Fairplay for women take ONS to judicial review for redefining sex in census

[fatblackcatspaw]

fairplayforwomen.com/

@Xanthangum

If I have understood Nancy correctly, T people have been lying since 1801 so why stop and try for accurate data now?

even if that's true though (which I take with a handful of salt but whatever), that was when Trans mean transexual not the marquee size umbrella that Stonewall have erected to include as many people as possible to justify why they need ever more funding.

a few thousand people would across the country make little different, a few hundred thousand people makes a very big difference to the data indeed

Does Nancy offer up any evidence base for that assertion?

I may have missed something, but did Nancy actually give any single objection to the sex question referring to sex registered at birth? She tried to deflect and distract by saying that most people don't read the guidance, that ONS have consulted widely, that trans people have always answered however they want to, and by talking about the gender identity question. But don't think she explained what problems would be caused by asking about sex registered at birth (or even 'legal sex')

It seems that Stonewall really don't have any reason that they can admit to publicly for their position.

But maybe I just missed it.

I found it quite difficult to follow NK's points, which I imagine was deliberate.

She seemed to be using the LG and B as a smokescreen, as usual, and made out that the updates are purely good news for all these groups. But, if this census shows up that there is a 500% rise in the number of people identifying as lesbian, how will we know whether that is a genuine shift in female sexuality, or that more women feel able to be open about it, or whether actually the massive growth in number is made up of male-bodied lesbians?

This useful data say for sexual orientation can be rendered useless very easily rather than giving visibility.

If a male clicks the female choice and then puts in Lesbian. You're getting a straight/heterosexual male rather than a female who is a Lesbian. Vice versa as well. I have no idea why 'gender' is tied to material sex.

@Xanthangum

If I have understood Nancy correctly, T people have been lying since 1801 so why stop and try for accurate data now?

Indeed - a pretty poor argument- I think she said it twice didn’t she?

It is similar to the argument that certain groups of people have always used the toilets of their choice as a justification for dismantling single sex spaces.

While I don’t believe that has been happening en masse anyway, the fact that some people have done something they are not supposed to do and think they’ve got away with it (women not feeling confident to object, no one actually being in the space, actually a successful legal challenge said that it wasn’t ok) is not an argument for explicitly allowing everyone to do it for ever.

Sorry, crossed.

It seems that Stonewall really don't have any reason that they can admit to publicly for their position.

Yes, They're doing their level best to obfuscate and obscure everything. It's intriguing.

What @Kit19 said

I thought it was interesting that SW are trying to pitch themselves as protecting women. I couldn’t work out which bit NK thought helped us.

Of course, as Kit19 says, Trans is a wide umbrella now. I have jeans and a fleece on today. Not performing being dressed 'as a woman' stereotype. If I filled out the census, then I'd have to admit my sartorial expression of 'gender identity' is as a man stereotype today and put in my gender identity (for today) is Trans.

Wonder what day Pip/Philip Bounce will fill in their census form? The woman day or a man day?

I thought it great that Nancy admitted Stonewall's influence in changing the census to the detriment of factual information. It's another example of overreach and gives everyone concrete examples to evidence how a self interested lobby group has acquired powers that negatively impact on society. They can't be stopped while they work in the shadows but sunlight and publicity is a different matter.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude

I thought it was interesting that SW are trying to pitch themselves as protecting women. I couldn’t work out which bit NK thought helped us.

I saw a suggestion that maybe it’s because if more trans people identify as female, it will inflate the apparent numbers of women that need resources and services based in our sex.

Those services will be of no use to the trans people because they weren’t born female so more for us??

But then she realised that she couldn’t say that out loud. Is Nancy an undercover feminist?

Maya F properly took this argument apart...

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1364167705713115137?s=20

One thing I can't understand, why can't they have two questions on the census? One for sex and one for gi.

74% carrotts ...

@TFSRM

One thing I can't understand, why can't they have two questions on the census? One for sex and one for gi.

They do have two questions one for sex and one for gi. That is fine in principle. The problem is that the guidance for answering the sex question allows people to pick the sex listed on a legal document. It is possible to change the sex on some legal documents to match your gi without having a GRC eg your passport. Sex should refer to the sex on your birth certificate or GRC as they are official records of sex. Other documents such as driving licence or passport may be based on self identification so reflect gender identity not birth or legal sex.

Bloody hell. I've just listened to this. Nancy is wanting us to believe, that the questions can be answered truthfully, or not, but that the resulting data will be better than previously. ????????????

TFSRM

One thing I can't understand, why can't they have two questions on the census? One for sex and one for gi.

As ChazsBrilliantAttitude says, there are two questions on the Census already.

Now, the thing that's harder to understand. The trans lobbying groups are against this. They don't want an accurate question on sex and an additional question on gender.

They want people to be able to put their self-identified gender for both questions.

They are not trying to ensure trans people are fairly counted. They are trying to get rid of sex as a meaningful category. And the ONS should really not be pandering to this.

@testingmitb

Bloody hell. I've just listened to this. Nancy is wanting us to believe, that the questions can be answered truthfully, or not, but that the resulting data will be better than previously. ????????????

Yes, but that's better as in "better adheres to gender ideology" not better as in more accurate stats. Adherence to the gender ideology matters above all else!

It is flabbergasting that an individual, who is obviously not stupid, is willing to go on the record spouting such patent bollocks.

@ChazsBrilliantAttitude and @fastwigglylines thanks for explaining. It makes no sense to record both if you can answer with gi for both.

I think the GI question should be asked next to religion not sex. Far more fitting.

Nearly 53,000 carrots now. 75%

I rather assumed the Woman’s Hour piece would bring a fundraising bump... perhaps WH only have an audience of people who agree with Stonewall and people who have already donated, and no one in between!

75% is good but means 25% is still missing.