COMMENTARY: Some jurisdictions are trying to ban counseling for gender-identity issues, right alongside bans on sexual-orientation ‘conversion therapy.’
Jennifer Roback Morse February 6, 2024 at National Catholic Register
You may be aware of the worldwide attempts to ban “conversion therapy” that “intends to change or suppress sexual orientation.” But did you know that some jurisdictions are now slipping in the phrase “or gender identity” into these laws?
For instance, Scotland is considering banning any therapy that “intends to change or suppress sexual orientation or gender identity.” The Australian province of Victoria in 2021 used this language, as well. The addition of these three seemingly innocuous words, “or gender identity” compounds the problems of these already-problematic therapy bans.
In the first place, the concepts of “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” are not precise analogues of each other, even using the terms as understood and promoted by their sexual-revolutionary proponents. According to the American Psychological Association, “sexual orientation” “refers to an enduring pattern of emotional, romantic and/or sexual attractions” and is widely claimed to be an “inborn” “immutable” trait. The APA further states that “gender identity refers to a person’s internal sense of being male, female or something else” and that transgender people are “persons whose gender identity, gender expression or behavior does not conform to that typically associated with the sex to which they were assigned at birth.”
In its explanation of its new law prohibiting therapy that “intends to change or suppress sexual orientation or gender identity,” Australia’s Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission, describes “gender identity” as: “what you feel and understand about who you are as a person.”
Wait a minute. Feelings are changeable, even volatile. Our self-understanding can certainly change. It is impossible in principle for a concept as subjective as gender identity to be “inborn” or “immutable,” as sexual orientation is said to be.
The concept of “gender identity” sees the sex of the body as not very substantial and potentially “fluid.” By contrast, the concept of “sexual orientation” presupposes the importance of the sex of the body: A “gay” man insists on a male sex partner, not a masculine woman. A “lesbian” woman insists on a female sex partner: An effeminate man will not suffice.
For transgender people, the sexual-revolutionary narrative prescribes medical interventions to make their bodies align with their feelings. By contrast, the very same narrative encourages people having a not-strictly-heterosexual orientation to accept their patterns of thoughts and feelings as reflecting their “true selves.” They must not intervene to change themselves. Even talking with someone about their options is forbidden. That’s what the ban on so-called “conversion therapy” is all about.
The major alternative to medical interventions on transgender persons is “watchful waiting.” Give young people time to see whether the misalignment of their bodies and their feelings resolves itself. Several European countries have backed off from immediate and aggressive medical interventions for young people in favor of this “watchful-waiting” approach.
About the Ruth Institute
The Ruth Institute is a global non-profit organization, leading an international interfaith coalition to defend the family and build a civilization of love.
Jennifer Roback Morse has a Ph.D. in economics and has taught at Yale and George Mason University. She is the author of The Sexual State and Love and Economics – It Takes a Family to Raise a Village.
To schedule an interview with Dr. Morse, contact media@ruthinstitute.org.
Refute the top 5 Gay Myths With Our Ebook & Get Our Newsletter
Join us on Locals for exclusive content*!
*Censorship free!
Get all of our video content on Rumble*
*Also censorship free
One Response