Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

BBC Radio 4 PM today on the bill to ban conversion therapy

8 replies

ScrollingLeaves · 29/01/2022 00:18

I was wondering if anyone heard this and felt frustrated as I did that the discussion fell so far short of showing what problems might arise in practice if therapy intended to stop people from being gay is conflated with therapy intended to explore and possibly delay a decision to become trans in a young person.

Nikki da Costa, who would like the government to slow down and take stock before proceeding, spoke first and was given 30 seconds.

Dame Angela Eagle, who would like the bill to go through as soon as possible, spoke second and had 3 minutes 40 seconds.

She spent a great deal of time emphasising the evil of conversion therapy for gay people- even though this was never under dispute from the very outset of the programme.

“Well, firstly, conversion therapy which is trying to persuade people that it is either evil or wrong to be gay, and that they can be changed, is actually, it still goes on in the U.K. now. It is harmful, it is abhorrent” etc - all still about gay people.

She then went from speaking specifically about gay people for quite a while to suddenly changing the terms to LGBT without explanation, so conflating the categories being affected by conversion therapy. I think many listeners might have been lulled into a non-questioning state by this elision.

She later said, “And there’s a perfectly reasonable reason for including trans people. We want there to be no loopholes. We want it as soon as possible. It’s been three years since the government said they were going to do this, and people like Nicki da Costa who are saying, “Oh, we are going to have to slow down, we have to have loopholes for trans people are just watering down a long overdue bill and leaving people potentially to be harmed. Now that is not an appropriate way to behave and I suspect it’s an argument she’s making because she doesn’t actually believe that trans people ought to be recognised.”

At one point when the presenter asked if she could accept if there might be, as Nikki da Costa had said, a potential problem with therapists or parents finding themselves on the wrong side of the law if they tried to talk things through with muddled trans teenagers, she answered,

“No, I think, hum, we haven’t seen..the bill doesn’t actually exist yet, so we’ll have to look at the way that it’s actually expressed but conversion therapy is trying to change people from what they are into believing that’s wrong and trying to get them to deny and suppress their own natural feelings. Any therapist that’s trying to change people from what they are into believing that’s wrong and trying to get them to deny and suppress their own natural feelings.

Any therapist that’s helping an LGBT+ person, any non- binary person, deal with society and their own feelings has to do it without trying to push on them a view of what they are. So long as you don’t do that it’s not conversion therapy.

Then she said, “There’s a perfectly reasonable reason for including trans people.” Though she did not say exactly what this was. She continued, “We want this bill to have no loopholes ….” ( As I quoted before.)

When the presenter pressed her again, asking,
“Your not denying some teenagers may be muddled, or are you? You’re just saying the law protects the therapist. The law is not going to endanger reasonable therapists talking that through?

She answered, “Of course not. I mean if you actually are… let’s look at what conversion therapy is. It’s, fifty percent of it is done from religious belief, for religious reasons, and what it does is try to persuade a person whose got feelings for the same sex, or whatever their situation is, that it’s somehow wrong and disordered and evil. And if only they take various therapeutic responses that somehow they can be cured. Well, it’s offensive to LGBT people to be told that, that they’ve got a disease or that they’re sick and that they can be cured.

What they’ve got to do is be given access to help if they’ve got feelings of self-hatred that help them accept themselves for who they are and to have confidence to move forward in life.

It Conversion therapy is not that. You can see the differences between therapies that are trying to help people help themselves and those that are trying to push them a particular way. And ..it’s chalk and cheese.

OP posts:
Mollyollydolly · 29/01/2022 00:34

I always admired Angela Eagle. I wrote to her over the Conversion Therapy bill last year. A very reasonable letter highlighting my concerns. I thought she would understand being a lesbian. I remember what it felt like when I was a teenager. Never got a reply. I will never understand how she cant see it.

NAndJIsStayingAtHome · 29/01/2022 00:43

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

SteakExpectations · 29/01/2022 01:59

The contents of the (proposed?) Canadian conversion therapy bill give insight into what we should expect to see coming into force soon here.

www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/44-1/bill/C-4/royal-assent

BBC Radio 4 PM today on the bill to ban conversion therapy
JustSpeculation · 29/01/2022 03:03

@SteakExpectations

The bit cut off at the bottom of your screenshot reads:

For greater certainty, this definition does not include a practice, treatment or service that relates to the exploration or development of an integrated personal identity — such as a practice, treatment or service that relates to a person’s gender transition — and that is not based on an assumption that a particular sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression is to be preferred over another.

This would seem to clear the way for exploratory therapy. But I'm not sure. Does anyone know what "integrated personal identity" means? Is it a term in psychology and psychiatry that has a generally accepted and clearly defined meaning? And does this all imply that the words "a particular sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression is to be preferred over another" refer to a general preference on the part of some organisation or therapist, or a specific preference in each case? If it's the second, then surely it would be OK to say "I think I might be gay or trans and I want to talk about it", but not OK for the client to say "I don't want to be gay or trans, and want to find a way out of it". I can see this leading to problems, because any successful process will surely result in the client sorting out their problem and settling on a preferred sexuality or identity.

I could be overthinking this....I am not a therapist, and have little knowledge of the field.

SantaClawsServiette · 29/01/2022 03:14

I think it's wishy washy.

But none of that really touches on the main point which is that there is no real strong medical or scientific support for the idea of gender identity as innate in the way that activism is now claiming, or that it is in fact somehow representing people's "true self".

And passing a bill on the basis of such limited science seems pretty stupid.

DottyDoge · 29/01/2022 03:26

One problem seems to be that both sides think it’s the other side doing the converting

DottyDoge · 29/01/2022 03:28

I recall being delighted when homosexual marriage was passed all those years ago, though had I known it would end up being the catalyst for the erosion of women's rights I'd have been staunchly against it.

How did gay marriage promote this? And should feminists have campaigned against gay marriage?

ScrollingLeaves · 29/01/2022 14:52

Thank you for the shot of the Canadian conversion therapy bill.
Under the list of banned conversion therapies it says [change{

a. a person’s sexual orientation to heterosexual.

I wonder if they have reflected on how some people may be trans, or persuaded to be trans, so that they will appear to be heterosexual to fit in with society rather than because they truly want to change their gender identity? Wasn’t the gender recognition bill ( which was before gay marriage was allowed) passed partly so that an apparently heterosexual marriage could take place legally?

In Iran, I think, being trans is preferred by families to their children being gay.

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread