Government ban on conversion therapy dropped

[DERFDogmaExlusionary]

Breaking news

Leaked briefing "The PM has agreed we should not move forward with legislation to ban LGBT conversion therapy"

Feeling really frustrated with the reporting of this.

It's been a good week, but we still have mountains to climb before mainstream news outlets stop deifying the T.

Anyone just hear Jane Ozanne on BBC R2 news just now? Apparently trans kids will be committing suicide in droves now.

Evidence please, Jane.

They should rename it - there is either coercion or exploration. It’s not the same thing to have an exorcism on a gay kid, as allowing a professional to discuss a child/young persons feeling of gender confusion. It’s really not.

I think it goes even further than that, Kitty. They seem to be trying to position any denial of the person’s ‘transness’ as ‘conversion’.

Nancy Kelley again...

The Guardian published this www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/third-of-young-british-lgbtq-people-experience-abuse-by-relatives

This relates to behaviours like shunning, threatening to make someone homeless, outing, verbal harassment etc.

Nancy Kelley calls these things ‘conversion therapy’.

I call these things (possibly) very unpleasant, but there is nothing about them that can reasonably be described as ‘conversion therapy’.

An example would be if my husband came out as trans and I told someone or I asked him to leave. To me, that’s a relationship breaking down, or me confiding in a friend. To NK, that’s ‘conversion therapy’, and she wants a law against it.

@Rightsraptor

Anyone just hear Jane Ozanne on BBC R2 news just now? Apparently trans kids will be committing suicide in droves now.

Evidence please, Jane.

That's pretty irresponsible and goes against the Samaritans' guidelines. The BBC should not have broadcast that statement from Ozanne without comment.

The reason we need the ban is because young people are taking their lives. This is not an ideological difference of opinion, this is what the UN themselves have called often forms of torture or mental anguish that leads people to feel that the only way out that they can see is to attempt suicide because they cannot reconcile who they are with what they are being told by those closest to them.

This almost sounds as though Ozanne is telling vulnerable young people that they should be feeling suicidal. Appalling.

@tabbycatstripy

Nancy Kelley again...

The Guardian published this www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/third-of-young-british-lgbtq-people-experience-abuse-by-relatives

This relates to behaviours like shunning, threatening to make someone homeless, outing, verbal harassment etc.

Nancy Kelley calls these things ‘conversion therapy’.

I call these things (possibly) very unpleasant, but there is nothing about them that can reasonably be described as ‘conversion therapy’.

An example would be if my husband came out as trans and I told someone or I asked him to leave. To me, that’s a relationship breaking down, or me confiding in a friend. To NK, that’s ‘conversion therapy’, and she wants a law against it.

Nancy talking havers again. What nonsense.

I might have been unfair to NK. Her tweet relates to a claim in the article that ‘5% of LGBTQ+ respondents reported being subjected to conversion practices, with a family member attempting to change, “cure” or suppress their sexual orientation or gender identity, increasing to 11% of trans and non-binary respondents.’

But again, this isn’t about conversion therapy. Telling your child, ‘You’re not a boy, you’re a girl’ might be seen as an attempt to change their ‘gender identity’. I don’t know. But it’s not conversion therapy.

This law had ordinary family disagreements over a sensitive area without a clear scientific consensus in its sights. It’s absolutely right that it has been withdrawn.

@Justme56

Not totally related but I see that Stonewalls challenge against the EHRC has been dismissed by the UN.

The EHRC is now encouraging campaigners to work collaboratively with them to deliver a new three-year strategy to tackle some of the most significant equality and human rights challenges facing Britain today.

Oh, I'm glad they are reaching out to collaborate with people who have criticised them and wanted to strip them of their status.

The sooner they realise that 'collaboration' can only mean one hundred percent craven capitulation, the better.

An example would be if my husband came out as trans and I told someone or I asked him to leave. To me, that’s a relationship breaking down, or me confiding in a friend. To NK, that’s ‘conversion therapy’, and she wants a law against it.

Exactly. Any disagreement with a man identifying as a woman needs to be outlawed.

And they will use made up statistics about child suicide to enforce it.

As we've always known, they've got absolutely nothing.

So is it going ahead now but without the T?

@tabbycatstripy

Nancy Kelley again...

The Guardian published this www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/third-of-young-british-lgbtq-people-experience-abuse-by-relatives

This relates to behaviours like shunning, threatening to make someone homeless, outing, verbal harassment etc.

Nancy Kelley calls these things ‘conversion therapy’.

I call these things (possibly) very unpleasant, but there is nothing about them that can reasonably be described as ‘conversion therapy’.

An example would be if my husband came out as trans and I told someone or I asked him to leave. To me, that’s a relationship breaking down, or me confiding in a friend. To NK, that’s ‘conversion therapy’, and she wants a law against it.

I call these things largely the same as what TRA are doing to GC people.

That's the stated current intention but there's going to be a massive fight over attempts to get the T reattached to the LGB in the Bill, and looking over yesterday it's clear the government is not in control of what's going on and so it's going to be unpredictable.

We've seen with the covid restrictions and the overreach of that (where police were fining any they deemed to have broken "the rules") that woolly and ambiguous definitions in the law can lead to anyone falling foul of an interpretation.

The activists are already changing their terminology today. Get the T CT under the banner of LGB CT, now it's getting questions like "are you sure" made illegal under the banner of religiously-based conversion therapy.

I don't see many people criticising the conversion therapy in Iran. Perhaps that should be raised with Thatchell?

This is excellent news.

Primarily because it marks a turn away from legislation barring parents and other carers from trying to help children suffering from dysphoria or anything like it, rather than encouraging them on a path towards sterilisation and drug use. (Looking over that sentence emphasises the craziness of all this -- the putative legislation was precisely intended for that purpose.)

There are secondary gains too.

1. The 'T' has been separated from 'LGB' where it never belonged. Once separated on this issue, might it be a little easier to separate it tout court ? -- LGB Alliance, take a bow.

1. The locution 'gender identity' will not slide its slippery way onto the statute book. This is good because the idea of a gender identity, universal in humans and causative of dysphoria when somehow mismatched with sex, is fundamental to gender ideology. Getting the words on the statute book would make it more difficult to convince on the truth of it -- which is, of course, that there is no such thing as gender identity in this sense. And, no gender identity, no TWAW.

So, to all you women (and some men? -- hope so) who worked on this, stood up, argued, acted, even just filled out the consultation sensibly, heartfelt thanks.

How do they honestly expect it to ever work??

Man aren't women. They're just not.

This was just discussed on Radio 4's The World at One.

Jonathan Blake, Political Correspondent at BBC News, summarised as follows:

Leak to ITV, government responded by saying that they would rely on existing laws, LGBT support groups reacted very strongly, as did some backbenchers, then there was the second U-turn for sexuality only. He talked about the difficulties involved in the proposed law, and that it's not about abusive behaviour, it's worries over people simply talking to those suffering gender dysphoria. He went into some very specific details of the proposed law. The summary was actually well-informed and delivered in a balanced way.

@Rightsraptor

Anyone just hear Jane Ozanne on BBC R2 news just now? Apparently trans kids will be committing suicide in droves now.

Evidence please, Jane.

I came here to say that, I was driving, could have been dangerous.

I will be complaining.. might need some help with the wording

The LGB held hostage to the T.

The LGB must be homogender. If they are not, they will be educated by Stonewall about their biogtry.

The LGB must not be allowed to advocate for themselves. Especially the L.

It does not matter if the LGB or women are harmed by the desire to force the conflation of gender with sex. The purpose of doing so is to erase homosexuality and women's right to say no as an acceptable thing, and instead put men in control of sexual gate keeping.

It is lesbians who are told they must sleep with transwomen or they are bigotted. The conversation doesn't go the other way. Does it Owen?

Everyone must stand by the T because if you don't Stonewall find themselves in the position where people might to start asking difficult questions.

If there is a high level of very vulnerable children with comorbity indicated:

Nikki da Costa @nmdacosta
U18s with gender dysphoria. GIDs see tip of iceberg - 4000% increase in a decade 134 to 2242. Puberty = upsurge. 2/3 girls. 35% autism. Many same-sex attracted. Often pre-existing mental health issues. Over rep of those in care. Exploration needed not slogans to stop thinking.

Lets be honest here. This is about banning access to any therapy because it might explore alternative explaination and therefore be labelled under umbrella of 'convertion therapy' - because thats the reality in practice of what would happen.

Why would you want to make it more difficult for those who identify as T to access appropriate mental health support?

Would it make it more difficult for detransition therapy to exit?

We know that males and females are presenting in different ways and at different types as trans. WHY? Its important. It tells us something.

Women - both those identifying as trans and homosexual women are affected very differently and more acutely by the LBG with the T. This is also important.

Unless you see the SEX based difference here, you can't see how particular groups might be more at risk and more harm could be done to.

The LBG with the T is something to hide inconvenient and difficult truths behind. If the T's argument only stands up if hitches to the LBG, then the argument was flawed to begin with.

Right... more annoyed now. I shall be using the IPSO guidance as well as other links

www.ipso.co.uk/member-publishers/guidance-for-journalists-and-editors/guidance-on-reporting-suicide/

This about it not being youths...

www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/sex-reassignment-doesnt-work-here-the-evidence

Nice nuanced piece about no increase over time, since 1972, but an increase in risk at all stages of transition, but some important limitations in the study

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/

And the FPFW round up and analysis

fairplayforwomen.com/suicide/

Looking at how this is being discussed on social media, activists are expressing confidence that the Bill will be amended and T will be included. They haven't though through what that means in practice. It means debates in Parliament where the arguments that T must always be with the LGB will be critically examined. However, this will only happen if there are MPs in the House who are motivated to engage in the debate and are well briefed so that they can do it effectively.

@tabbycatstripy

Nancy Kelley again...

The Guardian published this www.theguardian.com/world/2022/apr/01/third-of-young-british-lgbtq-people-experience-abuse-by-relatives

This relates to behaviours like shunning, threatening to make someone homeless, outing, verbal harassment etc.

Nancy Kelley calls these things ‘conversion therapy’.

I call these things (possibly) very unpleasant, but there is nothing about them that can reasonably be described as ‘conversion therapy’.

An example would be if my husband came out as trans and I told someone or I asked him to leave. To me, that’s a relationship breaking down, or me confiding in a friend. To NK, that’s ‘conversion therapy’, and she wants a law against it.

I suspect that to these people, laws like this are seen mainly in relation to hate type laws. Their ultimate goal is to make it impossible for individuals to publicly challenge or maybe even privaltly challenge, or disagree with, whatever the socially or politically correct viewpoint is.

Not just in medical or therapeutic situations, they want this across the board, in families, in public life. It's looking for a toehold to slowly make the window or public discourse smaller and smaller. It's very much the same technique used by the totalitarian socialist states - yes, you can believe x privately but you can't mention it in public or to other citizens or expect any accommodation in the workforce or anything else for your belief.

you can believe x privately but you can't mention it in public or to other citizens or expect any accommodation in the workforce or anything else for your belief.

Listening closely to the evidence given by the witnesses for CGD in the Maya Forstater tribunal, this came across pretty clearly.

I have sent this. And will report back any wishy washy answer they may choose to send me!

I was alarmed to hear a guest/comment Jane Ozanne on BBC R2 news at 12 noon. She said that "trans kids will be committing suicide in droves now." This went unchallenged, no other comment for balance.

IPSO states "Journalists should be prepared to justify the inclusion of any detail of the method of suicide in any report." and this obviously was not done by anyone editign the news piece.

What should have been include is a more rounded version of that particular 'truth', or perferable it not having been broadcast at all! More care needs to be taken whenever this emotive issue is raised. Partisan statements, in error or as propagand, are not useful.

I refer you to just some of the reputable research on the matter.

This showing that suicide amongst trans individuals is not about being young.

www.heritage.org/gender/commentary/sex-reassignment-doesnt-work-here-the-evidence

A properly nuanced piece about no increase over time, since 1972, but an increase in risk at all stages of transition, but some important limitations in the study

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7317390/

And the Fair Play For Women round up and analysis of UK studies

fairplayforwomen.com/suicide/

Please consider having an equally prominant piece about this data. The BBC is increasingly showing its bias and lack of care on this isue, see also Jeremy Vine's piece with Sharon Davies and India Willoughby yesterday. It was very noticeable where the bias lies, and women need not be shut up when speaking about the rights and dignity of women. There are enough aggravated debates, attempts at silencing, women, no platforming and online threats without any part of the BBC showing clear bias that onnly inflames the situation.

Poorly done all round!

Children will become suicidal if they don't get treatment for gender dysphoria? But they will also become suicidal if you try and cure them of it?