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"

Yep. And are as likely to become suicidal as they get older, with or without any intervention.

Maybe it should be put back on the DSM list! It seems to feature quite highly as a concomitant issue with gender dysphoria! AT least that way someone will carry on looking at the best way to assist anyh trans individual. Rather than assuming that any treatment is the best way to help!

Yet again, TRAs causing harm to the very people they say they are trying to help and us nasty women carrying on being evil, murderous by pointing out the discrepencies!

LGBT Foundation statement: “We are all as one or none at all.”

What do they mean?

It sounds threatening.

Say what now? Is there any sense in that? And yes, it does sound a bit like "You are either with me or against me" - not at all pleasant if you are not 'with' them!

@tabbycatstripy

LGBT Foundation statement: “We are all as one or none at all.”

What do they mean?

It sounds threatening.

As a lesbian....er, I want my right to leave now please, because that sounds scary as fuck?

It does. Unfortunate echoes of men we’ve heard before.

Now this from the EHRC:

twitter.com/EHRC/status/1509809751852527618

"Conversion therapy is harmful. We support the ending of such practices relating to both sexual orientation and being transgender, and urge Government to now move forward with its proposals. See our full consultation response: https://t.co/1djOSIrOfNN_

Our conversion therapy response recommended Parliament scrutinises legislation in relation to being transgender, which is less clear in law, in order to properly assess the implications for all."

Now what do the people calling the EHRC Nazis do? They must be very confused.

@tabbycatstripy

LGBT Foundation statement: “We are all as one or none at all.”

What do they mean?

It sounds threatening.

It means not to separate out T from LGB.

As with all the reporting there is a desire to get the trans conversion therapy (illegal to question to transition) to fly under the radar of LGB conversion therapy.

It's a well known tactic that any laws relating to trans issues should be included in less controversial laws, so they can get laws passed on the sly.

And that "one" is the trans....

So would this not work against those who tell children they are trans? Because If cis is a gender, surely telling someone they are not cisgender but trans would also be conversion therapy?

See, that's all us "Gender Crits" can come up with. Interminably fucking logical!

No one tell them.

They better not includ the T if it means parents and professionals have to just go along with it and start medicating and surgically intervening on children/young people/adults who say they are the opposite sex to what they are

They are banning gay conversion therapy which I agree they should of course

@Crcohetmonster

So would this not work against those who tell children they are trans? Because If cis is a gender, surely telling someone they are not cisgender but trans would also be conversion therapy?

Yep. So assuming your sonis trans because at 3 they said they wanted to be a girl, that's conversion therapy?

I am 'agender' in this nonsense new world. So every time someone calls me cis, that's conversion therapy then?

parents and professionals have to just go along with it and start medicating and surgically intervening on children

I don't think people realise this, I'm no longer staying quiet irl, and this is the biggest thing I've found, people have no idea.

Bootsandroots Peter Tatchell did notice about Iran, if I knew how to link from Twitter I would have done - the responses were hilarious - people saying that they we're pleased he's now a Terf ! It was about 3 or 4 days ago

In The Times:

"One senior government source blamed Andrew Griffith, Johnson’s new head of policy, for the row, accusing him of “pushing his own particular agenda” and blindsiding ministers who were responsible for the policy.

Griffith, a Tory MP, was appointed by Johnson to the role earlier this year following the resignation of his long-term aide Munira Mirza.

“There is a lot of disquiet at the way that it happened,” they said. “You have got a new leadership around the prime minister who think they know how to do things and want to keep information really tight. But that doesn’t work. It just ends up alienating and angering people.”

Another source said Truss was “surprised” by Johnson’s decision and glad that the prime minister then reversed course again after an outcry from some Conservative MPs. “She thinks we’ve ended back in the right place,” the source said.

But senior figures have warned that Johnson’s new position of excluding people with gender dysphoria from the legislation would simply store up problems for the government when the bill comes before parliament. They said there was no chance that Labour would not amend the bill to include transgender rights, inflaming the row yet again."

Johnson kept equalities minister in dark on conversion therapy U-turn.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1c1eb074-b1d8-11ec-8b8c-0207c0fd6104?shareToken=fabaf9582c39f5c978e3172f73623c188_

It will be very useful to get all this out and discussed in parliament, and all in the Hansard record. Many MPs are woefully badly briefed on this and often briefed by people giving them a very selective overview.

So yes please Labour. Let's get every single inch of this out and under the microscope as to exactly why this is the proposed position. We should have the Cass report and the Webberly trial outcome in hand by then both of which will be helpful.

I actually think having to have a whole new set of discussions about this is great. Because every time this bill is brought to the table, more evidence is presented, or the lack of it acknowledged by experts and authorities. So it becomes clearer and clearer what needs to be done.

Which is exactly what SW and lobbyists don’t want to happen. At. All.

This could be messy. The evidence base was spectacularly poor for the T side, and not strong for the LGB side of things either because much of it is all already covered anyway for LGB. And free speech is a growing concern in general, so how do you write this law?

I don't see how they're going to legislate for a bunch of things that are already illegal, and how it'll get through without repeated attempts to add "gender identity", which must not make it onto the statute. It'll be game over if that happens.

Maybe pre-legislative scrutiny would assist. Hopefully some bright legal people will have ideas.

@ResisterRex

This could be messy. The evidence base was spectacularly poor for the T side, and not strong for the LGB side of things either because much of it is all already covered anyway for LGB. And free speech is a growing concern in general, so how do you write this law?

I don't see how they're going to legislate for a bunch of things that are already illegal, and how it'll get through without repeated attempts to add "gender identity", which must not make it onto the statute. It'll be game over if that happens.

Maybe pre-legislative scrutiny would assist. Hopefully some bright legal people will have ideas.

I don't think the introduction of these bills, in various countries, was ever intended for anything other than as a way to narrow the ways in which gender would be addressed by psychology and therapists. It may well not be possible to write sensible legislation about it.

Yep, Mangy. That.

Nikki da Costa in the Telegraph. It's a long comment piece:

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/04/02/conversion-therapy-law-must-not-rushed/

Politically Im not on the same page as Nikki da Costa as a rule.

However she is very very good at her job and understanding the principles of unintended consequences of well meaning but poorly written legislation.

What scares me is the number of MPs we currently have who do not fully understand the process of good law making and drafting and the consequences of fucking it up. Its much harder to amend law once in place rather than to delay and get it right in the first place.

I really respect da Costa for this reason. She is good at law writing and thats an ever decreasing skill. We need more Nikki da Costas.