In a recent parliamentary debate concerning the prohibition of conversion therapy practices, the discussion took an alarming turn as transphobia and concerns about gender-affirming care were raised. The debate, which took place on December 6th, revolved around the government’s stance on outlawing conversion therapy and the specifics of the proposed legislation. The discourse stemmed from numerous petitions on the topic and a private members’ bill introduced by backbenchers, aiming to ban practices that attempt to change or suppress a person’s sexuality or transgender identity.
The promised ban on so-called conversion therapy by the Conservative government in 2018, during Theresa May’s leadership, faced numerous delays and shifts in political leadership. At one point, the plans nearly languished or were dropped entirely before ultimately being reinstated with a notable shift away from being fully trans-inclusive.
Bury South MP Christian Wakeford, who switched from the government benches to Labour, passionately presented the motion, expressing disappointment in his former colleagues for what he viewed as a “betrayal” of the LGBTQ+ community. He asserted that banning all forms of conversion therapy is a moral imperative, emphasizing that it is not a matter of ideology or political correctness but a matter of fundamental human rights.
However, opposition to the ban emerged from Alba Party leader Neale Hanvey and Scottish National Party MP Joanna Cherry, both known for their gender-critical views. The debate then veered away from conversion therapy to focus on anti-trans conspiracy theories related to gender-affirming care.
A Clash of Perspectives on Gender-Affirming Care
Neale Hanvey argued that the proposals to ban conversion therapy rested on a “bed of dangerous lies” and constituted an “assault on the sex-based rights of women, lesbians, gay men, and bisexual people.” He contended that the legislation would exacerbate rather than mitigate conversion practices and criticized the concept of “transing away the gay,” which some anti-trans groups have labeled as “modern” conversion therapy.
Hanvey went on to assert that LGBTQ+ organizations like Stonewall were erasing gay identities by endorsing transgender rights, linking this to the legislation’s push for gender self-identification and anti-hate crime measures.
Joanna Cherry echoed these sentiments, claiming that the rise in transgender identities was erasing gay identities. She pointed to statistics showing a significant number of teenagers referred for gender identity services identifying as girls, many of whom later identify as lesbian or bisexual. Cherry emphasized the importance of allowing young people the time to explore their identities before making irreversible decisions.
As the debate unfolded, it became clear that the discussions were not merely about the ban on conversion therapy but had evolved into a broader debate on trans rights and the intersection of gender and sexuality.
In this charged atmosphere, the debate highlighted the complex and contentious nature of LGBTQ+ issues, particularly when it comes to matters of identity, medical care, and individual rights. The path forward for the proposed ban on conversion therapy remains uncertain amidst these deeply rooted divisions.