Ban Conversion Therapy promotes conversion therapy

The second reading of Brighton Labour MP Lloyd Russell-Moyles’ private members bill to ban conversion therapy is due on March 1st in the House of Commons.

Russell-Moyle has robustly defended the inclusion of ‘transgender identity’ in the bill, whilst meeting groups with concerns about what this means for children and young people, particularly those who are LGB. There are legitimate worries that a legislative ban would have a chilling effect on therapists and parents by criminalising anything other than the ‘gender affirmative’ approach towards children who declare a ‘transgender identity.’

Recently on Twitter/X Russell-Moyle said this:

“You say theres [sic] no evidence of conversion practice to/from transgender then point to a load of evidence of conversion practice to transgender. What is it? Are people being converted to being transgender and we need this bill or not? On your own terms transgender conversion needs protection.”

Are we really to believe that the proposed bill is designed to equally protect children and young people from being persuaded that they are not gay, but ‘born in the wrong body’? On paper, maybe. The draft bill defines ‘conversion practice’ as

“a course of conduct or activity, the predetermined purpose and intent of which is to change someone’s sexual orientation or to change a person to or from being transgender.”

This use of ‘both ways’ implies equal problems given equal weight. But a gay conversion therapy ban is not ‘both ways’; it is designed to protect gay people, not heterosexuals. Heterosexuals may also be protected, but this is not the problem the bill is designed to solve; it is gay conversion therapy that has the shameful history. Adding ‘transgender identity’ to a gay conversion therapy ban broadcasts to the world that there exists an identical problem for transgender people.

It is a messaging exercise, designed with the knowledge that not many people will check the facts. In this case it is the most cynical pairing of the LGB and the T to date, in a crowded field.

Force-teaming the LGB and T is a tactic commonly used by trans activists as soon as the subject becomes a tricky one to win over the public (toilets, sports, children etc.) Reverting to ‘LGBT’ does the job of hiding an agenda the public may find unpalatable by diverting them to thinking of it as an equivalent to gay rights: the issue is not about allowing men into the female sports category, it’s about ‘LGBT inclusion in sport.’

By combining the LGB and the T into one piece of legislation the draft bill takes this sleight of hand into criminal law.

Not only is there no evidence of transgender conversion therapy, there is, conversely, plenty of evidence to show the opposite is true. In our ‘affirm, affirm, affirm!’ culture, where even rapists must be called ‘she,’ the claim of ‘being transgender’ is meaningless, yet has achieved special protection status.

For the children of this generation, this is all they know. From a media and online world saturated with trans affirmation, to schools preaching the gospel of ‘gender identity’ as fact, a child who starts to believe they may be ‘trans’ will be love-bombed into certainty, both on social media and by adolescent peers desperate to show their social justice credentials.

There is no corresponding gay affirmation therapy. There is no gay affirmative approach and parents are not urged to affirm their child’s sexual orientation, with threats that they may commit suicide if they fail to do so. There is no gay affirming medical pathway: no gay affirming hormones for children and no gay affirming surgery offered to young people. There is no ‘gay journey’ children are encouraged to take.

It is not equal. All the persuasion and pressure on gay and lesbian young people who think they may be trans goes one way. A ‘trans’ conversion therapy ban sends precisely the opposite message.

If ‘conversion practice’ is defined as a course of conduct with a “predetermined purpose and intent” then the Ban Conversion Therapy campaign itself is guilty of promoting conversion therapy.

What other motive is behind the relentless messaging and marketing of ideas to impressionable children, through selling children the idea that your ‘gender identity’ is ‘your authentic self’ and that your sex is immaterial, merely ‘assigned’ at birth? Troubled teens are promised ‘trans joy’ and ‘trans euphoria.’ They are told that anyone who does not affirm their ‘gender identity’ is transphobic and that this is conversion therapy. All the organisations supporting this campaign employ this messaging to children. All of them promote the ‘gender affirmative’ approach.  

Stonewall’s 2015 schools guide states:

“When a young person comes out it is important to reinforce that they can be themselves and encourage them to feel positive about who they are.”

Breakout Youth’s statement on conversion therapy says:

“We believe that the United Kingdom should follow suit and actively aid in the abolishment of an outdated mindset, that believes a person’s gender identity or sexual orientation are anything other than their true and authentic self.”

The flawed 2020 conversion therapy and gender identity survey asserts:

“Current research indicates that when working with gender diverse youth, an affirming approach is best and can create effective space to allow gender diverse people to be themselves.”

GLADD UK medical schools charter includes this in its list of pledges:

“Ensuring that curricula include an awareness of ‘conversion therapy’, its harms and the importance of working with LGBTQ+ patients to respect and affirm their gender and/or sexual identity”

There has never been such an aggressive marketing campaign targeting children, with the full knowledge that in the past, in the time before they were bombarded with messages about ‘gender identity,’ a majority of these children grew up to be gay.

The homophobia of the trans movement began by redefining gay people out of existence. Stonewall says ‘homosexuality’ is an old-fashioned medical term and to be gay means being attracted to people of the same ‘gender’, not sex. Men are now ‘lesbians.’ Girls can be ‘gay men.’ Trans and LGBT groups have done a good job of convincing children that ‘gay’ doesn’t really exist, while ‘trans’ is a real thing.

The LGB Alliance was set up precisely because there are no other charities now who exclusively advocate for and work to protect the rights of gay, lesbian and bi young people.

Russell-Moyle says “This bill will not support “affirming” or “questioning/exploratory” care it will give everyone protection.” Of course it will support “affirming” care, why else would all the gender affirmative, sex-denying, homophobic organisations demand it?

In the face of this, why should parents not have the “predetermined purpose and intent” of trying to prevent their child by any means possible from going down a route that leads to unnecessary and experimental medical intervention? It is what any caring parent would do. Will the bill criminalise them, as has happened in the state of Victoria by means of a similar conversion therapy bill?

The biggest threat to the trans juggernaut over the past few years has come from so-called ‘gender critical’ people who understand the reality of biological sex. If anyone is in doubt about which belief a ban would legally support, The Queerness spelled it out in 2017 in their response to the first bill proposed by government:

“Just as it is wrong to tell someone who is gay, lesbian or bisexual that they should be heterosexual, so it is wrong to tell someone who is trans that they should be cisgender.”  

Therapists Against Conversion Therapy and Transphobia clarify this explicitly in their response to the UKCP’s recent position statement on therapists who hold ‘gender critical’ views:

“…we urge UKCP to reflect on how a ‘gender-critical’ therapist could reasonably, ethically, and legally be able to offer psychotherapeutic support to trans, non-binary and gender-questioning people.”

“We would like to remind UKCP that, as a signatory of the Memorandum of Understanding on Conversion Therapy (MoU, 2022), you are already bound to an ethical stance on working with gender diversity.”

There you have it, clear as day. ‘Gender critical’ belief is akin to conversion therapy; not reasonable, not ethical, and soon to be perceived as not legal if a conversion therapy ban does what the activists want it to do, which is to frighten people into suppressing their heretical beliefs even more than they do now.

A conversion therapy bill that includes ‘transgender identity’ is a bill that protects a belief, not the people it purports to help. A key part of the messaging lies in its assumption that we are all believers.

In fact, if you don’t believe in the new religion of ‘gender identity’, it is not possible for you to practice conversion therapy according to the terms of this bill. A non-believer cannot try to convert their child from a transgender to a ‘cisgender’ identity if they do not accept those terms. The concept of ‘conversion’ simply does not apply to parents exercising parental responsibility by bringing their child back to reality against a backdrop of ideological indoctrination.  

The inclusion of the words from/to does nothing to protect the children who would have grown up to be gay or lesbian if they had not been indoctrinated into this belief from an age before they even know what ‘sexual orientation’ means.

Russell-Moyles’ bill would be a ban that pretends to protect gay people while taking away with the other hand the small amount of protection these children currently have and strengthening and consolidating the approach that harms them. A bill to ban gay conversion therapy? We just have to remember that in trans world everything means its opposite.

This Post Has 7 Comments

  1. charles lewis

    Russell-Moyles is either a moron or fundamentally evil. Moronic to think that the novel theory of gender identity is anything other than a a narcissistic charade of imagination or fantasy. Evil to be so keen to convert children , without argument or gentle exploration of other possibilities, to a twilight life of endless medication in an irreversibly mutilated body with limited sexual function. And beyond that, evil, again, to align himself with political activists whose basic purpose is to destabilise a generation of children and through them to weaken and finally destroy our society.

  2. Peter Jenkins

    Superb! Very simply put and strongly argued. ” in trans world everything means its opposite”.

  3. C Brunner

    Very lucid and crucial analysis, thank you!

  4. Jane Pritchard

    Thinking that “you are born in the wrong body” is not being “happy about yourself” is it?

  5. Elspeth Cooper

    This is superb, particularly pointing out how ‘it is the most cynical pairing of the LGB and the T to date, in a crowded field. ‘
    It passes comprehension that a gay man is putting so much time and effort into this…transing away lesbians and gays.
    Excellent mention of the connection to social justice movement.
    Thank you from an older lesbian.

  6. Mandy

    Thank you for providing clarity where confusion and madness exists.

  7. Sarah

    Always essential reading. I spent a long time reading your blog and then composed a knockout email to my MP in my own words (copy and paste doesn’t work as he has filtering software.
    Thanks as ever!

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.