To be very glad the judge ruled properly on Self ID and sex for the census?

[ItscoldinAlaska]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/09/guidance-on-sex-question-in-uk-census-must-be-changed-high-court-rules?CMP=fb_gu&utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR0ARobpxFavIo53e2Pu6v4laOlBOGfwuEwkQmjOuG52F04-N6RXK1jsBx4#Echobox=1615318013

I have shared the FB link as the comments are eye opening. According to advisory guidance (before this ruling) the Census was advising that documentation that allows Self ID (e.g. a passport or driving licence) could inform the answer to sex on the census. This was challenged by an organisation that stated it was self ID through the back door. The judge ruled (correctly IMO) to change the wording. The advice states that you should put the assigned sex at birth and the sex you were registered as (on your birth certificate) should be used, a binary choice of F/M.

Later on in the census there is an option to state your gender. AIBU to think that if you are gathering statistics on sex, counting sex accurately is really important to inform policies? To account for how many females and males there are in an area is really important? The comments section has people who are stating that the numbers are so small it doesn't matter? Accuracy matters doesn't it? Or am I missing something? I am a health researcher. If you add skew into it, it leads to a lack of robust data and interrogation? There is an option to state your gender, so why is it trans phobic to give a binary option for sex? (Which is what the comments section debate was. Lots of TERF and Bigot being thrown at people like me, who thought statistical validity is important).

'Surely it's the Gender Identity question that will indicate the number of trans people out there?' Yes, and this is the question that is important to you and you have an opportunity to answer it.

So answering the question:
'What sex are you'? (Answer Male if you were recorded at birth as Male. Answer Female if you were recorded at birth as Female) shouldn't be complicated or difficult, as you get to discuss how you feel is in the voluntary gender question.

Why should the sex question statistical validity be undermined, if there is further chanve to gather data on trans status? It doesn't make sense to be worried by one question, when another question provides the context needed to negate that worry surely?

'What sex are you'? (Answer Male if you were recorded at birth as Male. Answer Female if you were recorded at birth as Female) shouldn't be complicated or difficult, as you get to discuss how you feel is in the voluntary gender question

If that question was:
What sex were you registered as at birth instead of what sex are you, I think there would be 'better buy in'.

@PegasusReturns

It is critical that organisations are not permitted to redefine what sex means.

It’s a great first step in dismantling an alarming trend to do just that.

Great result

Totally agree with this. I breathed a huge sigh of relief at the judgement.

What do they do if someone fills it in with the wrong info?

For example a transwoman saying they are female

@GottogetaGRC tbh it could word it like that, I haven't seen the question.

It's a great result.

To the PP up thread, I don't hold with gender identity either. I've spent most of my adult life fighting these tired stereotypes. I'm not about to start accepting them now.

That's why I think it important to ignore the question on gender completely. If you state 'no' they won't read your reasons, you will likely be recorded as trans.

For many reasons accuracy is important. And if the numbers really are vanishingly small, there's less of an argument for laws, policies and services to change.

The judge's ruling I support. I think it is something to record if people born male consider themselves female (and vice-versa) and so accurate reporting of whether or not you are biologically male or female is a part of this. By the separate question.

The judge also had to rule on a point of law, and self-ID is not law.

@Soubriquet

What do they do if someone fills it in with the wrong info?

For example a transwoman saying they are female

Probably nothing. But if you lie you could theoretically receive a fine.

Excellent results for both women, services for women and trans people, and of course common sense! It feels lately like the rest of the world is living in some sort of alternate reality where science and facts no longer apply. Great to see some hints that not everyone is completely deluded!

Isn't it a sign of the times where we need a court ruling on declaring biological sex accurately.

Very happy to see this.

I’ve been happy to see that the courts tend to be the voice of reason about these things. This is the point of them, of course, to deal in facts and not be skewed by what seems politically popular.

@GottogetaGRC

People have said that if people fill in biological sex as 'they feel', then that will reduce the numbers of trans people in the statistics.

Surely it's the Gender Identity question that will indicate the number of trans people out there?

If 10% of people say that their gender identity is different to their sex registered at birth, that shows the numbers of trans people.

"Is the gender you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?"

I will be saying No to that question - because it's true. I don't think that's a hard question for trans people to fill in.

I also can imagine that many other trans people will be saying No to that and recording the gender they identify with.

If you put female for sex and no for gender identity as you plan to then you will be recorded as a trans man. Still shooting yourself in the foot by obscuring reality and potentially undermining service provisions for transwomen.

It does ask what gender you identify as.

Of course it does!

@Clymene

It's quite a bizarre strategy being adopted by Bristow et al. The trans community regularly complain about lack of access to trans specific healthcare and other services. They now have an opportunity to tell government how many of them there are so that they can get the services needed and they're pissing it up the wall.

Well those with a penis can piss up a wall, the ones without a penis will be pissing on the floor and getting their shoes wet.

@Gasp0deTheW0nderD0g

I get the sense that some people don't understand that the census is all about gathering data for use by the government, councils etc. An individual return is confidential for a century after the census date. It's not an opportunity to tell the world 'I identify as ...' in any way that is linked to your own name. If the questions aren't answered correctly, the data becomes a lot less useful.

Made up example: Joe is male, and his birth certificate says M. When Joe is 45, he comes out as trans and henceforth is called Jo. Jo doesn't get a GRC, as can't see the point. Jo has hormone treatment, but no sexual reassignment surgery, as Jo has some heart problems that make it risky to have major surgery for anything except a life-threatening emergency.

Jo should click M on the census. There's an optional question on gender identity. If Jo feels comfortable answering that, that's the place to inform the government about Jo's trans status.

The data from the census helps the NHS plan what services might be needed in future. If lots and lots of Jos ticked F, not M, the NHS may conclude that there are more middle-aged and older women around than they thought and fewer men of that age. So they up the number of clinics and specialist HCPs dealing with breast cancer, ovarian cancer, menopause etc etc. Fewer services for older males, e.g. dealing with prostate cancer.

This is a problem for Jo, who isn't at risk of breast or ovarian cancer. If Jo gets a sex-specific cancer in old age, it's likely to be prostate cancer.

Actually, Jo is at risk of breast cancer, although the risk is much lower.

About 400 males per year get breast cancer, because male humans still have breast tissue (although a lot less).

I agree with the rest of your post, though.

It’s a brilliant result and a great victory - well done Fair Play for Women!

Why on Earth you can lie on your passport and get an updated birth certificate anyway baffles me. We need to stop indulging this lie.

@HeeHiHoHum

Fantastic news. Glad that sex has been reinstated on the census.

I think we are all glad sex has been reinstated

Actually, Jo is at risk of breast cancer, although the risk is much lower

Trans women on oestrogen may also be at increased risk of breast cancer - but the data may not be collected for that (or masked of course)

@GottogetaGRC

Actually, Jo is at risk of breast cancer, although the risk is much lower

Trans women on oestrogen may also be at increased risk of breast cancer - but the data may not be collected for that (or masked of course)

What do you mean by “masked”?

Yes, sorry, that was an oversight to say Jo wasn't at risk of breast cancer.

I have to say I’m glad I’ve seen this thread and now see it makes more sense to leave the gender identity blank rather than write “none” or similar.

Yanbu. Sex is defined by chromosomes and you cannot change it. You can cosmetically alter your outward appearance to give the impression that your sex and gender are aligned where they are not, but you cannot change your chromosomes.

Surely it's the Gender Identity question that will indicate the number of trans people out there?

How, if people fill in female because they have a GRC and woman on the gender question? How does that indicate who is trans and who isn't?

And well... we know just how many have deliberately now lied as well. Again, how is skewing data like that helping anyone?

What do you mean by “masked

If a transwoman got breast cancer, then I am not sure if it could be picked up in any kind of data survey as I think it would come under female breast cancer results in NHS data audits.

If a transwoman got breast cancer and their biological sex was recorded as Male on the NHS logs, I think it would show as male breast cancer - and would add to the records on male breast cancer.

So I am not sure how easy it would be to interrogate an NHS medical database and see how many transwomen got breast cancer and see if oestrogen treatment may be a cause.