Thread by @Bernard_Lane

"(Victoria's anti-conversion therapy bill), which could mean up to a decade in jail or fines of almost $10,000 for anyone found trying to suppress or change another person’s sexuality or gender identity, passed by 27-9 votes late on Thursday." 1/
theaustralian.com.au/nation/politic…

Not a surprise, given the numbers. More significant, I think, was hearing several Australian MPs literate in the Tavistock court ruling, risks to minors in "affirmative" gender clinics, questions of consent to gender transition, & the emergence of regretful "detransitioners".

In the debate, some MPs, notably Liberal Democrat David Limbrick, tried to tease out the logic & possible consequences of this use of coercive state power. What does it mean to "change or suppress" sexuality or gender identity? He worried aloud about real-world scenarios.

Victoria's Attorney-General Jaclyn Symes, given carriage of the bill, had some clear answers but often seemed unable to come to grips with obvious questions, as if the activist mantra that "LGBT people are not broken" should have been enough to sweep away any doubt or curiosity.

This was odd because she stressed the bill had been two years in preparation, & she had the key departmental official with her in the chamber to supply ammunition against sceptical cross-examination. She had the numbers to push the bill through, yet seemed on-edge & impatient.

Ms Symes was asked how the law might interact with medicalised gender change for minors -- a central issue for critics of these "LGBTQ" conversion therapy bans worldwide -- but she dismissed this with the bromide that the bill had nothing to do with current medical practice.

Before Thursday, I'd imagined very few MPs had been following the global gender clinic debate, & I was struck by detailed, informed & thoughtful speeches from MPs I'd been unaware of, eg Bev McArthur of the Liberal Party.
facebook.com/BevMcArthurMP/…

Covering gender clinics, you get used to the sounds of silence: people with expertise afraid to talk because activists (many not trans themselves) will make their lives hell. It can delude you into thinking hardly anyone grasps how contentious the gender identity project is.

Thursday's parliamentary debate is a reminder that after years of well-intentioned media coverage framing trans as a straightforward human rights imperative, many people have been thinking for themselves -- but biding their time before discussing any risks or conflicts in public.

December's High Court's ruling against the Tavistock clinic has supercharged a freer, more factual debate, & behind the scenes it is no doubt forcing a host of institutions & professions to think much more carefully about what they are doing or enabling.
bbc.com/news/uk-englan…

Maybe this helps explain the tone & content of the concerns raised by Victorian psychiatrists @ranzcp about the govt's conversion therapy bill, & also the last-minute discovery of civil libertarian risks by the peak legal professional body @yourLIV.

https://twitter.com/Bernard_Lane/status/1356864064698216449?s=20

The govt bill galvanised criticism from a remarkable range of groups including psychiatrists, @amavictoria, major religious orgs, radical feminists & the new @LGBAlliance_Aus. With a history of boosting youth gender clinics, @theage gave prominent coverage to the bill's critics.

If, as critics fear, the intent of the bill is to deepen the legal foundations of Queer Theory's self-declared "gender identity" & the "affirmative" medicalised model of youth gender clinics, the marketing stressed the politically safer idea of banning "gay conversion therapy".

But the image of prison for unethical practices that very few people would imagine to be current -- the govt has given no credible evidence of a problem today involving health professionals -- may have forced many people to do a deep dive into self-ID gender & puberty blockers.

In Thursday's debate, MPs spoke of the sheer volume of concern & feedback flowing through their electoral offices. The govt won the vote, as expected, but has it also alerted more people in the mainstream to the gender clinic debate? Now, that could be an awkward conversion.

Footnote: letters to the editor from The Australian today suggest that informed scepticism about the conversion therapy campaign is spreading. Some good comments also generated by coverage in @TheAge.

Here's one thoughtful comment on The Age article which reported concerns by psychiatrists & physicians. (There are quite a few comments showing confusion among readers used to this rather woke Melbourne media outlet's history of being oblivious to precisely such concerns.)

Australian Doctor @australiandr, which claims to be the country's "leading medical publication" & which would reach many GPs puzzled by the surge in under-18 gender dysphoria, has also covered the criticism of the bill by the Victorian branch of @ranzcp.

The article quotes @ranzcp Vic president Kerryn Rubin saying: “Ultimately, (the govt bill) could lead to (practitioners) either withdrawing from this vulnerable (LGBT) population or change the way they work to
offer a less-effective evidence-based treatment.”

Here are some medical practitioners' comments on the article ...

Yet the news report of Australia's taxpayer-funded media outlet @abcnews was silent on the fact that critics of the bill included psychiatric & medical bodies, the peak legal professional body, feminists & LGB people. Readers were only told of right-wing & religious concern.