Stonewall resurrecting the 'conversion therapy' bill

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/mar/28/stonewall-will-fight-to-ban-all-lgbt-conversion-practices-says-new-chief

Welcome to the new boss, just the same as the old boss. Unrepentant and repeating all the same tropes.

And right on cue, here's the beeb to back up the narrative.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3w1gl530vvo

'“It’s absolutely right that Stonewall became trans inclusive in 2015,” said Blake, drawing a distinction between the “public narrative” and “practical reality” that followed.
...
Blake, who acknowledged there has been “huge division” over the issue, said that Stonewall had always navigated “incredibly well” through different views, with equal marriage as a recent example.
But some critics of Stonewall have pinpointed what they felt was the organisation’s own unwillingness to engage in respectful exchanges, be that with its earlier “no debate” policy on trans rights or previous boss Nancy Kelley comparing gender critical beliefs to antisemitism.
Blake said: “I have heard that view, but looking ahead I’m clear we have only made progress and will only make progress through endless conversations with people who may share none or some of the same views.'

From the BBC article:

'Simon Blake, chief executive at Stonewall, said their research showed a ban needed to be brought in "as quickly as possible."
He said: "This bill is about banning conversion practices and making sure that unacceptable practices, which tell people who they are is not OK, have no place in this country.
"It's about telling people this is not acceptable."
A government spokesperson said: "Conversion practices are abuse - such acts have no place in society and must be stopped.
"We remain committed to bringing forward legislation to finally ban these abusive practices, starting with publishing the draft Bill later this session."'

What examples of conversion therapy are currently legal in the UK?

They are the tonest of tone deaf organisations but then their vice chair is a trans woman who identifies as a lesbian

Good question.

'It can include talking therapies and prayer, but more extreme forms can include exorcism, physical violence and food deprivation.' (What is conversion therapy and when will it be banned? - BBC News)

Obviously physical violence and food deprivation are unlikely to be legal in the UK, but it is appropriate (and often done) to legislate on a specific topic, even when there are overlapping laws already. Abuse can still be perpetuated in talking 'therapy' and I am sure there are historical cases of exorcism abuse too.

The interview is a joke. There are huge issues surrounding Stonewall - the US funding and the withdrawal of it, the mass withdrawals from the Diversity Champions programme, so called "Stonewall Law", the organisation's finances..

Didn't touch on any of them. Focusedvon conversion therapy, which the Gov has already said it will outlaw.

Utter puff piece from the Guardian.

There was a big consultation a couple of years ago and no actual instances of trans conversion therapy were found. The main point of an anti-conversion therapy law would be to put the concept of gender identity into law. That is the big prize - at the moment GI is not recognised in primary legislation. If GI was a legal concept, it could migrate into the Equality Act, replace GR or Sex, put GI into the definition of Sex, etc, etc. Would be the worst setback to women's rights since the GRA, imo. However weak or full of safeguards any bill is, it must not be passed into law.

Plus it's wrong in principle to pass laws to address non-existent problems.

This is so important. As we've seen with the mess of the GRA / Equality Act legislation, this is another trojan horse of a bill attempting to wedge gender identity onto the statute book - at a time when the public are finally aware of the harm this dose to various groups - especially children.

I'm eagerly looking forward to seeing how the definition of "conversion therapy" is worded to include 'unacceptable' practices such as talking therapy (dissuading someone) and physical interventions (eg aversion treatment) but at the same time excluding 'acceptable' practices such as talking therapy (affirming gender identify) and physical interventions (cross-sex hormones, surgically removing healthy body parts).

Has such a definition been circulated yet?

There are so many issues with this.
Firstly that they would have to actual define what trans people are and not use the troublesome umbrella BS that they have at the moment.
What are they going to include under conversion therapy? Is asking 'are you sure' going to get you into trouble.

We know about the high numbers of de-transitioners how is this going to affect and support them.
Are the numbers of lesbians that must like "female penises" included in the sexual assault/rape figures that stonewall has put forward.

I am astounded that given the shit that stonewall is in and the problems that they have caused that they have the gall to demand/put forward anything.
And the absolute audacity to even say the last bit about how we must all talk to each other to move forward is just so tone deaf.

Baroness Richardson has written to him to take him up on his offer to talk - she has invited him to meet her at the house of lords.

Baroness Nicholson?

Oops yes sorry

I have no confidence at all that these people won't see vagueness and opacity in legislation as plus points.

He'll be too scared of her to show up! 😆

Well you can't subject people to unwanted talk therapy or prayer either.

And true conversion therapy isn't acceptable by medical organizations.

It's not necessary legislation which makes it bad practice.

If 10% of the 2000 surveyed had experienced some form of ‘exorcism’ practice that’s 200 people. If there are approx 1.5 million LGB people (excluding T) as taken from the last census, this would produce an estimate of 150,000 people in England and Wales experiencing some form of exorcism practice - that seems remarkably high.

Simon Blake, chief executive at Stonewall, said their research showed a ban needed to be brought in "as quickly as possible."

As quickly as possible, eh? No sinister motives there, I'm sure...

These charlatans will try anything to shove self-ID into law.

I sent an email to my MP a few months back asking him to not support any attempt to bring a conversion therapy ban law in and I never had a response from him.
I included a link to a story from Australia about a father who's young 10 year old daughter was claiming to be a boy in a girls body. Through talking to her he was able to help her, he was able to get to the bottom of what was troubling her and she decided not to start the treatment.

The article was about 3 years after that and she was now a happy young teenager, or as happy as teenagers get, and had forgotten all about being a boy.
I sent a link of the article to my MP because I hoped to show him that if they brought a conversion therapy ban in the chances are the action of this loving father would be considered illegal because of it.
Lets just hope it's dead in the water as far as the government is concerned but for Stonewall to take this up as their next cause is going to mean trouble. With all the zombies out there all to eager to bring in the next initiative, it's the next disaster looming on the horizon.

How do Stonewall differentiate between LGBT+ conversion therapy & LGB conversion therapy when the latter is what the "trans" pathway for children involves? Why is the former bad conversion therapy while the latter is good conversion therapy?

Stonewall's sudden, renewed push to silence conversation or discussion about what's influencing so many kids to believe they can or should 'transition' just happens to coincide with the big parental wake-up call about online Influencers that is Netflix's Adolescence, and the Stephen Ireland of Surrey Pride conviction, which I doubt the Guardian mentioned. Parents will be joining the dots - some boys are online listening to Andrew Tate, some boys listening to adult strangers encouraging them to dress as anime schoolgirls and chop their genitals off, some girls are so anxious about growing up alongside these Tate influenced boys they want to escape femaleness by crushing and cutting off their own breasts. And Stonewall is trying to get in there quickly to stop parents, doctors, the media, politicians, teachers, joining the dots and having this conversation.

Exactly. Very well said.

Related to this, but off topic, we need the government to stop kids having smartphones, support schools and parents that ban them, make it impossible for kids to access certain kinds of site (and I don't just mean porn), etc.

Realistically this would be law now if it focused on lesbian and gay conversion therapy. It’s the GI that makes it difficult. You can’t define it, at its heart it IS gay conversion therapy, and the research for the last bash at the bill explicitly condemned and proposed including open ended therapy for children (I think Spain may have actually done this but am looking to wiser and more knowledgeable Mumsnetters on this point). Of course no one should be exorcised, starved or isolated but in general GI conversion therapy is a nonsense that we cannot legislate on.

Labour are still planning on some kind of law.

A government spokesperson said: "Conversion practices are abuse - such acts have no place in society and must be stopped.
"We remain committed to bringing forward legislation to finally ban these abusive practices, starting with publishing the draft Bill later this session."

Given genderist questioning people like the Lord Chancellor and the Minister for Health are potentially involved in drafting it we shall see what it looks like. It maybe the law will be focused on religious stuff and leave the threat of banning therapy to one side. It may even be we can use the law to target the homophobic trend of transing gay youth. Labour also may be scared of a law which gets them into a fight with minority communities.

Stonewall are attempting to ensure the law works in their favour it doesn't have to be that way.

Labour Women's Declaration and others are pointing out the flaws in advance.
https://labourwomensdeclaration.org.uk/mp-briefing-conversion-practices-ban/

So lets see what happens. Remember the Irish government and SNP couldn't find a way of drafting this kind of law without major drawbacks and gave up.