What sex were you assigned at birth asks Covid Symptom Study

I went for an NHS drive through covid test today. To track progression of the disease, I was asked my ethnicity and gender....

And GRA requires meaningless things like that GRC holders must live in that gender until death, but provides no revocation process if people don’t actually do that, so it’s not really any kind of requirement at all.

There’s also no clear explanation of what it means to ‘live in a gender’. If getting pregnant & giving birth can be done when ‘living as a man’ then where on earth are the boundaries?

www.nhs.uk/sign-up-to-be-contacted-for-research

I totally missed a trick with this one. As we have said it asks volunteers about sex as registered at birth (catering to the political idea that is admin and can change legally via GRC) but which seems necessary as part of capturing sex accurately, because of the political zeitgeist we are in.

But the gender question only allows for matching or not matching that registration sex. There’s no ‘Gender is sexist, harmful and a political dogma that I don’t believe in’ option. Not even ‘i don’t know’ It takes some deciphering to know what to put.

I had to pick my gender fitting with my sex because otherwise I think they would have coded me as trans, but of course now they will code me as ‘cis’. I really object. Anyone know who is running this programme so i can get in touch with them?

The old Irish retort 'Ask me bollix' just sprang into my mind unbidden.

I love this.

Its ridiculous that they have to find phrasing to make people answer 'Sex:' honestly. And still a fair few will lie no doubt. Maybe some kickoff about it not recognising nonbinary identities or some such rubbish too

Intersex does seem to get viewed as a kind of sex blank slate which doesn't at all fit with the majority of conditions, like you say someone with X0 Turner's is obviously female and someone with XXY Klinfelters is male. It must be rare to have someone who doctors genuinely cant consider either male or female these days.

Also the obvious fact that the vast majority of transgender individuals are straightforward XX or XY gets forgotten completely.

Assigned sex at birth just sounds like something from a teen dystopia which maybe is why it's taken off so well amongst young people.

I was very shocked when my DD who seems to have got embroiled in this ideology told me that her friend with Turner's Syndrome was 'intersex'. She is very much female, with all the accompanying problems of having a chromosome condition which she has been bloody marvelous at dealing with all her life.

It is a creeping ideology that seems to take over everything it can coopt in its way. Once you blur the edges and think "oh well I suppose you could think about it that way", the boundaries are extended and go further, and those in their pathway that have been coopted will be the ones whose "right to be themselves" is lost and blurrred away, and with it the rights to fit their needs.

This is no doubt a stupid question but instead of saying 'assigned', can't they just ask what biological sex?

Your question isn’t stupid, SheepAndCow. What’s stupid is that even scientists are being coerced to obey the truth-twisting demands of the trans lobby. Some TWs are now claiming they were born female. Very few authorities have the integrity or courage to contradict them.

*actual, not actions

the term ‘sex assigned at birth’ is becoming completely normalised into everyday language,

I find Cwenthryth’s NHS questions on page 1 quite heartening. That (parts of?) the NHS appear to have moved on from/are resisting standard use of “assigned” is very good news indeed.

“Registered sex” or anything asking for current sex won’t work either due to the GRA, which conflates sex and gender, so that some people’s legal sex is considered to be different from their actions sex.

“Registered at birth“, or “recorded at birth“ would satisfy me until the point when we have moved so far beyond this nonsense that we can revert to simply asking “sex” again.

placemats "And he peed at birth. All over the midwife."

Hey midwife, I got this brill water pistol.

I can sort of understand sex assigned at birth when there is some sort of intersex condition, it's not obvious and maybe it turns out the wrong decision was made. Most people don't have a sex assigned at birth, it's a basic observation that's right most of the time.

And he peed at birth. All over the midwife.

My daughters were obvious. No penis.

Of course there then followed the cleaning of my babies following nappy changes. Two females and one boy.

But a bc should not be used to prove id anyway, anyone who accepts it is not heeding the warning on the bottom of every bc.

WARNING: A CERTIFICATE IS NOT EVIDENCE OF IDENTITY.

Intersesting. I have had to provide my birth cert for official things. Seen and verified by Commissioner for Oaths etc. However, getting someone else's birth cert and adopting their identity would be fraud, whereas there is now a route to altering one's own birth cert. That is not classified as fraud.

So, can the information on the birth register be changed because the person in question wants to be given a new identity (for whatever reason), I wonder? Name and sex.

A birth certificate is just a copy of the info on the birth register. It should not really be accepted as proof of identity. Anyone can apply for a copy of any birth certificate if they know the details. There have been stories of criminals obtaining birth certificates of deceased children to create a new identity.

Er, I searched and found the thread, but forgot to delete my last line. Excuse me, brain is a bit leaky this morning. Friday, eh?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3978623-900-sex-offenders-disappear-from-police-radar

There is a thread on here, somewhere, I'll see if I can find it.

Arse to all of this, I have just in a fit of pique scored out 'gender' and written in 'sex' on a form where I really oughtn't to have bothered. (Some battles are not worth taking on). It's the poor, harassed data gatherers that then deal with the aftermath, rather than the twonks at the top that have implemented these ideologically-driven fudges. And I don't want to give the admin staff grief.

I think I'll bin the whole bloody form and ask for another.

Gah.

Me too. Have you still got the link Cwenthryth?

It'd be interesting to know what the answer to 'why are we asking this question' on the gender question of Cwenthyth's screenshot.
The problem organisations have is they shouldn't be asking for any information that isn't relevant - so generally 'gender' isn't needed. Sex may be required or used for equalities data.

Just as an aside, when a person's birth cert is altered to change sex, can the name be altered as well?

If so, this is a dream for someone seeking a completely new identity. No need for a false alias, you can change the original document.

I can’t mention the GRA without saying that I think the GRA should be repealed- it’s superfluous now because (rightly!) we have same sex marriage and equal pension age.

It’s also not the state’s role to issue validation for validation’s sake in the way GRA now does. (because unless I have misunderstood greatly, holding a GRC is no longer correcting any individual injustice around marriage and pensions etc, it is now just ‘correcting’ reality.)

The fundamental principles of the GRA are sexist and homophobic and misogynistic because they rely on privileging sexist stereotypes of femininity and masculinity over biological sex, and the GRC process itself was poorly and naively drafted because it contained those sorts of assumptions.

So for example GRC process lacks the basic features of an official status that is granted if people meet specific criteria. For example it has no revocation process because the GRC holder has changed their mind- so it fails basic rules on consent in how it traps people within an official record of legal sex even after they detransition.

And GRA requires meaningless things like that GRC holders must live in that gender until death, but provides no revocation process if people don’t actually do that, so it’s not really any kind of requirement at all.

GRCs and the secrecy and criminal punishment around asking who has the GRC all cause a chilling effect around the GRC itself. All that props up self ID and problems with male access to women’s places and spaces. The existing exceptions in the EQA to the GRC’s relevance are unclear and very hard to get enforced.

There are loads of other problems with it. It’s a big, outdated mess. Let’s do away with the GRA and just let people live how they want under their EQA protections. Our laws should recognise that society does need to place value on biological sex- especially to support the interests of women and children.