Suggestion that census could ask “do you menstruate?” instead of asking sex.

[broccolibush]

Telegraph article

So apparently it could be more inclusive and more precise to ask do you menstruate instead of asking for your sex. Which makes no sense at all to me. It would mean that pregnant women, menopausal women, women who have had hysterectomies, women on hormonal contraception, anorexic women, pre-pubescent girls and many others aren’t female. Surely this is beyond stupid?

More concerningly the article refers to “soft decertification” and “slow law” as a way to describe softly-softly pushing through change to erase women from womanhood.

These people need to grow up. And then fuck off.

I menstruated between the ages of 14 and 35 (only one-two weeks in four, though).

I've voted for quite a lot longer than that.

Daft sods.

Can't it just be sex registered at birth? I know that might alienate the (very small) intersex population but seems the best way? There could still be an additional question to ask if how you identify now?

How stupid is this? I menstruated, very randomly, from 17 to 41. So by that measure I've spent longer 'not' being a woman than I have being one...
Misogyny on stilts!

I've been through menopause. No periods, still a woman, thank you very much!

Stupid idea

All it needs to ask is sex at birth.

Then anyone who identifies as something else can still do so, but the census will still be biologically accurate.

These people need to grow up. Then fuck off.

And then pay back our £579,717.

JFC I do hope they aren't paying a lot for the idiot who dreamt that up.

And yes they need to fuck off.

"Do you menstruate" raises the questions of when? how often? under what conditions? Should I stop taking my contraception to find out?

If this is a specific survey to do with menstruation, it would be acceptable. It isn't, though. It's a terrible idea for a proxy question.

That's a lot of time expended by several intelligent people (not to mention the money) to come up with a lot of shite, isn't it?

Does anyone ever think this is a clever way to get the general public to refuse to fund academia anymore, on grounds of it actually actively lowering collective intelligence of society?

This is the verrrr important project: futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk/

Fine if it's on a questionnaire designed around medical needs of women and wanting to know how much provision to make for those of child-bearing age. Otherwise no - I haven't had a period for years, I am still a woman. (But I don't conform to the TW dress code of long hair, micro skirts and heels.)

Absolutely horrific.

Many women don’t menstruate, I haven’t had a period since a hysterectomy aged 31! Along with all the shit I went through having a cancer diagnosis, should I now consider myself less of a woman or no longer a woman 🤔

How fucking inclusive is that?? Although I am clearly missing the point in that inclusion only matters as long as we are talking about males 🤔

And then pay back our £579,717.

Quite.

This is the verrrr important project:

They've never been fans of Mumsnet as we called out their nonsense.

futureoflegalgender.kcl.ac.uk/2020/04/30/responding-to-gender-critical-feminism-on-gender-sex-and-a-generous-feminist-politics-in-anxious-times/

it's a pretty good idea, tbf.

or at least it would be if post menopausal women didn't outnumber trans women by a very hefty double digit factor.

it being the case that they do, the idea is beyond stupid.

'a generous feminist politics' - oh, wait, let me guess - is it generously including males in the lady umbrella?

• thanks for linking the article, Eresh, trying to read, for some reason my eyes keep sliding off the screen ...

The project is about not registering sex at birth at all! The authors wish to go in that direction.

I read the report. I made notes about it somewhere, but mostly it's the authors' own queer theory ideas, intertwined with comments from the survey they carried out. The comments which don't support the authors' ideas are largely ignored in the conclusions of the report.

They want to erase the concept of legal sex slowly, over time, as currently there is not enough popular support for it.

They can all just fuck right off now.

Why are a tiny minority who have an issue with THEIR sex, being so pandered too that the rest of us have to be so fucking dehumanised by having to be described by bodily functions?

Male or female. Only 2 choices. Not confusing in the slightest.

Penis havers, ejaculators and prostate owners are all male, regardless of whatever they 'identify' as.

It's utterly absurd to have our language removed because some people might have dysphoria and apparently get 'triggered' by words relating to their sex, so the rest of us must stop using them.
Why should the 99% who think gender ideology is bullshit be redefined so that the 1% doesn't get hurt feelings? Not our religion.
Funny how it's only ever female related language though eh.

This spot on, couldn’t say it better myself.
Drivel through and through. Where is this utter rubbish going to end

Outside of a private appointment with a Dr about something relevant to that fact if someone asked me if I menstruated I would be furious. None of your tucking business.

Yep. It’s a really inappropriate question. Creepy.

this is just a question so I can be educated on this possible situation,

If you were to meet a potential date in club, but your heterosexual and prefer female but female by birth, how are you ment to word the question or is it a case of go by looks alone and "surprise" later ?