Kemi "to write to all Tory MPs to insist that a ban on trans conversion therapy must not criminalise parents"

[ResisterRex]

In the Telegraph. Front page lead story:

twitter.com/tmorrowspapers/status/1615481738884517890?s=46&t=0TXFOsdaPO7ObIDrJNgGgw

www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/01/17/trans-conversion-therapy-ban-could-turn-parents-criminals/

"The equalities minister is to write to all Tory MPs to insist that a ban on trans conversion therapyy_ must not criminalise parents, as a backlash against the plans grew.

In a highly unusual move, it is understood that Kemi Badenochh_ intends to set out her concerns over the proposed legislation, announced in the Commons on Tuesday.
She will warn that legitimate conversations between parents and trans children must not be outlawedd_ and that freedom of religion must be protected.
The letter reflects concern in Downing Street that Tory MPs will rebell_ over the introduction of the conversion therapy ban"

And

"She is set to acknowledge that the draft version of the legislation will be imperfect, with issues around what constitutes conversion therapy, and how to protect faith leaders, counsellors and parents, not fully resolved.

A source close to Mrs Badenoch said: “The area of gender identity is much more complex than sexual orientation. We have said we will not inadvertently criminalise parents who are trying to support children.”"

Accessible link found here

twitter.com/cforwomenuk/status/1615435994677022721?s=46&t=0TXFOsdaPO7ObIDrJNgGgw

Thanks for this.

Im suddenly feeling like Cass is disappearing without trace? It felt like there were concerted movements towards more rational thinking on this. I'm glad Kemi is not the case but she feels like a lone voice.

I was never clear if the research that Cass was doing (the one that meant Javid had to permit a change under the GRA) was part of the review or parallel or separate. If part of, it could take time.

If this conversion therapy ban is to have pre-legislative scrutiny then that could be a good thing. Presumably it'll have to listen to detransitioners, therapists who've spoken out and anyone who's lost their job or been harassed for supporting children through this time.

If people don't get it - and it is complex - or wilfully aren't getting it, then that will cease to become an option. But the person steering that process will be key.

Just been mentioned on radio 4, that it's an unusual move from Kemi

I am aware that some therapists I personally know of are extremely concerned.

Not just parents.

Medical professionals should he able to properly treat mentally ill children, and that most likely does not involve affirmative therapy.

On the therapist, doctor, teacher side, the article says:

"Campaigners and Conservative MPs are concerned that the ban could inadvertently criminalise parents, teachers and doctors who simply question whether children really want to change their gender.
A source close to Mrs Badenoch told The Telegraph that the issues involved were “complex” and that framing the law would be “difficult”, adding: “Many people do not understand how complex this area is, so we’ve committed to pre-legislative scrutiny.
“It has taken us a long time to make this announcement because we have consulted a large range of stakeholders, including the medical community.
“We want to show we are committed to doing this, but we need to build proper time for scrutiny. It will be difficult but we will do it. We will be letting MPs know more details about what is happening."
Another source said avoiding unintended consequences would be “hard” and that “there is much still to work on”, adding: “We do not want to do harm with this Bill to a very vulnerable group through cavalier legislation.”"

How about: the so-called 'transing of the gay'? Does that come under the conversion therapy for the LGB? (Sorry if this a detail)

Oh look, a Tory MP on manouveres trying to position themselves with a particular section of the party ahead of the next leadership election. How cute.

I am aware that some therapists I personally know of are extremely concerned.

Right, because the thing being effectively criminalised is "talking about reality to a 'trans' person'". How do you work like that?

The reality point is the fundamental problem.

"Conversion" for a gay person means attempting to change something in reality. Trying to change actual real behaviour. And in the case of sexuality, that's pointless, and has proven to be futile.

"Conversion" for a "transgender" person has nothing to do with reality at all. "Transgender" isn't real, so any sort of "conversion" isn't doing anything material. "Transgender" is a way of thinking - therapists' job is helping people's change their way of thinking.

Reality for "trans" people is "you will never be the opposite sex" and most often "no-one will never see you as the opposite sex", and "any medical intervention will have life-time health consequences, even if there are no complications". That reality isn't going to change, all a therapist can do is point it out, or not.

If they point it out, they're not "converting" anyone - they're just telling you something that's always been true.

Back in the day those sorts of realities were very much spelt out to transsexuals leading up to 'transition' attempts, and formed part of consent forms. It appears that these days, that's already rare, but these bills are explicitly to codify that and prevent any sort of reality-check on the path to irreversible choices - the actual real "conversion". It's effectively stopping there being any brakes on the continuum from "transgender" (just in one's head) to "transsexual" (medical intervention).

I can't see anything else being criminalised beyond "talking about reality to someone who's decided they're transgender".

Oh look, another lame attempt to derail a thread with only insults and no evidence or detail, or indication the article has been read (there's an accessible link in the second post)

If you want to discuss Tories on manoeuvres with just insults then start your own thread.

This shows what a mistake it is to include the T with LGB - it’s not the same, I can’t see how a conversion therapy ban will work unless the T is discounted.

Surely much of the info that came out of the Tavistock should at least make you consider that for some, transitioning a child is conversion therapy? Look at Jackie Green, look at Jazz Jennings as well known examples of this?

How on earth can anyone produce anything meaningful?

The Telegraph view which covers the GRR but closes with the conversion therapy issue:

www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2023/01/17/mps-avoiding-real-debate-trans-issues/

"Politicians should not hide behind technicalities to avoid discussing the substance. One of the few prepared to go to the heart of this issue is Rosie Duffield, Labour MP for Canterbury. Her objection to the Scottish bill is that anyone would be allowed to self-identify and therefore enter spaces reserved for womenn_, such as changing rooms.

At least one of her male colleagues could be heard shouting “rubbish”, but it is not rubbish and most of the country agrees with her. As Ms Duffield said, MPs had just discussed the appalling behaviour of a serving Metropolitan Police officer guilty of sex attacks on women but seemed unable to make the connection.
Trans people should be protected from discrimination but their rights should not always trump those of others. It is hard to understand why politicians have allowed this state of affairs to arise. For instance, why are children being taught from a young age that their gender is something always to be questioned? As the Telegraph reports, Secretary of State for International Trade and Minister for Women Kemi Badenoch is raising her concerns about the proposed ban on trans conversion therapy with Tory MPs. She is right to do so."

So you are more interested in shaming a woman MP than you are in ensuring that a law is worded in such a way to allow the best medical care for trans people?

Or would you prefer that all trans people receive the very best care including for their co-morbid conditions as well.

Maybe you could produce some links to show just how only allowing affirming only (as has resulted in some places) significantly improves mental health of patients?

But it's not just parents in the firing line to get criminalised, is it, Kemi? It's all of us, too.

Friends, relatives, and anyone trying to question (or talk reality) to a child (or adult) who's been sucked into this nonsense.

A ban on 'trans conversion therapy' will negate the Maya Forestater judgement completely. We won't be able to say any more that there are 2, and only 2 sexes, and that they are immutable. Not within hearing of one of the magic sparkly people, anyhow.

Quick reminder of an assurance that was given to Parliament during the House of Lords debate on the GRA:

Gender Recognition Bill HL
Volume 656: debated on Thursday 29 January 2004

Lord Filkin:
"The noble Baroness (Lady O'Cathain) also asked whether people who refuse to call a gender-changed man by the changed gender would be open to action. No, they would not, unless they had information about the person's gender history in an official capacity and they disclosed it otherwise than is allowed for by Clause 21."

hansard.parliament.uk//Lords/2004-01-29/debates/f813c7d4-41a1-4cfd-8115-6be9753889e5/GenderRecognitionBillHl#contribution-4f7e4ad5-5e65-4c3d-8b8e-b0a0d8094016

So, no risk that anyone misgendering someone would be "open to action". That went well.

Letters, written and verbal assurances are worthless. What matters is what is actually written in primary legislation and statutory instruments.

However, it really does look like this Government is taking it very seriously and that we are in a different world now to when a pig's ear was made of the GRA2004 and a similar smoke-and-mirrors mess was made of the Gender Reassignment provisions in the EA2010:

Trans conversion therapy ban ‘could turn parents into criminals’
Kemi Badenoch, the equalities minister, intends to set out concerns over proposed legislation announced in Commons on Tuesday

archive.ph/www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/01/17/trans-conversion-therapy-ban-could-turn-parents-criminals/

A different world only because, I suspect, women have kicked up such a stink. Ministers must know that will not be able to get away with lazily allowing their tame trans advisors to lead them by nose this time.

If Parliamentarians have read the debates and Committee meetings on the GRA2004 and the EA2010 then they will surely have been horrified by the quality of debate, the steamrollering of dissent and the illogical, irrelevant nonsense spouted in answer to concerns raised. I certainly was. I sincerely hope that those proceedings are not typical.

@ResisterRex Yes, there seems complete cognitive dissonance between the misogyny of the Met and violence against women and the climate of fear caused by the Transactivist lobby which has been supported by the largest institutions in the country, NHS, BBC, Welsh Government and many individual Universities.

But it's not just parents in the firing line to get criminalised, is it, Kemi? It's all of us, too.

The article says she covers others impacted. See upthread but I think "criminalising parents for having discussion with their kids" is going to be the one I'd choose for a headline. You want readers to read it.

If conversion therapy is defined as
"the practice of attempting to cause a non-heterosexual person to become heterosexual by using psychoanalysis, behaviour modification, spiritual counselling, etc" then the tactics of trans organisations that target children will meet the bar for for conversion therapy. The emotive gaslighting techniques are immense - fact & evidence free training that frames questions as transphobic, #nodebate, prioritising trans over a child's known co morbidities. Gendered Intelligence selling "mentoring" by self interested adults to work 1 -1 with children in schools confused about their sex.

Posters on here have comprehensive screen shot / recorded evidence of all these extreme techniques used by organisations and individuals in their efforts to trans children, especially "transing away the gay" in children which hopefully will be shared in any consultations.

I, for one, am glad this plaster is finally being ripped off in Parliament. The behaviour of Lloyd Russell-Moyle towards Miriam Cates in the chamber yesterday showed up the nastiness that simmers below.

I hope that politicians, led by Kemi and others can get clarity on the legal terms and define sex rather than made up gender as the important factor.

"Therapist, sometimes I think I am a gay man and sometimes I think I am a transwoman"

Which one would win out on that case?

Considering its a crime worse than death to not affirm a 'trans' person I think I know the answer.

Which one, would most likely result in the person having better mental health in the long term (becuase its what they actually are)?

Thank you Bosky.

We actually need that excerpt to be put into the Break it down thread . Because it shows exactly that unless laws are written with clear definition they are now worthless.

That concerns addressed in Hansard with assurances that those concerns are covered and no additional clarity or restrictions is needed to pass the act have been shown to be historically naive.

This is where parliaments need to address the issues with robust legislation.

Surely this shuts down the possibility of clinical studies that compare affirmative care with talking therapies, because it will make conducting talking therapies very difficult. Care for this area of medicine desperately needs more evidence based, and this will be a hindrance to achieving that.

Exactly. There are already huge problems with the training in this area.
Were the results and response to the consultation we all completed ever published?

I've now read the whole article @ResisterRex (sorry I can't post the archive link, they get deleted). But the only 'exceptions' mentioned to criminalisation are specific groups, teachers, religious leaders, parents etc.

What about concerned friends? What about normal, everyday concerned women? We are not therapists, we are not professionals. But we have a lot of knowledge.

We must not be gagged by this legislation. We witches must be allowed to keep speaking out, and to whom we choose, without fear.