Striking a balance in a local authority

I increasingly think this is the best way to get this nonsense stopped - by pointing out the data protection violations. Compliance with public sector equality duties means that you may need to monitor sex, so the question becomes “what is your sex”. There’s no reason at all to be collecting gender identity/stereotypes bullshit.

^^This.

I was looking at a public building chart (pre lock down, when this sort of thing actually happened) which wanted visitors to an exhibition to indicate one of a massive list of gender identities.

Really left me wondering: why do they need to know how the exhibition appeals to people who like high heels, skirts and long hair for example? How is that usefully going to inform their planning? What do people with high heels and long hair really want in an exhibition?

Of course it boils down to: look at our pretty chart proving our diversity appeal to tick the box to qualify for the next lot of funding.

Unless it's relevant to the job (very unlikely) I don't see why they should ask any of these questions.

They will be collecting the data so they can proclaim how many people who aren't heterosexuals, happy with their own identity, they are interviewing/hiring - and, who knows, possibly giving interviews to people who tick the more "interesting" boxes (being incredibly cynical here - I know they're not supposed to do that). I currently work for a local authority that is becoming increasingly - and worryingly - woke. Their job adverts now include a line about wanting LGBT people to apply. Why? Of all employers, LAs are some of the least likely to discriminate on any basis, so why do they have to practically beg certain groups to apply for jobs? And you can be sure that they are mainly aiming at the T in that group.

If those questions are optional, then the wording needs to explicitly state that and allow you to leave the answer blank - prefer not to say as an option isn’t really good enough.

Diversity monitoring questions are completely optional. That is why there is a prefer not to say option for each question. It would be preferable to be able to leave the whole thing blank.

The info on gender queer is no more relevant to your employment than emo or goth would have been in the past.

You can’t collect personal data just because - you’ve got to have a need for that data.

It's like they know about the EA, so they have to ask about/collect data on sex, but they know just asking about sex will upset the TRAs so they add a few different genders in the sex category, and then they also want to be totally cool innit and so add the second data collection point.

Thus resulting in a dump of data that isn't really worth collecting because you can't really do anything with it.

I increasingly think this is the best way to get this nonsense stopped - by pointing out the data protection violations. Compliance with public sector equality duties means that you may need to monitor sex, so the question becomes “what is your sex”. There’s no reason at all to be collecting gender identity/stereotypes bullshit.

There are only two sexes - male and female.

What is the purpose of collecting this data in the first place? That's the main consideration. It isn't a validation or virtue signalling exercise.

Is there an actual need to know factual, biological sex? This includes data such as medical or a census that will be used to plan sex class based resources. Someone's need for prostate screening for example doesn't change with their preferred identity descriptor.

Is there an actual need to know variety of labels/number of service users who identify as trans/NB/GF? Usually to assess reach of service, inclusion targets for hard to reach population and to plan provision that is not very large scale and based on sex class.

Obvious solution:

Biological sex as recorded at birth if needed for that specific data:
and
Gender identity in addition if needed for that specific data: all options or open text box

Job done.

But Melia and others make a very good point - why do they need to collect data on gender identity at all?

It's not to have a coherent dataset. It is virtue signalling and designed to normalise - 'if the library suggests it's ok to tick a genderqueer box, maybe we should have one on our forms...'

twitter.com/zeno001/status/1274758091284910086

You're not the only one pointing this out, and it's not just your LA.

But, I guess overall the use of the term 'sex' is what surprised and pleased me, to an extent

I would have felt the same, if they hadn't demonstrated the fact that they don't actually know what a sex is, gender fluid and non binary are definitely not sexes, they're identities.

If they ask about sex then they can't put gender fluid as an answer! It would be male / female / intersex / prefer not to say

People who have intersex conditions are all male or female. They may like anyone else 'prefer not to say'.
There is no basis to include this as an option.

If they need to know your sex, they should specify "biological sex" and offer the choice of male or female. They are mixing up sex and gender. If they need to know your chosen gender, they should give a choice of the most popular ones, plus "other".

The more I think about this, the more furious I get. There are REAL material problems in terms of hiring practices to be addressed.

It is useful to gather data on how a LA is managing to attract female candidates, as well as male, BAME candidates as well as Caucasian, working class candidates as well as middle and upper class candidates. This is because these groups are under-represented in some workplaces (over-represented, of course, in the lower paid workplaces).

But there is no historical effort to keep genderqueers or non-binaries from employment. I mean, sure, there's a dress code, but that's not genderqueer specific. Where is the structural inequity preventing genderqueers from doing anything? Non-existent, because they only invented themselves five minutes ago,.

This nonsense detracts from real issues of import.

If they ask about sex then they can't put gender fluid as an answer! It would be male / female / intersex / prefer not to say

Then a do your gender identity match the sex given above?

However, it still won't help because of all the male transgender people who would tick female and yes as they insist on complete capitulation at all times

Why does anyone need to gather data on 'genderqueer' representation? It's a meaningless buzzword label. It makes about as much sense as asking if someone's sex is arglebargle.

What material problem is there that identifying the number of arglebargles applying for a job helps address?

They need to be provided with a copy of the EA2010 they are in violation of, and advised they may have been the victim of a fraud.
Gender identity is not a protected characteristic in the EA. Sex and gender reassignment are.
I do not think they are allowed to ask about gender reassignment though they are allowed to ask about sex, but not the way they did.

That is not a balance. That is stupid.

Here's how I would write the questions:

1. What is your sex? Female/male/prefer not to answer
2. Do you identify as transgender? Y/N

As they stand, the questions are anti-science, illogical garbage bullshit.