1 in 67 English/Welsh Muslims are transgender

This thread about Nancy Kelley raving about all the trans people in Newham because the population in Newham is so young would be interesting to look further into.

Something tells me, there's going to also be an abnormally high number of 'older trans people' despite the area's demographic and despite the statistics everywhere else.

The descent of the ONS into discriminatory statistical incoherence may be partly explained by the presence of a senior individual with a vested interest and presumably with considerable influence?

https://twitter.com/STILLTish/status/1645077923496353792?t=VDIj8lyzxiF2howP7hj0GA&s=19

So an area with a high Muslim population and low English literacy will have to prioritise trans gender welcoming facilities to an area where single sex provision is both most needed and culturally essential.

And this will inevitably impact on the provision of services for non English speakers.

All because the word salad pricks can't comprehend that not everyone went to fucking university in the UK.

The privileged fuckwittery of this is too appalling for words.

Data collection needs to be kept simple. Plain English is hugely important otherwise the most vulnerable groups in society are discriminated against...

😆

Scotland was the same. I think their testing was “We asked Stonewall, Engender and LBGT Youth”

They do do a lot of question testing in advance of the census. Details of the sex and gender questions here https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/censustransformationprogramme/questiondevelopment/sexandgenderidentityquestiondevelopmentforcensus2021#:~:text=Is%20the%20gender%20you%20identify,your%20sex%20registered%20at%20birth%3F&text=The%20gender%20identity%20question%20is,aged%2016%20years%20and%20over.

It does sound as if most of the testing was with the trans and non binary community rather than a cross section to include those who don't feel that they have a gender identity, aren't familiar with the entire trans context, or don't have good English language.

Shows what a ridiculous question it was. I thought the ONS was gold standard and the envy of the world?

I realised I hadn’t used the same question so had another go with Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?.

My favourite translation was Hawaiian:
Is the man you saw the same as your husband at birth?

Wow I always thought the ONS was gold standard data. That Alice Sullivan article reveals them to be ideological nutters with little interest in useful statistics.

Has anyone organised a complaint about this? I would like to write to my MP but these things need to be coordinated before politicians will take notice. What would the call to action be? Could the census sex and gender data get struck off?

I am not surprised by this, TRAs do not want accurate data collection as it potentially undermines their arguments. I suspect there was an element of rebelling and TW stating female for sex.

It shows why the NHS removing the words women and girls from medical conditions and symptoms is such a bad idea. As has been said time and again, it will impact women who have English as a second language and those with poor comprehension.

I had always hoped the census would give us stats that can be used to fight for single sex spaces. For example, It’s hard to justify making all toilets in a building unisex if only 0.2% of the population are transgender.

I am disappointed as the census results are being released they are showing such contradictory information.

I have always had respect for the ONS, this has disappointed me but more importantly has worrying implications for everyone.

It should ask “is your gender identity located in your penis?”

That was inspired, and makes it very clear that lots of people are likely to have been very confused.
Last one is hilarious 😂

I think there may quite a few people with a warped sense of humour.

Excellent article, and entirely "No Shit, Sherlock!" to those of us know actually bloody well live amongst friends and family who have limited English proficiency and/or educational attainment. But I expect, an astonishing result to the supremely privileged, luxury beliefs-steeped Right Side Of History folk.

The sexuality question was for over 16s too but there was no validation to stop my then 15 yo completing it. 🤷‍♀️

The fact they didn’t road test the question on normies is the biggest 🤯

Screenshot of the qualifications section of the census. No qualifications means no GCSEs, no certificates whatsoever

All the people I've ever known who would tick "no qualifications" were in that situation due to many years of missed school. The reasons were multiple and complex (prolonged illness, school refusal due to unaddressed bullying, caring responsibilities at home, and so on) but one thing these different people had in common? Poor literacy.

That's a major factor to why they had no qualifications. In my experience, those who'd had similar lives but who could read despite it, were press ganged into some sort of gateway qualification by desperate and worried school teachers.

I read that the best predictor of the percentage of transgender people in some area in that census is the percentage of people who don't speak English as their main language:

The more people who don't speak English as their main language an area has, the more transgender people the census reports from that area!

This strongly suggests that the results are because many respondents didn't understand what was being asked about in the first place. If this is the case, then the findings from the census are not useful.

It is not just the wording of the question either - it requires an understanding of a weird illogical ideology to understand it. Keir Starmer declared ‘no one is talking about it [gender ideology]’. That is clearly not true, a lot of people are. But equally there are a lot of people who aren’t because it hasn’t impacted on their lives, especially groups who are less likely to engage with UK media or social media (eg those with limited English or less education). So what does ‘gender identity’ mean to them? Did they test out the understanding of this concept outside the QWERTY community? Of course not!

Honestly the simplest explanation is probably right.

The data is utterly useless because the question was so poorly worded that significant numbers of people misunderstood it.

The correlation between people with low levels of education (more likely to have low levels of literacy) and people who speak English as an additional language (more likely to struggle with weird, nonstandard constructions and slippery neologisms) is pretty strong evidence that it was simply just a terrible question that has generated meaningless data.

GIGO

Several of the responses on this thread are actually good illustrations of the point made in the article, which is that the clarity of English matters and the quality of is largely determined by the quality of the questions asked.

If people don’t understand it, you get nonsense back.

I suspect here it’s largely that people read the thread title, but not the article itself. But the same problem will be caused by a terrible census question that requires people to be familiar with pretty niche debates and concepts to understand.

Maybe having no qualifications is correlated with having autism, learning disabilities, or other neurodiversity. And in turn those difficulties are correlated with being transgender?

FPFW had to fundraise to challenge the ONS in the courts to stop them allowing sex to be self identified in the census. That's how captured the useful idiots running the ONS are:
:
https://fairplayforwomen.com/fair-play-for-women-wins-high-court-challenge-against-ons-census/#:~:text=in%20the%20Census-,Fair%20Play%20For%20Women%20wins%20High%20Court%20challenge%20and%20judge,self%2Didentified%20in%20the%20Census&text=Fair%20Play%20For%20Women%20have,sex%20as%20recognised%20by%20law.

In a society not captured by so many dodgy lobby groups, those in charge at the ONS would be sacked for these embarrassing inaccurate statistics.

I misread the sentence. I thought I saw university in there twice. Even so I don't understand how not having qualifications makes you more likely to be trans - or as I say, is being trans a hindrance to getting qualifications (in terms of poor mental health etc, not because I think trans people lack intelligence)