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

"There will be a separate, voluntary question for those aged over 16 about their gender identity, which was welcomed by Nancy Kelley, chief executive of Stonewall, a pressure group for LGBT rights. She said: “It’s great that the 2021 census will include voluntary questions on sexual orientation and trans status for the first time. Collecting accurate population data on sexual orientation and trans status is vital to ensuring that organisations can develop services targeted to the needs of the LGBT population.”

It would be great if Stonewall and co could admit how irresponsible they have been in the census debate. They keep telling the people they're supposedly advocating for that 'sex doesn't matter'. What about things like health? Their behaviour is maddening and it actually puts people at risk.

"A recent freedom of information response revealed that ONS hosted a roundtable discussion about the guidance for the sex question on 24 June 2020. The names of those who attended are redacted but there were representatives from Stonewall, the LGBT Foundation, the Government Equalities Office (GEO), NHS England, the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) and Fair Play For Women (FPFW), the LGBT National Health Adviser, and individuals from 11 UK higher education institutions.

Documents released in the same FOI response reveal an extended correspondence between Stonewall and officials at ONS. The tone and rapidity of the exchange of emails suggests a close relationship between the two organisations, not dissimilar to the relationship between the NRS and the Scottish Trans Alliance, as seen in correspondence released via another FOI request lodged last year.

By way of contrast, ONS took six days to respond to a query from the FPFW representative who attended the meeting and the UCL representative (which we have confirmed is Professor Alice Sullivan) did not receive responses from ONS to queries in emails sent on 9 and 17 June for three and two days respectively.

Prior to the meeting – presumed to be a video conference call, given the Covid-related restrictions in place at the time – the Stonewall representative sought assurance from ONS that “this is not a hostile environment for trans attendees”. They also suggested that ONS extend an invitation to a representative of another LGBT organisation, which ONS appear to confirm in response."

murrayblackburnmackenzie.org/2020/09/24/back-under-the-radar-a-review-of-plans-for-the-census/

This is good news, and I really hope National Records of Scotland are paying attention. Of course ideally we would be recording sex at birth rather than the falsified birth certificates of those with a GRC but ONS have to work within the law as it stands so I think this is a reasonable approach. As others have said, only a small number of people have a GRC. We can't stop people lying on Census forms so nothing to be done about that but at least there is a clear message that sex and gender are not the same thing in official statistics.

We can't stop people lying on Census forms so nothing to be done about that but at least there is a clear message that sex and gender are not the same thing in official statistics.

Stonewall could put its funds to good use and tell its followers why sex matters regardless of how you identify. Because it does.
That would help, and given their public funding status I'd say it is their duty to try and get the message across after all the confusion they have caused.
But we know they won't, so it's time to stop giving them public money. I'm sure NatWest and others will carry on funding them.

I honestly don't understand the thinking behind putting down the sex you 'identify as' rather than the sex you 'are'. How is the NHS supposed to tool up for the correct number of trans patients if they don't get accurate numbers from the census? Isn't that the purpose of the census, long-term planning of what's need for the population we have/will have?

To take that to its logical conclusion, if everyone returned that they were the sex they wanted to be, the NHS could, theoretically, stop providing any transition services because clearly they weren't needed, the census told them so! How does that benefit anyone? Even at best it just lengthens queues. It prioritises validation over service provision. And the validation is 'locked' for a century anyway!

Census data is used to help decision-making. Inaccurate data only produces poor decisions.

We already know how few people have a GRC.

That some more people identify as a different gender to their birth sex is mildly interesting. To some.

Planning services for the population on the other hand needs accurate data. Though If a few muppets wish to skew the data perhaps they should consider the consequences. Imagine (OK, in my dreams) if we ended up with better healthcare for women as a result.

I heard the interview on the Today program.
It was very clearly stated that you should put your sex as what it says on your birth certificate unless you have had that changed.

Gender to be listed separately.

I can’t see how this could leave anyone upset.

I was really pleased to read this earlier today. And thought it is worth taking a moment to thank everyone whether as grassroots activists, key board activists or academics for not giving up on the pressure on the Census compilers to recognise the danger to actual facts if the question on sex was allowed to be self identity.

However, as far as I know up until this proposal, the question on sex in previous census was assumed to be about sex. Whether or not trans activists chose to answer based on how they felt rather than fact, is in fact the reason why it became an issue this time.

So it isn't a reversal. It is confirmation of the intention of the question as it has always been - about biological facts. (some trans activists on twitter are saying who cares I have always answered how I feel).

The concession is the additional voluntary question about self identity.

You would have thought trans activists would have welcomed this because if answered correctly not only this time but into the future it should (if they are right in their assertions) provide actual number of just how many people have a gender identity.

You would have thought that would want to be able to demonstrate just how many of them there are.

Or maybe it is because they know that out in the real world most people want answer as it is irrelevant to them, or there will be so few in terms of the population as a whole, that it will undermine their campaigning on how this is such an important central issue for everyone.

I would think that, if you were say a transman, putting down both your sex and gender as male surely denies that you are trans which is part of your identity.

This is the guidance for the sex question in the 2019 census rehearsal

The sex question on the census will be mandatory, so will need to be answered by all. However, for those whose gender is different from their sex registered at birth, who may find the question difficult to answer, the answer they provide does not need to be the same as their birth certificate.

If you are one or more of non-binary, transgender, have variations of sex characteristics, sometimes also known as intersex, the answer you give can be different from what is on your birth certificate.

If you’re not sure how to answer, use the sex registered on your official documents, such as passport or driving licence, or whichever answer best describes your sex.

At the top of the page it says:
This article relates to guidance used in the 2019 Rehearsal. The guidance to be used for Census 2021 is currently under review

There isn't much time left for reviewing it, but I couldn't find an update on the site about the 2021 census.

The DM take: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9182797/Census-gender-question-asked-declare-sex-identify-as.html

University College London sociology professor Alice Sullivan said: 'Sex is an important predictor of outcomes across all areas of life, including education, wages, crime, and physical and mental health.

'If we do not monitor sex differences, we cannot tackle sex discrimination.

'Gender identity is not the same thing as sex.

'Understanding people's identities is important, especially at a time when increasing numbers of girls are identifying as trans or non-binary.

'But we cannot simply assume that the lives of these girls are not also affected by the fact that they are female.'

The small number of trans people in the UK, it is hardly going to move the needle or make a difference if they select the wrong gender. This is big data. Small variants get lost in the wash....

Clearly this is the right thing to do, but will it make any difference? Won't all the TWs just put their sex down as 'female' because they genuinely (magically) believe they are, and there is nothing to stop them?

It would be great if Stonewall and co could admit how irresponsible they have been in the census debate

Not much danger of that, Nancy was in twitter yesterday telling everyone that the Sex question is voluntary and encouraging people to still treat it like a ‘gender’ question.

Apparently it is very undesirable (for unspecified but darkly hinted reasons) to allow a government agency to hold data on whether someone is trans.

Mishy this data provides the raw source for many researchers. It may feel like it is ‘big data’ and accuracy and honest responses don’t matter but when you drill down to specific areas, as we’ve seen with the ‘female’ sex offending data, a small change can make a big difference. That was looking at a population of hundreds but the percentage difference was huge. If research is used to inform policy or decision making it is hugely important.

B Cohen is most unhappy about the change in headline. Am I imagining it or is the Times getting more supportive as time goes on?

That is scary rozwatching these close relationships

But good news on the census

Not much danger of that, Nancy was in twitter yesterday telling everyone that the Sex question is voluntary and encouraging people to still treat it like a ‘gender’ question.

Bless her, I think she was getting confused between sex, gender, and sexual orientation. Perhaps she needs some training?

Apparently it is very undesirable (for unspecified but darkly hinted reasons) to allow a government agency to hold data on whether someone is trans.

The TRAs really are their own worst enemies as the question on gender identity is for their benefit, nobody else's. If they want to lie, confuse or withhold information on either the mandatory or voluntary questions so it's impossible to make much sense of the data it will be their funding that suffers.

Good new about the national census. I wonder if the school census will follow suit. I think a lot of people don't realise that schools don't normally record students' sex; only their gender, and these are the data used in the annual schools census. This is what the DfE guidance says:

We need this data for both on and off roll pupils.

The gender of the pupil in the format of ‘M’ (male) or ‘F’ (female).

Gender should be self-declared and recorded according to the wishes of the parent and / or pupil.

Individuals are free to change the way their gender is recorded. There is no requirement from the department for any legal change or gender recognition certificate and it remains open for the school to amend the gender of any pupil, within their own MIS, at any time.

Where does the article say this is a blow to trans rights?

I can see it says a blow to the trans lobby, and to the TRAs, but not to rights.

@TyroTerf

Where does the article say this is a blow to trans rights?

I can see it says a blow to the trans lobby, and to the TRAs, but not to rights.

In the original version of the article.

archive.vn/6W3wU

Ah, it's been edited, makes sense! Thought I was going mad there, because the way it's phrased now keep it on. Serves me right for not having read the whole thread.

...wtf, autocorrect? No idea how "makes sense" became "keep it on"!

Thought there might be interest in what these women in Manchester did in response to registering for the census early in the 20th century. www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/picture-captures-manchester-suffragettes-hiding-6733274

[quote Angryresister]Thought there might be interest in what these women in Manchester did in response to registering for the census early in the 20th century. www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/whats-on/whats-on-news/picture-captures-manchester-suffragettes-hiding-6733274[/quote]
That's a great read, thanks. It seems to me that we now need a second suffragette movement, seeing as now men can count as women.

Get me that balloon now!

The last census in 2011 asked for sex. The next census is going to ask for sex(no change to 2011)plus additional questions around gender identity. Most transsexual/gender people are very aware of their sex and their subsequent discomfort with it. As a result, I'm pretty convinced the framing of the story in The Times is misleading at best.

statsgeek1 - if you have followed any of the many threads on here about changes to the Census you would know (and in fact I took part in a trial of it so I do know) the question on sex was going to have the additional comment that you could complete this based on your identity, not what had been recorded on your birth certificate.

Why do you think there was all this campaigning?

So the story in the Times is accurate, despite its provocative title.

And even if the Census officials didn't listen to arguements from gender critical feminists, we can be glad they listened to academics who pointed out what a colossal act of stupidity it would be to not have the census record accurate information. And so be able to see how well or how badly women's equality has progressed since the last census and census to come.

For once commone sense and reality have prevailed.