Australia is due a census. There has been shouting.

So you don't think the Australian census should include questions about gender identity?
I think I agree, actually. Not beause there are to few impacted to bother. But because there don't seem (to me) to be agreed upon definitions of terms like trans, or trans*, or gender diverse, or gender queer, or gender identity, &c. &c., so it would be really hard to draw up questions that can be universally asked. I guess that's the downside of différance.

So, such a tiny group that it cannot affect anything significantly, yet must have data collected because it is so vitally important.

That sounds like a very accurate reflection of the reality of what we are constantly told everyday on FWR about the group.

Did you read the article on statistics above - due to not understanding the gender question in the census the town with the accepted largest Trans population, Brighton, came 20th, whereas towns with a high number of people with English as a second language came higher.
So who knows how many there actually are in the ‘small’ segment of pop.

Trans is such a small segment of the population, I don't see any meaningful impact. Such a small community does get a lot of focus.

I think the ABS is rather conscious of asking questions that will produce inaccurate results though. I believe I was a Jedi in one census,

There is a need for accurate census data when it will shape medical, education and social needs for the future. I am not sure how they can ask the question that will produce accurate data. And I don’t believe that people should indicate they are sex they are not.

The UK experience was an important one. It will be interesting to see where this goes.

Perhaps keeping stuff out of the mainstream protects gender diverse people from increasing disapprobation?

what you mean is perhaps keeping trans stuff away from public scrutiny allows them to get away with more? That has been their whole modus operandi as set out by Denton and their #NoDebate because they know what they are asking is unreasonable and the public would not agree if it was set out in front of them.

I was wondering what all the politicians' claims of not wanting to stoke a "divisive" public conversation was about.
But now I'm wondering if it isn't genuine concern for people who identify as trans or non-binary. Think of the U.K. statistics which show drop in support for trans rights-claims. Perhaps keeping stuff out of the mainstream protects gender diverse people from increasing disapprobation?

That's hilarious - the greatest rate of transgenderism in the UK is among Asian residents of Newnham.

The Sex Discrimination Commissioner in Australia doesn’t know what a woman is. That’s how captured things are. The shouty groups will get their way, no doubt.

It’s completely useless data due to the expansion of gender ideology terminology. What data will be collected? Let’s go through the letters to determine what could be used for planning:

L: lesbians, which now means “anyone who identifies as a woman who is attracted to anyone who identifies as a woman”. So data on this will include men and women.
G: “same gender” attraction”, again, meaning straight people are included.
B: probably the most accurate data set.
T: a broad group including AGP men, young people with ASD, lesbians who identify as male, the nebulous ill-defined “non binary” and people who are gender fluid on the night of the census. What useful information can be gleaned from this subset of data?
Q: anything. Absolutely anything, including young people who are straight but don’t want to be too boring.
I: not only will this include people with DSDs, it will also include people who think they have a DSD but don’t, like I have seen on trans forums.
A: asexual. Because there’s a pressing need for services for asexual people, is there? And we’ve been “educated” here that asexual is a broad term that includes people who only want to have sex with people they romantically care about .
+: yes, let’s get all the people with kinks to declare themselves…

I’m not talking about feels or operating tables. I’m discussing access to health services of all types.

Statisticians cover that by recognising that individuals that reported formerly as female now tick the male box - and so on. The number that do so, in any case, wouldn’t be so many as to make more than a blip in statistics.

Unless you collect accurate information about birth sex and acquired gender (where applicable) it’s of no use to planning. If all the transmen report themselves as male, how does the health service work out how many breast surgeons it needs to cover essential cancer surgeries and the new cohort of elective mastectomies? Or urologists or OBGYN to manage genital reconstructions and testosterone-related hysterectomies?

The (Australian) news broadcast I listened to today covered the OP's topic, and also had a brief story on M-pox. The newsreader let us listeners know that "LGBTQI+" individuals are at higher risk of contracting the disease.
The public health expert whose statement was replayed did talk about vaccination rates among "MSM" so I gather it is gay men who need to be aware of their increased risk of contracting or spreading this disease.
At this point I think polite society's agreement to never say "gay" is looking more and more like old school homophobia.

Yes I can see how it could be useful for getting hands on resources.

Another, and often more preferred though less heard, term for DSD is congenital reproductive disorders.

As for forced teaming - that was the point of my question: what benefit is there in finding out if people ‘identify as LGTQI’ as opposed to finding out if they are LGB, T or have DSD/CRD (which should be known from medical recording)? The only place for asking if someone ‘identifies as LGTQI’ would be alongside asking about religious beliefs.

It does seem like the Australian government will consider gathering information about LGB people in the next census, but certain activists are still displeased that gender-incongruent people were excluded and believe further action is necessary, though some gender-incongruent Australians seem to think not being formally counted is better in the long run.

Feels are worse than useless on the operation table