Times article: Question about sex to be voluntary for next census

That's v interesting hinged

I would be keen to hear if any uk groups representing intersex people have commented on the census change, or if the sex question has caused them issue/concern in the past

Just in regards to intersex:

The 2015 report on intersex human rights by Organisation Intersex International Europe and the European Region of the International Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans and Intersex Association stated that intersex should not be listed as a 'third sex'.

A third sex positions intersex people as having bodies that are unclear or unknown which is deemed to cause social isolation and pathologise their bodies - leading to cosmetic 'normalising' surgeries and other intervention on infant bodies. Instead of being unclear, intersex individuals who are male or female variants. In this regard there's a lot of overlap in the disability rights movements - particularly as OLL are peer-led.

From their stats, most intersex people identify as a man or a woman and do not have an incongruent gender identity to their sex variant bodies. Of course some intersex people do identify as trans, but gender identity is separate from the material reality of a sexed body.

There is no question that an aim of this and other projects (passports, GRA) is to obliterate sex as a class, or a "protected characteristic" as the Equality Act has it

It won't be an aim for all - I am sure most in the ONS are trying to be as inclusive as possible and make sure that nobody feels bad - but it's embedded for sure

Indeed MrsPestilence.

Jane Fae's in the Mail (thanks @Mumsnut for sharing on the board).

www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4964536/JANE-FAE-proposal-make-stating-sex-optional.html

So Jane believes the proposal to remove mandatory sex question is "poppycock". Jane proposes instead a three question approach:

Sex M/F ( or gender as Jane would choose to answer this)
Is this the gender assigned at birth Y/N
Do you not identify as a man or woman? Y/N

This is even more complicated than the two question option ONS tested, which when tested "there arose some confusion"

It also confuses sex and gender AGAIN and ignores intersex people who allegedly are a core group who will benefit from the census change

Feck is 36% of the population transgender now?

Or was their sampling biased?

Got the link thing wrong...

Gender dysphoria

This is very scary indeed. As someone says above, Donkeythingy I think, the activists are setting out to erase gender and sex differences totally. The no offense culture means that no-one can stand up and say no without being hounded. The world is nuts and the West has sown the seeds of its own destruction through corruption of the nuclear family and desire to make everyone's choice equal even though clearly outcomes are not equal.

Read this article [http://quillette.com/2017/10/06/misunderstanding-new-kind-gender-dysphoria/ Gender dysphoria] and contemplate what disaterous outcomes are being pushed on young vulnerable people by activists with an agenda.

Yes, precisely.

They are going to be even more under researched when ovarian cancer affects 1 in 150 peoples rather than 1 in 75 women.

I think also valid to add "intersex person" as a third choice of noun.

They should find out if intersex people would want that adding and do it. Not 'other'.

That noun/adjective distinction is good.

I was doing a heart health survey this morning on Menopause Matters. Women are still more likely to die from a first heart attack than men [sigh].

YY and there are conditions which primarily affect women that are underresearched.

Attendees at that workshop did include Gender Identity Research and Education Society (GIRES), Stonewall, Mermaids

Oh yes I bet they did. FFS.

I think also valid to add "intersex person" as a third choice of noun.

How about classifying people like this:

1. Noun: Woman or Man (i.e. what biological sex are you)
2. Adjective: Female or Male (i.e. your gender - how you identify or describe yourself)

So while the majority might describe themselves as a female woman or a male man, a man who identifies as a woman would be a female man. A woman who identifies as a man would be a male woman. This would correctly identify the sex, but would also indicate those feel their identity does not match their sex. A non-binary person, or anyone who thinks gender is a tool of the patriarchy :) would be man or woman and then "neither".

The first layer of identification cannot be changed but is kept on the record and relevant only for the situations where biology/physiology matters : medical, recording of crime, women only spaces, sport?, and for the aristocracy inheriting titles (cough). For all other purposes gender is used, and frankly there should be very few situations where one would need to differentiate on the basis of gender, so should be largely irrelevant.

I do realise that this would be totally unacceptable to TRA's. But this is kind of how my kids see it (with a trans sibling), and it makes sense to me.

I do absolutely support trans people being included in appropriate statistics, btw. Just not at the expense of counting male and female sexed people (and intersexed!)

Yes absolutely. It is not beyond the wit of woman to work out a set of questions that distinguishes between sex at birth and gender you identify with.

For the vast majority of the population that shouldn't be confusing.

Why are we deleting really important valuable information for around 1% (if that) of the population?

The ONS tested 3 options for the question:

sex (m/f) (unchanged from previous census)
"cisgender" testers had no problem
Trans participants expressed confusion about the subject of the “Sex” question; either thinking the “Sex” question referred to biological sex, or that it was indirectly asking about gender identity. Either way, they expressed negativity about the question and confusion about how to answer....[this q] was considered to be irrelevant, unacceptable and intrusive, particularly to trans participants, due to asking about sex rather than gender. The lack of response options for intersex and non-binary people could make it difficult to answer

sex (m/f/other) "allowing varied interpretation of sex or gender"
caused trans participants to be unsure whether they were being asked about their biological sex (when “Other” would be intersex) or their gender (when “Other” would be open to them). This led to inconsistencies in responses.
"cisgender" testers had no problem

two Stage: sex (m/f/other) and gender identity (how you think about gender identity: m/f/in another way)
These q's led to differences of opinion as to the use of the word “identity”. There were cisgender and trans participants who did not understand why there were two questions

So, given that feedback, you can see why they have extended their project. Noone knows the difference between sex and gender.

AFAIK no intersex.people tested this, although they are mentioned as being a reason for the change, nor are intersex groups mentioned in the stakeholder workshop to kick off the project.

Attendees at that workshop did include Gender Identity Research and Education Society (GIRES), Stonewall, Mermaids

No womens groups in any consultation I've seen so far

I do absolutely support trans people being included in appropriate statistics, btw. Just not at the expense of counting male and female sexed people (and intersexed!)

I don't see why they can't ask sex (ie what is on Birth Certificate) and Gender Identity if you have one separately.

Ridiculous. Both questions should be mandatory. The state is so large in Britain that it's ability to operate smoothly will be compromised, particularly if a lot of people refuse to provide sex.

Yes, because medicos don't recognise the symptoms in women.

WOMEN ARE NOT MEN!!

sorry for shouting .... But this is why we need granular data: about sex, about ethnicity, and all sorts of stuff.

I was doing a heart health survey this morning on Menopause Matters. Women are still more likely to die from a first heart attack than men [sigh].

Grrrr, I heard that as I was making breakfast & had to race to Twitter to point out that we are not "assigned a gender at birth" we are noted as either male or female (apart from the 1% or so intersex which is generally not diagnosed until later) and that gender is a socially constructed role.

But to do her justice, Jane Fae did say that she thought it was very necessary to have information about sex of the population in the census. But that if the gov't needed information about trans people, the census could ask people's sex, and then ask if their gender id was the same as that "assigned" [grrrrr] at birth.

Which seemed very sensible.

But AS USUAL a trans person is asked rather than a woman.

I'm old enough to remember the activism that went on about medical/health planning for women - pointing out that women's biology/physiology was not identical with men's - that the male body is not the default human body and that we may need to treat women with heart disease differently from men, etc etc etc.

The parallel is with ethnicity/race: there needs to be specific provision for black British people, especially men, around sickle cell anaemia. So we might think it would be useful to have an idea about people's ethnic heritage. And so on.

It's about knowledge & data, so we can plan, & so we can look after people.

Ah. Is it compulsory for ALL independent advice on gender issues to be provided by Y-chromosomed-persons, because they do wimmining so much better than mere females?

Thanks Eresh, I've done so!