2021 Census - sex not gender

[TheWordWomanIsTaken]

Just seen this on twitter. Sorry do not have share token.
Sanity prevails I hope.
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sex-question-back-on-census-in-blow-to-trans-rights-r75fq5lgc

Thank goodness. I was actually worrying about that this week (well I added it to my list of things to worry about)

Oh that's a relief. Have just been gathering info ready for a letter to my MP so that will save me some time .... for now. Still need to let him know my views but that was one of the most urgent issues.

It's a shame that article spins it as "a blow to trans rights".

I don't agree, it's a win for truth and we need to be able to analyse data by sex.

Is the gender identity question still included?

Share token

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/eb5780de-5da9-11eb-9757-b51ef053b3e2?shareToken=72a0f6ad7f2ca66b1b1a3b8b151693a6

Thanks. That's a much more sensible approach.

I still think people shouldn't be able to change their legal sex, but at least it's not just a free for all.

Thank you for the share token.

The framing of that article is off, asking a question about sex is not anti-trans.

Still, I am relieved about this. Sanity prevails. So much pushback needed by so many on what should have been a straightforward question.

The question on gender identity is voluntary (hurrah, will leave blank).

Of course, one of the dopey comments btl says 'is there an option for "yes please"?', which I seem to recall is one of the reasons why organisations were happy to make the move to asking for gender not sex in the first place.

I note that it asks for 'legal' sex, so presumably those with a GRC can answer according to what is on their re-issued birth certificate? (Wondering how Keira Bell should answer, since her bc has her down as a male).

Very disappointed in the way the Sunday Times has spun this. It's not a blow to trans rights it's a "victory for common sense" (in true Daily Mail parlance) so that data can be recorded accurately. If a town needs to know how much maternity or gynaelogical provision to provide, it needs to know how many biological females live in the town.

How is it a “blow to trans rights”? Being required to accurately fill in a form with no information anyone else will see?

I seem to remember some people on Twitter who stated their determination to lie because they view their birth certificate as wrong, there’s a screenshot on an older thread IIRC.

It’s so self-defeating. Regardless of how people identify, they still need services on the basis of their sex.

The comments are heartening. Several point out that the “blow for trans rights” line is incorrect.

Anyway, despite the political slant taken, this is great news. Those running the census have recognized the slippery slope they were putting themselves on in allowing self-ID in the responses and have reversed that decision.

The reversal is obviously going to be more publicised than the original change, which was brought in under the radar and with no public discussion. It might well wake a few more people up as to what is being quietly brought in behind the scenes.

Strange, why would it be a blow to trans rights? Can’t read the whole thing but if there is still a question about gender identity surely there’s no problem? Like birth certificates, a census needs to be a document based in reality or it’s completely pointless. The results could be illuminating.

The correct decision but not a good way to spin it, I agree.

Every little step into the world of reality is a good thing

Am I missing something - anyone with a GRC will note their 'chosen gender' as the sex answer so the data will still be skewed.

It should just be sex and use the gender answer for what your GRC says if you have one, then a question on gender identity which is optional.

OhHolyJesus

The data will be slightly screwed, but 5000 people in a country of 65 million is not much.

I guess that the problem with asking for biological sex is that, as we're seeing with the trans rhetoric, an amazing number of people don't understand what that is. "What it says on your birth certificate" is unambiguous, hence it's probably going to give the most accurate data. The GRA got us into this mess.

I think the article knows what it's doing. The 'blow to transgender rights' aspect has elicited exactly the right kind of comments — all about sanity, two sexes, honesty, truth and science. Any politicians scanning the comments for a quick poll on where public opinion lies will be in no doubt.

Good news. I don't think this covers Scotland, sadly.

From the ONS website - this needs challenging:

“It is important to note that the law in the UK treats the terms sex and gender as interchangeable. This is shown by the Gender Recognition Act allowing someone who is changing their gender to change the sex marker on their birth certificate.”

We need to remind them of the Equality Act 2010!

www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

Anyone fancy writing to the authors:

Laura Tolland and Joanne Evans
[email protected]

The Today programme interview with Sir Ian Diamond, that is referred to in the article, was on Friday at about 2:44 in.

I don't get the 'blow to trans rights' either.

Surely it is good for trans rights that trans people are recognised and recorded?

The heading has now changed:
'Sex question back on census in blow to trans lobby'.

Bloody well done to everyone who complained, and good for the Times for listening.

@Shedbuilder

I think the article knows what it's doing. The 'blow to transgender rights' aspect has elicited exactly the right kind of comments — all about sanity, two sexes, honesty, truth and science. Any politicians scanning the comments for a quick poll on where public opinion lies will be in no doubt.

I think you're right that it's intentional, but it does make the Times look a bit dim when they call all these ludicrous demands 'rights', and there are plenty of people who can't get past that word and the perception it creates.

Well done and huge thank you to Alice Sullivan et al

‘The heading has now changed:
'Sex question back on census in blow to trans lobby'.

Bloody well done to everyone who complained, and good for the Times for listening.’

Echoing that hurrah to all involved!

Increasingly delighted that I subscribe to The Times now and not that despicable misogynist pile of crap. I don’t even need to name it.

Over on subreddit Transgender UK, posters are just saying they will answer the ‘sex’ question however they like...

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/l2trto/2021_census_21_march_why_we_need_to_answer_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

According to the article: "There will be a separate, voluntary question for those aged over 16 about their gender identity"

If this question is included, the framing of this question is important and therefore we can expect a big struggle over it. The question should ask something like:
"Do you identify as transgender?" or "Are you transgender?" with two main answers
Yes (with suboptions trans woman, trans man, nonbinary, other)
or
No

It would be bad and will not capture any useful information if the question is: "what is your gender identity?" with answers "male, female, nonbinary, other". Because (a) people do not understand it (b) it assumes everyone has a gender identity (c) it would not capture the information about how many people identify as trans.

[quote PlantMam]Over on subreddit Transgender UK, posters are just saying they will answer the ‘sex’ question however they like...

www.reddit.com/r/transgenderUK/comments/l2trto/2021_census_21_march_why_we_need_to_answer_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf[/quote]
Okay, so presumably they'll be happy to receive healthcare appropriate to the sex they 'identify as', then?

It's not going to do yourself any favours, for goodness' sake. There's feelings and there's prostate/uterus issues.