gender identity clinics over the past ten years. These are children who self-harm, attempt suicide and suffer from mental illness at a disproportionate rate from the rest of the population. NHS statistics indicate that, if left alone, 80 per cent of gender dysphoric children will reconcile with their birth sex by the time they pass through puberty. It is immoral for the government to allow them to undertake a path that leads to puberty suppression and cross-hormone treatment while legislating for a criminal ban on practitioners who seek to help these children to do what most of them would anyway. Ultimately, it is not for the government to protect citizens from themselves by preventing certain people from having access to the therapy they want. The UK respects the rule of law. Paternalism is not lawfulness, and as it stands, any proposed ban looks a lot more like the latter than the former. Just a taster. Interesting the legal knots and the work of activists is causing a wake up call for the legal profession.

So much going on that it's difficult to keep up

Congratulations to FPFW, and thank you!

Any indication that extending the deadline indicates willingness to actually listen to peoples concerns?Or is it just that they had no choice after fucking up the accessibility part so badly?

(And why was the easy read version published then immediately withdrawn? That part is very odd.)

Still shocked women have to do all this stuff. But very well done

The decision to extend the consultation came after Fair Play For Women, a gender-critical organisation, threatened a judicial review.

Bloody hell. Well done Nic.

Why cant the government separate sexual orientation from 'gender identity'??

What's stopping them? They are so poles apart that the one erases the other as a concept.

How can anyone think that waving through a law that doesn't question thousands of children who have been taught they could be in the 'wrong body', is remotely acceptable?

The D of E have said themself that teachings have to be evidence based. How does that square with unequivocal acceptance of 'gender identity'?

Thank heavens for women like Nic Williams.

Excellent work FPFW. Nobody should rush through permanent law making on the basis of getting a good headline for a conference .it’s totally undemocratic.

When will the government stop treating distressed kids who think ‘gender identity’ will help them feel better, as lesser than other kids? Whatever the gender identity lobby groups want to have validated, that’s not the job of government or distressed children to validate by allowing the kids to be unquestioningly put on an unresearched path to medication, hormones and surgery which isn’t even shown to be effective at helping their distress. Plus which has a whole host of known, awful permanent side effects including raised risk of cancer and diminished ability to think clearly and permanent loss of normal sexual function and permanent loss of their natural fertility the further they go down this path. Not something any child can understand enough to consent to lose.

Particularly sinister, if this is true: I saw in the Times comments is that the government haven’t yet produced an Easy Read format for this very short consultation. These are vital tools of inclusion to include for people with low literacy in English or with some learning difficulties. Now why would anyone think that it’s OK or good to exclude their views from this?

There was an Easy Read version @ChattyLion. It was swiftly withdrawn when eagle eyed reviewers noticed it misrepresented the government's proposal according to this article

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10285677/Parents-backlash-set-brakes-new-gender-law-amid-fears-families-prosecuted.html

Thank you Nic! Great job!

More of us can get our submissions in now!!

That's brilliant, well done Dr Nic!

My only complaint about the Times article is that they have used the label ‘gender critical’ in reference to FPFW and other women’s groups.

They should stop this. It is confusing to those who don’t know what it means. Plus, it is Women’s groups!!! It is women campaigning for their rights and the rights of children.

@Helleofabore

My only complaint about the Times article is that they have used the label ‘gender critical’ in reference to FPFW and other women’s groups.

They should stop this. It is confusing to those who don’t know what it means. Plus, it is Women’s groups!!! It is women campaigning for their rights and the rights of children.

Agreed.

I agree, but at least it's better than "anti trans".

Nancy Kelley, chief executive of the LGBT rights charity Stonewall, also welcomed the extension:

Sure Jan.

I'm always so impressed with FPFW. They don't shout much but just get on with what needs to be done. Well done and thanks.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

Nancy Kelley, chief executive of the LGBT rights charity Stonewall, also welcomed the extension:

Sure Jan.

IKR?

The wording of that quote was quite telling. I think she probably said "necessary" between gritted teeth.

[quote Clymene]There was an Easy Read version @ChattyLion. It was swiftly withdrawn when eagle eyed reviewers noticed it misrepresented the government's proposal according to this article

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10285677/Parents-backlash-set-brakes-new-gender-law-amid-fears-families-prosecuted.html[/quote]
Easy Read versions have form on being non-neutral on this topic. E.g.:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4324416-Welsh-Government-Transgender-people-are-people-who-are-born-as-one-sex-but-are-the-other-sex

@Ereshkigalangcleg

The wording of that quote was quite telling. I think she probably said "necessary" between gritted teeth.

And a tinkly laugh

"Any indication that extending the deadline indicates willingness to actually listen to peoples concerns?"

Yes, it does suggest they are listening (and think they might have lost any legal challenge).

I suspect that this proposal will be kicked into the long grass post consultation. The more of us respond to it (I already have) to point out its flaws, the more likely this is.

Clymene