Jump to content

London Pride 2023: A Long Wait or Another Broken Promise?


Drew Payne

471 views

spacer.png

They were dotted throughout the London Pride march. On all different types of banners and placards, some very professionally produced and others homemade but often more pithy. All of them demanding the same thing:

BAN CONVERSION THERAPY!

Every time I saw one, I would smile, partly to show my support and gratitude to the person carrying the banner, and partly to myself. To see the dangerous threat of conversion therapy so openly denounced by the LGBTQ community was so reassuring.

It was on the tube ride home, that the thought struck me, why the hell hasn’t it already been banned? Weren’t we promised that it would be?

Conversion therapy is described asan attempt to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity”. It has been deeply discredited and shown to be extremely dangerous and damaging to those who have experienced it. Back in July 2018, Theresa May promised to ban it. In July 2020, Boris Johnson said it was "absolutely abhorrent" and "[had] no place in this country". In May 2021, it was announced in the Queen’s Speech that the government planned to ban it, but only after consultation with “key stakeholders”. Then in March 2022, Johnson dropped any plans for a ban.  But the next month, April 2022, plans for a ban were back on. In June this year, we were told that all it needed was for Rishi Sunak to sign the bill and the ban would be law, but it is now July and he still hasn’t signed it. What is happening? Why is the government dragging its feet? Is it that difficult to ban conversion therapy?

Sasha Misra, associate director of communications at Stonewall, said: “Five years and four prime ministers later and we are still waiting for this ban to come to fruition. In the meantime, lives have continued to be ruined while these damaging attempts to ‘cure’ LGBTQ+ of being themselves remain legal.”

But the ban would only be a partial ban and a very weak one, under the government’s proposals. It wouldn’t cover trans people and wouldn’t apply to anyone who “consented” to it. These is such huge loopholes and render the ban useless. The person only has to agree to it and/or say they are confused about their gender and the conversion therapy is legal. Conversion therapy preys on people who are vulnerable, confused about their sexuality and/or their gender, and this ban will do nothing to protect them.

I survived conversion therapy, as a late teenager, but it left me very damaged. My twenties were marred by PTSD, depression, suicide attempts and an inability to form relationships. I lost ten years of my life to the harm it caused me. Yet this ban would not have protected me because I contacted the ex-gay organisation and agreed to be “cured” by them, because I was so afraid of my sexuality back then. Therefore, it could be argued I consented to it. But my opinion alone, of the harm it does, should not be what policy is based on. It should be based on the evidence and the evidence against conversion therapy is huge.

D Haldeman identified that it causes poor self-esteem, depression, social withdrawal, and sexual dysfunction. Anna Forsythe’s research found that survivors of conversion therapy experienced 50% more mental health problems, twice as much depression, 25% more substance use, 50% higher rate of attempted suicide and 67% more experienced moderate to severe injury from those attempts, than someone who hasn’t been through it. But these are not the only, scientific evidence of the harm it does, and how useless it is. Here is a list of scientific and healthcare professional articles that identify the harm conversion therapy causes.

 

References that conversion therapy is harmful:

Beckstead & Morrow (2004)

Haldeman (2002)

Shidlo & Schroeder (2002)

Forsythe, Pick, Tremblay, et al (2022)

Human Rights Campaign (2021)

American Psychological Association (2009)

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry (2018)

American Medical Association (2019)

American Psychiatric Association (2018)

Committee On Adolescence (2013)

American Counselling Association (2017)

United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner (2019)

Independent Forensic Expert Group (2020)

Higbee, Wright & Roemerman (2022)

Wolf & Platt (2022)

Campbell & Rodgers (2023)

 

References that conversion therapy doesn’t work:

Beckstead (2012)

Adelson (2012)

American Psychological Association (2009)

American Psychiatric Association (2000)

American Psychological Association (2013)

Jacob (2015)

Drescher, Schwartz, Casoy et al (2016)

Haldeman (1994)

Conine, Campau & Petronelli et al (2021)

Kinitz, Salway, Dromer E, et al (2021)

 

This is by no way a comprehensive list of the evidence. It is the result of only a brief literature search, of only a few databases, carried out on a Sunday afternoon, on my laptop. A much more in-depth literature search would produce a much more comprehensive and much longer list of evidence. All the above references are from peer reviewed publications or professional bodies.

 

Countries that have banned conversion therapy

Brazil in 1999,

Samoa in 2007,  

Fiji in 2010,

Argentina in 2010,

Ecuador in 2014

Malta in 2016.

Uruguay in 2017,

Spain in 2017

Taiwan in 2018 

Germany in 2020,

Queensland State in Australia 2020, followed by Victoria State,

Chile, India and Canada in 2021, 

Since 2013, 20 states, two territories, and multiple local counties or municipalities in the United States.

If we have so much evidence and so many other countries before us have banned it, why hasn’t the British government already done so? I am sure someone will make the argument that legislating to ban conversion therapy isn’t easy. My reply would always be, it’s the government’s job to write and implement difficult legislation, and to do it well. They have all the resources to do it. But this government is now deliberately dragging their feet over this. I wonder if this is part of their “war on woke” attitude? This government’s strategy to blame and attack unpopular minorities, such as trans people, immigrants, and anyone else the Daily Mail newspaper doesn’t like, to try and appeal to their right-wing base voters. Whatever the reason, the government’s reluctance/refusal to ban conversion therapy speaks volumes about how little they value LGBTQ people.

I do know that if there was a quack therapy that tried to “cure” Evangelical Christians of their believes, but failed to do so and left its victims very damaged, or dead from suicide, then Evangelical Christians would be screaming for it to be banned. Would this government be so slow to ban it?

Drew.

 

PS. I do not like the term “conversion therapy”. It gives this dangerous and completely unethical bullying a veneer of respectability, implying that it is somehow medical/clinical. I prefer to call it “ex-gay”, which tells us how impossible it is.

  • Love 4

7 Comments


Recommended Comments

Fully agree!

Also, if religious people claim such torture was necessary, I can tell of a conversion that verifiably works: change religion!

  • Like 3
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, lawfulneutralmage said:

Fully agree!

Also, if religious people claim such torture was necessary, I can tell of a conversion that verifiably works: change religion!

People are still claiming it works. While researching this blog, I found two doggy papers that claimed it worked and didn't harm anyone. That really made me angry.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Zombie

Posted (edited)

Quote

 

under the government’s proposals it wouldn’t cover trans people

I suspect most MPs accept homosexual attraction is innate, whereas gender is a human construct, which is likely why the govt’s proposed legislation to ban “gay conversion therapy” only deals with sexuality

Edited by Zombie
  • Like 4
Link to comment
16 hours ago, Mikiesboy said:

Sadly it took us a long time in Canada.

Dressed up human experimentation.  Disgusting.

At least you've banned it in Canada, we haven't even done that.

It is human experimentation but an experiment where no one is even keeping records of the results but they are blaming the subjects when they get it seriously wrong.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
15 hours ago, Zombie said:

I suspect most MPs accept homosexual attraction is innate, whereas gender is a human construct, which is likely why the govt’s proposed legislation to ban “gay conversion therapy” only deals with sexuality

I do wonder if any of our governing MPs can make that distinction. The government is waging its "culture wars" to hide its failings, and I feel the conversion therapy ban is caught up in that. I also wonder how loud the Evangelical Christian lobby is. The loopholes in their ban, if they ever implement it, are so big that their ban would be useless., and that benefits Evangelical Christians.

  • Sad 2
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Drew Payne said:

I do wonder if any of our governing MPs can make that distinction. The government is waging its "culture wars" to hide its failings, and I feel the conversion therapy ban is caught up in that. I also wonder how loud the Evangelical Christian lobby is. The loopholes in their ban, if they ever implement it, are so big that their ban would be useless., and that benefits Evangelical Christians.


“governing MPs… ‘culture wars’”

No, this is not the govt’s ‘culture war’, this is a societal division which the govt has noted. And it should also be noted that the govt invoking the Scotland Act 1998 in order to block the Scotland Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) bill was a constitutional necessity because the Scottish govt was acting ultra vires (later upheld by the Supreme Court) and in the Commons vote all the opposition Labour MPs abstained - except for 11 Labour MPs who voted to support the govt (which indicates that societal division is reflected in Parliament). 

”the loopholes in their ban”

I haven’t seen the amended draft bill but my understanding is you were correct in your OP about there being one significant “loophole” regarding the freedom for adults to choose if they want to undergo sexuality “conversion therapy”. However, my view is that adults should generally have the right to choose how to live their lives. Also the law is in a mess: the landmark 1993 decision against individuals’ rights to submit to physical pain and minor injury in BDSM sex was only a 3 to 2 majority and has been widely criticised ever since (and conflicts with a later decision upholding this right in ‘heteronormative’ sex); consented cosmetic surgery can be both unnecessary and cause significant physical harm yet remains legal; circumcision for non-medical reasons permanently mutilates male genitals of infants/children who cannot give consent; and so on.

You could make similar arguments with  personal choice about drinking or against gambling - we know these cause significant harm (drinking alcohol ruins more lives than illegal drugs) and yet the Labour govt in the 2000s actually deregulated gambling prohibition laws knowing full well the extensive financial and mental harm this would cause to thousands of individuals and society - which it has done.

”Evangelical Christian lobby”

I haven’t seen voting details on religious lines for the House of Lords (which contains representatives from all major UK religions) or individual Commons MPs with strong religious convictions. The Prime Minister is, of course, a practising Hindu, so it would be interesting to see how he and other religious leaders/MPs in govt + opposition parties vote on religious matters.

  • Like 3
Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Our Privacy Policy can be found here: Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..