How Both Gay and Trans Conversion Therapy Push Heterosexual Norms

I have a few reservations about the narrative presented in the 'Free to Change' survey. I am concerned that certain elements inadvertently reinforce narratives that advocate for gay conversion therapy –the transing of homosexuals. That unwittingly aligns with a number of trans rights activists narratives.
The narrative from trans activists and the Queer community often emphasizes the following points: the inherent validity of all sexual orientations and gender identities, the non-pathological nature of these identities, concerns about the efficacy and ethics of change or suppression practices, and a history of strained relations with religious groups.
i.e. the mantras are:
- that no sexual orientation or gender identities are broken and in need of fixing.
- that no sexual orientation or gender identity constitutes a disorder, disease, illness deficiency, or shortcoming.
- that change or suppression practices are deceptive and harmful because they don't work.
- that groups, such as Christians have never denounced the harm that they have been caused in the past and wish those practices to continue i.e. ‘pray the gay away’.
It’s a powerful narrative and we saw politicians in Victoria during the Conversion Therapy Bill debates, for example brought to tears, part showmanship I’m sure, but also because of testimonies from LGB people whose harmful experiences were co-opted for the transgender movement. It’s true that the trans narrative is a mix of truth and distortion. Therefore, all the more reason for strict adherence to truth. There have been a number of lawyers that have looked at the report and considered using it, but because of the biased sample set it would not stand up in court. It is not representative of the whole picture.
While I understand the complexities surrounding discussions of gender identity and sexual orientation, I am concerned about how these topics are approached in this report and spin off groups that support its main ideas. Specifically, the conflation of homosexuality with transgenderism—as noted in the report [i]—it does not represent the perspectives of all LGB organizations or individuals who have nuanced views on these matters.
For example, groups like the LGB Alliance Australia, CoAL, Lesbian Action Group, LGB Defence and LGB Tasmania express concerns that the concept of gender identity calls for the erasure of same sex attracted people as a class. Nor does it relate to the experiences of many RODG parents whose children may be ‘transgender’ but are not gay. Nor does it align with the largest study on genetic investigation into sexuality that[ii] found that there is no single gay gene – as there is no one gene for most human behaviours - but rather the contribution of many small genetic effects scattered across the genome and the important role of the environment in shaping human behaviour, sexual or otherwise.
My concern is that this attitude harps back to the underlying reasons for gay conversion therapy, ‘homosexuality is subjective’ therefore one can alter a gay child’s or adult’s mind to make them straight. Today, trans activists also suggest that ‘gender identity’ is deeply felt (essentially subjective) but requires altering children’s bodies to adhere to a heterosexual or, most recently, non-binary appearance. I would strongly argue that either viewpoint is damaging to youth whether you agree that they are gay or not. Furthermore, it supports the last mantra: that groups, such as Christians have never denounced the harm that they have been caused in the past and wish those practices to continue i.e. ‘pray the gay away’.
Many LGB individuals may harbour distrust or dismissiveness towards Christian lobbies due to past negative experiences with various churches. Often, these experiences, though sometimes perceived as exaggerated or unrepresentative, have not been adequately acknowledged in discussions or reports like these. It's crucial to recognize the significant impact that LGB organisations have had in advocacy efforts to stop transgender conversion therapy (the social/medical/surgical transing of gay minors). Notably, it was the contributions from these LGB groups, rather than those from Christian groups, that played a key role in the postponement of debates on conversion therapy bans and self-identification policies this year.
Overlooking or misrepresenting such contributions can be seen as a form of disrespect, especially when considering the deep and lasting harm caused by issues like the sexual abuse scandals within the Catholic Church. These were particularly damaging not only because of the acts themselves but also due to the prolonged denial of such issues. Hence, acknowledging the full scope of harm and the contributions of all involved is essential for moving forward in a constructive and effective manner.
Although most would agree and support that anyone has the right to explore their faith, and as free agents make whatever choices they wish to make in life. Underpinning the report and the report’s narrative is this idea that something was broken in need of fixing for a person to be a homosexual – abuse, absent parenting etc only as the cause. It’s an attractive idea ideologically speaking for many Christians, the idea that to be born homosexual must be wrong, because ‘God doesn’t make mistakes’. Whether that’s true or not for the authors – that message is clear in the report, it's as much an ideological stance as is the trans narrative of one being ‘born in the wrong body’. Taking that stance bolsters their case which is also based on ideology. Ideology may be the reason and driver for why we fight, but it is not a platform that all on the same side can stand on.
The common ground that bears the weight of everyone is only evidence-based truth.
My point is not to delve into debates on ‘true trans’ or ‘homosexuality’.
Ultimately, if we are to foster constructive dialogue and effective policy-making, we must resist ideological conflations and focus instead on evidence-based truths that honor the distinct experiences of LGB individuals. Our fight against modern conversion therapy and harmful self-ID policies must be grounded in this truth, rather than ideological alignment, ensuring that no group’s narrative is used to diminish the lived realities of others.
If you have any questions on content, sources etc., please feel free to contact me on contact@aww.org.au , Catherine Karena or @KatKarena.
Comments