Census in Scotland proposes that sex and gender identity are the same thing?

[stumbledin]

(I wasn’t aware about this, but saw something posted on facebook and found this):

The Scottish Government regards ―gender identity as already being covered by the reference to ―sex in paragraph 1 of the schedule to the 1920 Act and a census could ask. This document relates to the Census (Amendment) (Scotland) Bill (SP Bill 40) as introduced in the Scottish Parliament on 2 October 2018 questions about gender identity without the amendment of that paragraph being made. Likewise, the Scottish Government regards paragraph 6 of the schedule as providing authority to ask questions about sexual orientation. The main policy aim of the Bill is not, therefore, to facilitate the asking of questions about gender identity and sexual orientation but to make answering those questions effectively voluntary. The policy recognises both the importance and sensitivity of the new questions and seeks to mitigate concerns about intrusion into private life by placing the questions on a voluntary basis.

6.There is an additional reason for amending paragraph 1 of the schedule to add reference to gender identity. The issues of sex and of gender identity are linked, especially if the sex question asked is a non-binary sex question (for example ―Are you male, female, other?). The precise form of the question is still to be considered by Parliament during its scrutiny of the Census Order and regulations. The ―sex question will remain compulsory. For that reason, the Bill does not hard-wire provision that would make answering questions about gender identity voluntary (that might catch the sex question) and, instead, provides a power to prescribe aspects of gender identity (such as trans/trans history) for the purpose of making questions about those aspects voluntary.

www.parliament.scot/S5_Bills/CensusScotlandBill/SPBill40PMS052018.pdf

There was a consultation which closed on 23 November 2018 and written evidence has now been published. (including on from Prof. Rosemary Auchmunty and Prof. Rosa Freedman) www.parliament.scot/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/109902.aspx

Scotland seems to be at least if not two steps ahead in implementing gender identity as the norm in law rather than sex.

This scares the beejesus out of me! How the hell did we end up here? I hope the MSPs use whatever critical thinking they have left to see what is happening.

I know - its really frightening how quickly it is happening and not everyone is aware that events like this are even happening.

Does look like some women in Scotland are trying to challenge this trans tsunami. But too often we seem to be raising our voices after the event has actually happened. scottish-women.com/2018/12/01/census-bill-to-change-sex-to-gender-identity/

Who knew or was aware at the time that the original GRA that created the legal fiction that proving you had a gender identity allowed you to be said to have changed sex.

And since then with the strategically effective in house training across media, politics and now schools, the blurring of the distinction between sex and gender is now socially ingrained. Built on the ingrained misogynist norms that women and particularly older women should not be listened too.

No amount of tweeting, facebooking, mumsnetting is actually impinging on the wider social trends that influence the majority.

Who knew or was aware at the time that the original GRA that created the legal fiction that proving you had a gender identity allowed you to be said to have changed sex.

Hansard record shows that people were aware of this in 2004 and the potential problems. They allowed it because it was only ever intended to apply to a few thousand poor oppressed souls.

Looks like Rosa Freedman and forwomen.scot are giving evidence at the Committee meeting on Thursday.
www.parliament.scot/S5_European/Meeting%20Papers/CTEEA_20181206PublicPapers.pdf

Excellent

Share token link:
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/feminists-fight-against-gender-choice-in-census-b6h8pq2nf?shareToken=eca97de6b1f9432fee6c379dc015a17b

That's an interesting point at the end of the Times article, it says if sex is changed to gender identity feminists may refuse to complete the census.

I agree. I will refuse to complete a census organised by a government than to refuses to recognise my sex. If males with dysphoria are more important then carry on, count them, not me.

Or if an 'other' category is introduced there could be some very interesting answers. Return of the Jedi perhaps?

Thanks for the share token link Igneococcus.

I agree. I will refuse to complete a census organised by a government than to refuses to recognise my sex. If males with dysphoria are more important then carry on, count them, not me.

Same here

If sex and gender identity are the same, and there are multiple gender identities, and nobody can clearly articulate (that I’ve seen anyway) a finite meaning for each identity, how can anybody understand what box they are supposed to tick? I have no sense of a gender identity that I’m aware of, so what clues can anyone give me as to whether I am a woman, gender non-conforming, non-binary, trans-feminine? I am comfortable ‘presenting’ as a ‘woman’ but could easily say 50% of the female stereotypes concerning my personality, likes, dislikes, etc. that exist don’t apply to me. Which box would I pick? Words have to mean something or language is redundant. This is the most utterly ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard.

I have spent a fair bit of time on 1841 - 1911 census records recently (for my family tree) and they are very useful. If the genders were unclear because uncle Bob changed to become Auntie Sue it would be very sad and harder to track people 100 years later. for me it just depends on the numbers. If hardly anyone is trans and does a full gender change then I can live with it. If loads of people are swapping over then it could be confusing and dangerous for statistical purposes - eg you might be measuring how many men are in the population and it becomes skewed if a lot have moved to become female.

[Currently wrestling with one family member who seems to have chopped the changed the family surname - I hope he realised how much trouble that might cause for us over 100 years later]

If loads of people are swapping over then it could be confusing and dangerous for statistical purposes

Exactly. It skews figures for the gender pay gap, which is impacted in no small way by women taking time off to have children. It affects medical figures for people whose biological reality puts them at higher risk for certain types of illness. It also derails my own parenting choices. I’m a big fan of the let toys be toys and let clothes be clothes campaigns and am at pains to teach my children that they can choose whatever they like and it has no significant meaning. I also want them to have respect for their bodies and what they can do and how to look after them. Everything about this proposal throws these things up in the air.

Indeed. When I was 10 my best present was my pen knife - we used as girls to make spears etc and would not wear dresses. We were feminist little girls, not trans people.

I just tried to find out the numbers but this 200,000 guess may include people who have not transitioned fully under current law. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/721642/GEO-LGBT-factsheet.pdf

This suggests perhaps 300,000 including cross dressers www.bournemouth.gov.uk/councildemocratic/Statistics/Documents/JSNA/GenderReassignment.pdf

However I wanted statistics on how many have legally changed gender which presumably the UK births and deaths register people would fairly easily be able to gather on an anonymous basis

In trying to find out how this got as far as it has it looks like there was a consulation in 2015 for the2020 census. As well as focus groups. On one level you cant criticise campaigners who organise and take every opportunity to further their aims. But also cant help feeling that if an equaly smal number of women were campaigning on an issue they wouldn't be listened to with the same attention.

3.2 Gender identity
The 2021 topic consultation highlighted a need for data on gender identity in order to understand inequality, inform and monitor policy development and allocate services for this population. The introduction of the Equality Act 2010 further strengthens the user requirement for those with the protected characteristics of gender reassignment.
We also identified a respondent need, with some members of the public reporting that they were unable to complete the current sex question accurately as it only offered the two categories of male or female. A major concern was not to damage the information already collected through the male or female sex question, which is an important variable. The research was focused to ensure that we fully understood this issue.
We don’t currently collect this information on any social surveys, so we developed a Gender identity research and testing plan (May 2016) to inform our position on this topic. It outlined next steps including engaging with relevant stakeholders, learning from other National Statistical Agencies, and identifying alternative data collection options. Within the plan we also committed to undertaking a review of the transgender Data Position Paper which was published in 2009. In response to this we published a Gender identity update (Jan 2017) which detailed changes and progress around the topic of gender identity and covered our research, testing and findings to that date.
Engaging with stakeholders
We have continued to engage with users and held focus groups to understand this user need further and to develop a clear understanding of the different concepts. We held a stakeholder update meeting in June 2017 and two stakeholder workshops, one in August 2016 and one in September 2017.
The workshops presented a consistent data need for a transgender population count, including individuals of all ages, and a respondent need for being able to self-identify. The workshops also provided insight into how we could ask a gender identity question on the 2021 Census. This has shaped the testing we have been, and will be, conducting to ascertain whether we can devise questions that meet needs while ensuring that we can collect the vital information on male or female accurately.
Understanding concepts
Our research has focused on understanding three concepts:
• Sex: male or female – this is the legal concept and a key research variable
• Gender: male, female or other – this is about the respondent need to be able to self identify and answer the census as well as being able to estimate those who identify as non-binary within the transgender community
• transgender population – the need for a reliable estimate of the population identifying as transgender which we define as those whose gender identity is different from the sex they were assigned at birth, including those who do not use the binary classification of male or female
We are aware man and woman are sometimes used in the transgender community rather than male or female but our research so far has suggested that the use of male and female are acceptable.
www.ons.gov.uk/census/censustransformationprogramme/questiondevelopment/2021censustopicresearchdecember2017

And this www.ons.gov.uk/file?uri=/census/censustransformationprogramme/consultations/the2021censusinitialviewoncontentforenglandandwales/topicreport03genderidentity.pdf

Is there a way of finding out if the English census will be the same?

Is there a way of finding out if the English census will be the same?

I had meant to add that the sections I have posted above are all England (and Wales?) but presumably Scotland carried out a similar process.

So read the above as being for the next census in England.

I had a similar ‘discussion’ in the office just today.

It ended when I offered to knee someone in the crotch to ascertain whether they were a he or a she.

I think if it passes in Scotland, then England and Wales will have to consider it!

If anyone has specialist knowledge - statistics, medical etc - it may still be worth trying to reach the committee.

I think it would be a shame however if the census were not accurate because people were spoiling the papers. I think the greater good is filling it in correctly even if we don't like some of hte boxes.

It is interesting looking at the earlier census records for my family (men sadly had to be head of household if there was one - our family has been largely female led as the men seem to die on us just as even this year if our children marry women are wiped from the history of that despite Cameron's promise for the marriage cert and only the two fathers' details are given) that if a man were away (a few of ours were mariners, away at sea or one was fighting in South Africa in the mary in 1900) the woman would often define herself by the husband's job. It is actually more useful to havethat if you are trying to work out who is who than not have anything given for an occupation.

In the 1841 census they rounded ages to the nearest 5 which is terribly confusing. I wonder who thought that was a good idea.

I like the 1911 one as it gives number of children born alive to the woman and number still alive which I think is really nice and allows a mother to acknowledge everyone of those babies. My grandmother was one of quite a few and they all have gravestones - all the ones who died as babies - only 3 of about 8 lived beyond 21. On the other side we had a similar lot of deaths for one ancestor 5 alive by 1911 of about 10 (and my grandfather died at work aged 30 in 1930 reducing it to 4). The 1911 census as that family did not do gravesstones for the babies was nice to have.

I got off the point, sorry.

This is the most relieved I have felt in years about this, after watching that session. I had all but lost hope in Scotland. But sense is prevailing, behind the noise of those driving this, people are absolutely aware of the issues.

That session left no doubt about what the solution was: sex as a binary, biological question; correct the mistake that was made 20 years ago saying sex could be self defined. Additional, optional, questions about gender identity so Vic can put their non-binary identity in there.

Thank fuck for that committee (except Ross Greer who just illustrated he doesn't have the skills or life experience to be on it)

I am a happy woman tonight.

Joan and Annabell were a breath of fresh air. And who was the man who kept taking his glasses off to read the definition of non-binary? I loved him too.

I feel reassured by that session, so much. The issues are known. People are aware.

I've just wastched it and Rosa and Susan were brilliant and most of the committee get it. Ross was outclassed and outnumbered.

Essentially the committee were given the choice: do this legally and grounded in provable reality or get Hans Christian Andersen to write it.

Essentially the committee were given the choice: do this legally and grounded in provable reality or get Hans Christian Andersen to write it.

Love this!

Ross Greer... oh dear! Did I mishear or did he make some comment about "I disagree about that" when told that NB women would still need sex-specific medical services, protection from discrimination and that women were highest public sector users?

Was he disagreeing with medicine/science, fact that sexism exists or government stats? Because I'm struggling to understand how he could disagree unless it's with reality in general!