What is the deal with the Banning Conversion Therapy in Ireland campaign?

Sheeps

There have been many posts lately on social media about a campaign to ban conversion therapy and there are naturally plenty of people expressing their outrage that it is legal in Ireland. It would seem to be the latest big social issue facing this country and it has universal political support across the Dáil. The "Prohibition of Conversion Therapies Bill 2018" is currently in its' third stage of the Oireachtas and the bill would effectively outlaw the practice.

There isn't really anyone calling for this to be a protected practice. The only people who are really pushing this and showing their support are political parties. The outrage generated by these posts from people in response to the campaign seems to be based around at the fact that it's legal in Ireland rather than actual instances where conversion therapy has occurred. There are plenty of people campaigning making posts responding to quotes of arguments, never accredited to anyone, made by hypothetical advocates of conversion therapy or people against their campaign.

What is the deal with this nonsense? Is this just a branding exercise for political parties or is there some legitimate reason for this campaign? Does this stuff actually happen in Ireland, or is this "conversion therapy" just a disguise trying to outlaw some other practice that falls within a grey area of what could be perceived in a court as being a "conversion therapy", such as therapists or doctors not prescribing puberty blockers to children?

Donald Trump

The rugby lads will be going mad.






Two potential points missed after every try

Monkey arris

I suppose it's like them putting through that nobody could own a nuclear weapon or what ever that one was. Good to have the conversion therapy lunacy banned.

Sonics2k

It's simple really, it's an incredibly dangerous practice and has been shown to have severe impact on the mental health of young LGBT people, including links to an increase in suicide.

Even across the US of all places they're bringing in more and more regulations and even bans on it.

Sheeps

Sonics2k wrote: »

It's simple really, it's an incredibly dangerous practice and has been shown to have severe impact on the mental health of young LGBT people, including links to an increase in suicide.

Even across the US of all places they're bringing in more and more regulations and even bans on it.

I'm not arguing the merits of conversion therapy. I'm asking what is this a reaction to? The simple fact that it is legal is irrelevant if it doesn't happen here. Cannibalism is legal in Ireland, yet there isn't an urgent rush to outlaw it, because it doesn't actually happen.

Is it about making a statement? Is there some real risk of someone setting up a conversion therapy practice in Ireland? It just seems like a non-issue.

Gradius

More emperor's new clothes.

"Gravity isn't real" is the proclaimation, popularise it through public media, putting paramount emphasis on the attachment of emotion, then sit back as the lowest of foreheads take your proclaimation and run the campaign for you.

Later, add an invisible smock to the emperor's repertoire to gain support with the indoctrinated.

In a world where "love island" and twitter exist, you can convince many people of anything. Absolutely anything.

biko

Had to google it, I didn't even know there was such a thing.

Is the individual forced to undergo this therapy?

Can it be used to ban children from transitioning to other gender?

Quantum Erasure

I think there was controversy in Canada when they were bringing this in, something to do with the wording of the act and counselling of trans kids, JK Rowling tweeted something about it at the time...

Anyway the pdf of the Irish act can be found here
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/39/?tab=bill-text

In this Act—
“conversion therapy”—
(a) means any practice or treatment by any person that seeks to change, suppress
and, or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender
expression; and
(b) does not include any practice or treatment, which does not seek to change a
person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression, or
which—
(i) provides assistance to an individual undergoing a gender transition; or
(ii) provides acceptance, support and understanding of a person, or a
facilitation of a person’s coping, social support and identity exploration
and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions;

Sheeps

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

I think there was controversy in Canada when they were bringing this in, something to do with the wording of the act and counselling of trans kids, JK Rowling tweeted something about it at the time...

Anyway the pdf of the Irish act can be found here
https://www.oireachtas.ie/en/bills/bill/2018/39/?tab=bill-text

How do you "eliminate" a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression?

Quantum Erasure

Sheeps wrote: »

How do you "eliminate" a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression?

Conversion therapy, although results may vary....

Is this the St. George and the Dragon fable? After slaying the dragon of marriage equality, new dragons must be found and vanquished. After a while everything starts to look like a dragon.

There are professional activists whose livelihoods depend on there being a big problem that they must be paid to solve.

[Deleted User]

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Is this the St. George and the Dragon fable? After slaying the dragon of marriage equality, new dragons must be found and vanquished. After a while everything starts to look like a dragon.

There are professional activists whose livelihoods depend on there being a big problem that they must be paid to solve.

It's an issue that's been there for years... I would say it's more a case of banning ****ty parents from doing terrible things to their kids.

Donald Trump

Deleted User wrote: »

Is this the St. George and the Dragon fable? After slaying the dragon of marriage equality, new dragons must be found and vanquished. After a while everything starts to look like a dragon.

There are professional activists whose livelihoods depend on there being a big problem that they must be paid to solve.

A different George I think

Overheal

biko wrote: »

Had to google it, I didn't even know there was such a thing.

Is the individual forced to undergo this therapy?

Can it be used to ban children from transitioning to other gender?

Very much a thing in the US and, given the era we’re finding ourselves in where there seems to be a growth in popular far right thinking, not unthinkable to believe it will be exported/imported. Used in other countries too naturally. The individual doesn’t necessarily need to be a volunteer to those who practice it afaik. Sure could see it employed against children with trans identity with or without their consent. Whether it’s a priority for the Oireachtas or not isn’t for me to say, could see why it wouldn’t though without examples in Ireland

They probably don't call it "conversion therapy", but it stands to reason that if people think sexuality is a choice or a personality trait, it could be changed.

This article seems to confirm that: apparently there was an electro-shock therapy used in the north in the 1970s called aversion therapy (negative conditioning, as the psychologists say), and a Roman Catholic group has organised meetings in recent years involving some kind of prayer/support group for gay people to, I don't know what, pray it away?

I'd be very surprised if gay men and women in Ireland didn't experience some kind of religious intervention 30 or 40 years ago, intending to reform them, but I'm speculating there.

paw patrol

Sonics2k wrote: »

It's simple really, it's an incredibly dangerous practice and has been shown to have severe impact on the mental health of young LGBT people, including links to an increase in suicide.

Even across the US of all places they're bringing in more and more regulations and even bans on it.

so what though...if people voluntarily want to give it a shot
why shouldn't they?

The LBGT lobby has no bother with young people lobbing their cocks off and injecting themselves with life altering hormones into their bodies but somehow balk at the notion that somebody may want therapy to leave their club.
Both have severe impacts. yet one is deemed acceptable and one not.
odd that.

Gwen Cooper

paw patrol wrote: »

so what though...if people voluntarily want to give it a shot
why shouldn't they?

The LBGT lobby has no bother with young people lobbing their cocks off and injecting themselves with life altering hormones into their bodies but somehow balk at the notion that somebody may want therapy to leave their club.
Both have severe impacts. yet one is deemed acceptable and one not.
odd that.

They very rarely go for it because they "voluntarily want to give it a shot". Usually it's either the church or their parents convincing them that it's the only way.

Plus, since you decided to compare conversion therapy to hormone therapy, aside from the fact that HT is, unlike conversion therapy, a legitimate medical treatment, you should also know that before a trans person gets access to that, they usually have to go through numerous assessments with medical professionals to confirm that this really will be the best course of action for them. That doesn't happen with conversion therapy, which is usually very hush-hush.

paw patrol

paw patrol wrote: »

so what though...if people voluntarily want to give it a shot
why shouldn't they?

Somehow I suspect you'd change your tune if there had been any attempt by gay-rights groups to intervene to reform young people into being gay.

jam_mac_jam

Conversion therapy is obviously horrible but I don't think it's an issue in Ireland.

Sounds more like us importing the politics and problems of the US rather than worrying about our own problems.

Also while I don't agree with conversion therapy where do you draw the line. Are you allowed to seek therapy as an adult for sexual interests that you don't want to have?

I wonder about the logic of legalisation for every little thing. But yes obviously no therapy that is not voluntary should be carried out.

paw patrol

Gwen Cooper wrote: »

They very rarely go for it because they "voluntarily want to give it a shot". Usually it's either the church or their parents convincing them that it's the only way.

Plus, since you decided to compare conversion therapy to hormone therapy, aside from the fact that HT is, unlike conversion therapy, a legitimate medical treatment, you should also know that before a trans person gets access to that, they usually have to go through numerous assessments with medical professionals to confirm that this really will be the best course of action for them. That doesn't happen with conversion therapy, which is usually very hush-hush.

I was very clear that it had to be voluntary. The rest of your post is really arguing about something i didn't say.

one point - What is legitimate and what isn't legitimate changes with the seasons and you know that anyway. I'm not sure saying something is legit means its' its good and proper.

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Somehow I suspect you'd change your tune if there had been any attempt by gay-rights groups to intervene to reform young people into being gay.

No need to suspect anything anymore . the answer is yes I would.

Gay people are people, I treat them as I would all others but not so much love for the LGBT lobby. Huge difference.

The cornerstone of my point was "voluntary" . That was clear.

Salvation Tambourine

Does this make it illegal for a professional (doctor, therapist etc) to recommend that someone does not go through with a gender change?

I don't fully understand what is being said in the bill. The bold bit seems to imply that they must only facilitate the process in a supportive way? I could be wrong though

conversion therapy”—
(a) means any practice or treatment by any person that seeks to change, suppress
and, or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender
expression; and
(b) does not include any practice or treatment, which does not seek to change a
person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression, or
which—
(i) provides assistance to an individual undergoing a gender transition; or
(ii) provides acceptance, support and understanding of a person, or a
facilitation of a person’s coping, social support and identity exploration
and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions;

Nokotan

Nokotan wrote: »

Does this make it illegal for a professional (doctor, therapist etc) to recommend that someone does not go through with a gender change?

I don't fully understand what is being said in the bill. The bold bit seems to imply that they must only facilitate the process in a supportive way? I could be wrong though

Conversion therapy does not work and is more likely to cause harm. Just because a medical professional might try it does not make it any more okay.

Salvation Tambourine

Deleted User wrote: »

Conversion therapy does not work and is more likely to cause harm. Just because a medical professional might try it does not make it any more okay.

That's not what I was querying. The traditional understanding of conversion therapy, where someone's sexuality and identity is suppressed as it's seen as a bad thing does not work and shouldn't be used.

Conversion therapy in this bill seems to suggest that it may be illegal to not be fully supportive or facilitate someone's desire to change their gender from the quoted section below from the bill. Like I said, I could be misunderstanding what it means but it looks less straightforward than what most would assume conversion therapy is.

provides acceptance, support and understanding of a person, or a
facilitation of a person’s coping, social support and identity exploration
and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions

Gwen Cooper

Nokotan wrote: »

That's not what I was querying. The traditional understanding of conversion therapy, where someone's sexuality and identity is suppressed as it's seen as a bad thing does not work and shouldn't be used.

Conversion therapy in this bill seems to suggest that it may be illegal to not be fully supportive or facilitate someone's desire to change their gender from the quoted section below from the bill. Like I said, I could be misunderstanding what it means but it looks less straightforward than what most would assume conversion therapy is.

That bit you quote is from the interpretation part of the bill, where they explain what means what. This is how they explain what is or isn't conversion therapy:

conversion therapy”—
(a) means any practice or treatment by any person that seeks to change, suppress
and, or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender
expression; and
(b) does not include any practice or treatment, which does not seek to change a
person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression, or
which—
(i) provides assistance to an individual undergoing a gender transition; or
(ii) provides acceptance, support and understanding of a person, or a
facilitation of a person’s coping, social support and identity exploration
and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions;

So if we break it down:

Conversion therapy means any practice or treatment by any person that seeks to change, suppress and, or eliminate a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression.

Conversion therapy does not include any practice or treatment, which does not seek to change a person’s sexual orientation, gender identity and, or gender expression, or which provides assistance to an individual undergoing a gender transition or provides acceptance, support and understanding of a person, or a
facilitation of a person’s coping, social support and identity exploration
and development, including sexual orientation-neutral interventions.

So basically they are explaining that conversion therapy is looking to change/suppress/eliminate someone's sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

Conversion therapy isn't something that supports someone's sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

Hope that makes sense.

Salvation Tambourine

Gwen Cooper wrote: »

So basically they are explaining that conversion therapy is looking to change/suppress/eliminate someone's sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

Conversion therapy isn't something that supports someone's sexual orientation or gender identity/expression.

Hope that makes sense.

Yeah, that helps, cheers.

Gradius

"I believed I was an Ostrich, therefore I was an Ostrich; One Humanoids Story of Overcoming Reality, Plus More Fairy Tales."

"Fiction at its finest, 5 out of 5" Gardeners Compendium

"I couldn't pick it up," Darwinist Daily

"Didn't make any sense, loved it" Plebeian Gazette

Gentlemanne

The amount of cognitive dissonance in here in only two pages is incredible -

"conversion therapy not a real problem, there shouldn't be any legislation like this"
simultaneously
"trans healthcare is an issue, I think the current laws should be changed"

Gradius

Gentlemanne wrote: »

The amount of cognitive dissonance in here in only two pages is incredible -

"conversion therapy not a real problem, there shouldn't be any legislation like this"
simultaneously
"trans healthcare is an issue, I think the current laws should be changed"

That's the up-is-down of this entire fictional universe. Contradictions left and right, you're a bee if you want to be, but not a wasp, because reality is a buffet from which I pick and choose.

Gwen Cooper

Gradius wrote: »

That's the up-is-down of this entire fictional universe. Contradictions left and right, you're a bee if you want to be, but not a wasp, because reality is a buffet from which I pick and choose.

You know, you just just say that you don't understand gender identity and ask questions instead of just dropping hints and hoping that someone will explain it to you.

Gradius

Gwen Cooper wrote: »

You know, you just just say that you don't understand gender identity and ask questions instead of just dropping hints and hoping that someone will explain it to you.

Allowing some child-like intellect, the type required for fantasy, to attempt an explanation of the impossible would be patronising of me.

The loch Ness monster has more reality attached to it.

Gwen Cooper

Gradius wrote: »

Allowing some child-like intellect, the type required for fantasy, to attempt an explanation of the impossible would be patronising of me.

Oh yes, my apologies, I forgot that you're more intelligent than any of us lowly peasants here.

Gradius wrote: »

The loch Ness monster has more reality attached to it.

I see. And how did you come to this conclusion? Based on an intensive research into both gender issues and the Loch Ness Monster, I hope?