Conversion therapy ban discussion in the House of Commons

[jellyjellyinmybelly]

After PMQ s today I kept the telly on and there was a labour minister in a blue jacket (didn't catch her name sorry). She said they're pressing ahead with a full conversion therapy ban which will be fully trans inclusive and will protect lgbt plus people. She contrasted how Labour were definitely going to push this through compared to how the tories wouldn't.

She was asked whether parents would be consultant if their child is gender questioning and she didn't answer and said they were analysing the responses to the consultation. A man with a northern Irish accent asked whether adults could opt into faith based discussions and this be allowed and she said she'd look into that.

Interestingly Jess Phillips was sitting behind her on the front bench and looked defensive with arms folded. I wonder what she really thinks!

What does everyone think? I worry about the proposed conversion ban which could outlaw talking therapy for gender questioning children that isn't fully affirmative.

I can't see how anyone is still so dim as to accept the idea that being gay (or bi) belongs in the same category as being, or thinking you are trans, especially for minors.

Aside from the qualitative differences, like the fact that being trans can't be defined or proved whereas being gay is an external reality related to who you want to be with romantically/sexually - the consequences of blind affirmation of a trans identity in a minor are absolutely huge, orreversible and potentially massively harmful.

A young person says they're gay, so what? Of course they shouldn't be pressured to not be gay/subject to "conversion therapy", that should not be allowed – but being gay isn't something that requires them to make any decisions. Maybe it's a phase, or influenced by wanting to be cool or piss off their parents (like some temporarily gay people I knew in the 80s), maybe not. It doesn't matter because they can change their minds at any point - as straight people can and do too. You can just say "Oh, thanks for telling me, I love you whatever, but remember you're young and there's no pressure to decide this right now."

Saying you're trans is totally different because it comes with medical interventions and decisions that absolutley should be subject to a process of questioning, making sure that is the best thing for that person, and checking for other factors that could have made them feel that way, such as sexual abuse, to make sure they don't make a trult awful and irreversible mistake.

That's the important difference. Aside from the fact that gender ideology is based on zero evidence, illogical, sexist and regressive, no one should be entering into that treatment like that without a significant process of checks and MH support, and especially not as a minor. Of COURSE that should result in some of them changing their minds, as the stats show over 80% change their minds anyway if left alone.

That is not "conversion therapy".

I couldn't agree more, WhatterySquash. I hope that someone can put this to the politicians as well as you have explained it.

I have met lots of young trans-identifying people and the thing they have in common is vulnerability. Therapy works best when there is a good relationship between client and therapist which needs to be build on trust and truth. Gagging the therapist is going to make it harder to achieve that.

And therapy is also often about gently challenging the person's assumptions that they have about themselves or life generally (particularly if the client is young). I think that there will be quite a few therapists who would say they cannot work with trans-identifying young people (especially) if they are worried about the 'conversion ban'. Could you suggest something they hadn't thought of? Would that be construed as encouragement to 'convert' (to being what they already are and always will be!)?

WhatterySquash · Today 13:34

How very well put, I agree entirely that if you're gay, you just get on with life, no drugs or surgery required. If you think you're trans, it's very different indeed and it needs to be explored verbally; that doesn't mean someone repeating "You're not trans, snap out of it," of course.

If a person is gay, that's between them and their sexual partner(s). It's a private matter. It harms nobody. Society has prejudices, but a person's sexual orientation isn't really society's business. The only safeguarding issues relating to not being conventionally heterosexual arise through prejudices.

If a person claims a trans identity, it suddenly becomes everybody's business because it depends upon everybody pretending that something patently untrue is true. It becomes everybody's business because safeguarding the vulnerable is everybody's responsibility. Vulnerable people who will be physically harmed by inappropriate drugs and surgery. Vulnerable people who will be emotionally harmed by lies and gaslighting - I count as vulnerable both trans people and the ordinary people occupying the spaces that trans people want to colonise.

The incoherency of conflating gay and trans in the same conversion therapy ban is made even worse when you consider that a large proportion of 'trans' youths are gay, but are struggling with self-acceptance - ie have internalised societal prejudices. In these cases, 'gender-affirming therapy' is gay conversion therapy!

This will blow up in Labour's face unless they can square the impossible circle of completely excluding children from this. They'll also need to exclude professionals (social workers, psychologists, therapists) and parents / family members from asking mentally vulnerable children and adults about why they think a sex change is the solution to their mental illness.

Fortunately there's now a wealth of informed organisations able to point out how this will allow trans extremists to employ their preferred methods of coercive control and try to bully parents and responsible adults out of safeguarding children and young people.

It's a sop to the trans extremists still nestling under Labour's banner but in the light of Cass and the collapse of trans dominated healthcare for children, they'll struggle to produce anything coherent - even a legal definition of gender identity.

@JellySaurus

If a person claims a trans identity, it suddenly becomes everybody's business because it depends upon everybody pretending that something patently untrue is true.

On everyone pretending that something patently untrue is true OR on everyone genuinely coming to believe that while women (and men) exist, we've somehow got it wrong who was who all through human history , and the thing that makes a person a woman is not her female sex but something in her mind, and actually women can be either sex. And that thinking we need women only spaces is right but not because of how society treats female bodies but because it's really important people take their clothes off only in front of people who have the same type of mind.

I do wonder whether this is one of the pay offs for all the freebies given to labour MPs by a Stonewall ally (Lord Ali)? He must have wanted something for all that investment and maybe this is part of it?

Yes, it's difficult to understand why they would push forward legislation that is so ill-conceived it will cause them nothing but trouble - as if they weren't in enough trouble already. So perhaps that's the explanation.

Yes -pushing this through against countless well thought out, evidenced arguments will yet again be saying the quiet bit out loud. That the demands of men with a fetish are prioritised over children's safety and wellbeing. The general public are already aware of how much harm this has done to children and are no longer prepared to be bullied into silence about it.

I think that there will be quite a few therapists who would say they cannot work with trans-identifying young people (especially) if they are worried about the 'conversion ban'.

I think the more tactically-minded trans activists very much have their eye on ethical and critically thinking therapists withdrawing from the area of gender identity creating a vacuum to be filled.

Don't forget Labour have also confirmed they are going to remove the Spousal Exit Clause which protects a spouse (mainly heterosexual women) from finding their marriage has been forcibly and unilaterally 'converted' from a heterosexual marriage to what the state records as a 'same sex' marriage without their consent. (At present he gets an interim GRC, which either partner can use to end the marriage, so both have equal say in their marriage).

It mostly protects heterosexual women/ religious believers as usually it's men who decide in middle age after fathering kids they are the women. Labour plans to remove the balance of power and the distress caused will be immense. This government really want to target women and religious believers to cause as much harm and distress as they can.

This is a male rights movement. (After confirmation today from Anneliese Dodds that Labour are happy women who need SS spaces are being excluded from everything from changing rooms to abuse support my revulsion at the cruelty/ misogyny/ lies of Labour MPs knows no bounds. ).

Don't forget Labour have also confirmed they are going to remove the Spousal Exit Clause

Where did you see that @Chariothorses? Not doubting you but wondering if this is more bad news they're dumping out before Christmas

I wonder if the minister is willing to be personally liable when the lawsuits come in?

It would be good to know that in addition to the Mengele inspired medics sterilising children, the politicians who promote these dangerous ideas are also held personally accountable in the courts.
It won't happen - they're teflon in terms of accountability.

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex
Well interestingly, I remembered it from this briefing last month but the reference to labour's plan to remove spousal consent is no longer there.
researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-10137/CBP-10137.pdf
Now it just says ' A consequence of one person in a marriage gaining legal gender recognition may be to change a marriage from being that of an opposite sex couple to that of a same sex couple'.

so either I remember wrongly or they have amended it ( any amendment has been done following the FWS court hearing- perhaps someone saved the original version?) .The writers have also amended the 'parenthood' references ( originally the briefing said transparents only remained mother or father for existing children- and the Cots group complained and got it corrected to reflect reality and the Supreme Court judgement).

Here's past references to it:
labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/the-spousal-consent-clause-in-the-gra-an-important-protection-for-women/
there's a useful legal assessment here:
https://www.legalfeminist.org.uk/2024/06/10/womens-consent-matters/

It's so fucking bonkers. Was I subject to 'conversion therapy' when my therapist gently challenged the thinking that made me petrified of flying? Should they have affirmed only my anxious flyer self and my belief (not rooted in reality) that air travel was highly unsafe?

Gender questioning kids won't be able to get the kind of care Cass recommends -quality mental health support -; as the therapists will all be too scared of being found guilty of conversion therapy.

Chariothorses

This is a male rights movement. (After confirmation today from Anneliese Dodds that Labour are happy women who need SS spaces are being excluded from everything from changing rooms to abuse support my revulsion at the cruelty/ misogyny/ lies of Labour MPs knows no bounds. ).

Bloody Hell! That's almost unbelievable, it's difficult to believe that she / they could be so crass.

Thanks Chariot. Is there a way to find out if that document has been edited? The date says 26 Nov, which was one of the two days in court for FWS I think?

@SinnerBoy Here's the telegraph article (if you can read- may be paywalled) confirming Labour are happy to give men who say they are women access to what should be SS spaces (thus excluding women).

@ResisterOfTwaddleRex
Cots on twitter only wrote about the 'parenthood' original wording so for the rest of the original briefing someone on mumsnet is bound to have saved it. Or you could email in to the address on the document and ask them to send the original (doubt they will).

@SinnerBoy
Sorry forgot the link- here are Labour's lies to get elected in the national press.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/12/18/labour-will-let-trans-people-use-some-single-sex-spaces/

I shouldn't be shocked at the contemptuous behaviour of our country's leadership, the lack of integrity and contempt for women, but somehow, I still am. It really damages public trust.

Who do we need to be writing to about this? What a shitshow it will be. It's already getting hard for people to find therapists for children who AREN'T completely captured because the GC ones mutter in private but don't advertise it.

Maybe the mp got her facts from Hollyoaks

I take comfort from Parliamentary Procedure. The Bill will have the strength of being part of Labour's manifesto but it is clearly a conscience Bill and is unlikely to be whipped. It will survive the committee stage with amendments but will not survive the third stage without the government accepting significant amendments from the HoL.

This could be wishful thinking though.