Most Britons want conversion therapy banned, including that aimed at transgender people

[JC544D]

Two-thirds of Britons (65%) say conversion therapy where people seek to change someone’s sexual orientation should be banned, while 62% say conversion therapy to change someone’s gender identity should be banned. Only 14% say each practice should not be banned, while 22-23% are unsure.

yougov.co.uk/topics/lifestyle/articles-reports/2022/04/12/most-britons-want-conversion-therapy-banned-includ

Did they not come back to define the term? I'm shocked

I’m a therapist. If a gender non conforming young person came to me saying they were trans, it is my ethical and moral duty to explore the full background to those feelings-what does that mean to them? How long have they identified as trans? Are any life events that might be connected in any way to their trans identity? Statistically (according to WPATH and others), the result of this self exploration would leave ~20% of young people growing into trans-identifying adults and the rest growing into gnc, often gay /lesbian adults.
If the “conversion therapy” legislation had passed, it would have explicitly forbidden me from exploring ANY aspect of the yp’s trans identity other than to unquestioningly affirm that they are trans. In my opinion, this would be unethical and actively harmful.

What we can do is look at other countries where there has been a complete blanket ban (I think Australia and New Zealand and parts of the US.)

We can see what is actually banned in practice (therapists are losing their licences for not following an immediate affirmation model and using talking therapies to ensure that transition is actually the most effective treatment for a child).

We don't want that happening here.

When children go down the path of transition we know it's a gruelling process with lots of complications. We know there are side effects to the puberty blockers and cross sex hormones that are irreversible. We know the surgery has a very high complication rate.

We also know that there may well be a small number of children, or very young adults, who may benefit from these treatments, but we know that most children grow out of their gender dysphoria by the time they finish puberty.

For some reason TRAs and organisations like Stonewall etc are absolutely adament that a lot of the above just is not true. I don't know why. When the shit hits the fan - which it will - someone is going to get the blame. I know who I will be pointing the finger at!!

I'm lost.
So a church group pressurising a young lesbian and telling her that she isn't a lesbian but is in fact straight, is conversion therapy,
but a social group pressurising a young lesbian and telling her that she isn't a lesbian but is in fact a boy, isn't conversion therapy.
Have I got that right?

rabbitwoman

In Australia, this is state based legislation as yet. Not all states have passed this ambiguous type of law around conversion therapy, I believe.

@BasicBinaryBltch - why would you assume we all know anything at all about trans. Its ridiculous to say we all know that quote about literal violence. I think only MN regulars would recognise it, possibly twitter users if they followed that kind of thing. Most of my friends and relatives dont use social media at all. They do things like 'take The Times on a Sunday'

Its a survey result. I wouldnt think about it very much at all. I wouldnt ask myself if the legislation was needed, if things were covered elsewhere, if there were better ways of doing it. The survey would say should conversion therapy be banned and id go 'yes' because I heard bad things about conversion therapy.

Of course I know violence is already illegal. But there are instances where things that are already illegal are given a stiffer penalty due to the motivation.

@Fishwishy

Heaven forbid a poll that shows Mumsnet opinions might not be in the majority. Either way it shows that the government seem to be doing women a favour by going against public opinion, heaven knows why they won't get much credit for it on here.

Gosh! Oh Gosh!

Such nuanced thinking displayed here! Not sure we can cope with coming up with arguments to overcome such valid, accurate and profound points.

It must be so hard to function knowing that the reality is that when terms are well defined and accurate background given, the majority of the UK actually do agree with MN.

And you only have to look at the dramatic decrease in support when the question around toilets and changing rooms is asked about when males still retain their penis!

Gosh, however will you get over that fishy?

‘Is conversion therapy the type of thing you read about with electric shocks, forced vomiting etc? Because I'm 100% against that. It's barbaric.’

It’s already illegal.

‘Or is it a therapist exploring options with a person before they set off on an incredibly long and difficult path? Because if it's only talking then I think we owe it to trans people to provide them with that option.’

Here, you have to differentiate between children and adults. Children were the subject of the proposed legislation.

A child or young adult vocalising sex confusion or distress - one consideration is abuse (sexual, emotional etc). Why tor to keep these young people away from therapists when teachers (unqualified therapists) can set up groups and become like a ‘parent’ in school (using new names and pronouns)?

I'm not sure if it's still on there but Netflix had a documentary called Pray Away which is about conversion therapy.

Well there is a grey area where people can try to bully / coerce people with just words that I also think is wrong

But without a real problem way to detect trans it's pretty hard to see who is doing the coercion- the people who say are you sure or the people who say you must be trans

Random problem sorry

‘Well there is a grey area where people can try to bully / coerce people with just words that I also think is wrong.’

I do, but in order for it to be considered illegal (with an adult) there would have to be a coercive control-type situation.

The complexity there is that we could see grown adults insisting on living with their parents and being funded for surgeries or sex hormones, but trying to suggest they are allowed to control what that parent is allowed to say. They could then accuse a non-affirming parent of “coercion therapy practices”.

Now the parent can obviously kick them out (or could, unless they were being bullied themselves, in which case the coercive control relationship would be reversed). But the trans activist crowd are trying to include such “practices” as making a trans person homeless in the ban.

So unless we are very careful, a ban on coercion “therapy” might be brought in that regulates what people are allowed to say in their own homes. That is dangerous.

So we end up in a situation where it’s obvious that the ‘targets’ of this ban are:

- things that are illegal already
- things that shouldn’t be illegal

Exactly. And the latter snuck in with the former, Trojan horse style. Again. It's just another TRA tactic. Instantly revealed with one or two questions.

Not to mention the risible and rank hypocrisy of seeing how the entire TRA lobby have relentlessly tried to enshrine legal conversion therapy for heterosexual women.

Trans widows are not lesbians, it's awful to think that their husbands want to 'turn' them into lesbians when they are only attracted to men confused

So you are saying there are three parties q who can be bullying / manipulative - yip that makes sense

The person themselves
A trans ideology promoting person / group
A person /group who is not convinced about the individuals transgender identity ( independent of what they think about transgender ideology)

No wonder it's hard to write this correctly

I saw this article the other day on the apple news app:
apple.news/AE5WlglKkTDaUhHhgP9K3rQ
(It’s in Dazed magazine and titled “The dark reality of trans conversion therapy” with the subtitle “‘It was just normal therapy – except my therapist was a TERF’”)
If this is what is being pushed at the public - not sure how the stories on the app are chosen - then it’s no wonder we end up with these so called statistics.

How many days (seconds) do you think it will take before exclusion from single sex spaces of the opposite sex is deemed 'conversion therapy'? The problem is not just children.

@Fishwishy

As a PP pointed out, when you provide the general public with accurate information (eg, that the vast majority of TW have a penis [& that proportion is only increasing]) they very much agree with MN.

Thus I would be fascinated to know what they’d make of the fact we do not know (as per my previous post) if anyone in the UK has ever been offered, much less undergone, conversion therapy for being trans gender.

This is the government’s research & analysis on the prevalence of conversion therapy in the UK. Yes, a 2021 paper used the answers to a couple of poorly-written questions in a 2017 survey. They were in a rush to try to push this through to tie in with the now-cancelled conference (which was going to cost an obscene amount & on which huge sums of taxpayer money have already been wasted)*.

As you’re clearly one of the people who IS for the ban, would you mind answering** as to which category of supporters of the Bill [as it was proposed] you fall into? Of course, should you feel I have somehow missed a fourth option which in fact describes you, please explain.
• You don’t see/understand the inherent contradiction in the ban on LGB conversion therapy & the ban on T conversion therapy when the latter meant an affirmation-only approach should an individual question their gender identity. Affirmation only = effectively a form of LG conversion therapy.
• You completely understand affirmation-only therapy for trans people = conversion therapy for lesbian & gay people; & that [in children & adolescents, in particular] it may lead to irreversible physical damage & serious health problems - but consider their lives to be completely acceptable collateral damage.
• You don’t, in fact, understand the issues at play here, but are choosing to express your support for banning trans conversion therapy (which, again, the research for the Bill didn’t ACTUALLY find evidence of) & thus de facto - & I do not think this can be emphasised enough - Are. Supporting. Gay. Conversion. Therapy… Because Reasons. (Right Side Of History? [Social] Media told you to? You trusted Stonewall?)

Seriously, if it’s the last one, I’d desperately like to understand, because it speaks a lot to the power of propaganda - but is it also peer pressure, the phenomenon of outsourcing thinking - perhaps combined with [AI-generated] echo-chambers? Of course on the surface “Ban Trans Conversion Therapy” sounds like a no-brainer. But as soon as you look into the inadequate research; the text of the Bill; & the simple fact it was not a good piece of legislation by virtue of its being forced through Parliament at such a rate & with such an agenda behind it… to blindly support it is to advocate for trampling on the rights of other groups; & to demand sub-standard care for young people questioning their gender identity.

• I currently have a free subscription to The Telegraph hence including that link; perhaps unsurprisingly most media aren’t covering this angle but a non-paywalled article is available at The Daily Mail ** It wasn’t phrased as a direct question in my original post, but I very much wish to know.

If we agreed there should be a ban aimed at violent or coercive practices to prevent adults transitioning, would that be a version the activists would accept?

A definition might be: a ban on activity to forcibly prevent, through violence or other coercive practices, an adult seeking gender reassignment or social transition of their gender (their ‘gender expression) MTF or FTM.

Can anyone (on either side of the debate) explain why that would be an issue, or why it wouldn’t be good enough?

tabby 'gender expression' like men being able to enter women's sports? Be place on female hospital wards or in women's prisons instead of men's prisons? Ticking the female box for data collection?

No, ‘gender expression’ is presentation. What you wear. Make up. Etc.

@tabbycatstripy

No, ‘gender expression’ is presentation. What you wear. Make up. Etc.

That would need to be clearly defined or we would quickly find behaviour included. Behaviours such as above.

Can we objectively identify what transgender is?
Can we prove it was attempting to change someone's identity without knowing what they identify really is ?

Back to the anorexic question - we know the person isn't fat so it's ok to try and make them see that

‘That would need to be clearly defined or we would quickly find behaviour included. Behaviours such as above.’

Sure. It could be defined that it had to do with physical reassignment and physical presentation.

So any mother saying "you're not going out like that " or any school teacher saying " that's too short " is preventing someone expressing their gender ?