AAARGH. How can I take your research seriously when you preface it with this...

[expandabandband]

"We recognise that sex and gender are not binary; we know that using the terms boy/girls etc can be triggering and we mean no offence; but we are data driven and nearly all of the data that is available to inform the debate is recorded in binary terms (boy girl/man woman) so because we are often talking about data we end up talking in binary terms even though we absolutely accept that sex/gender are not binary."

Tell me you are a muppet who doesn't understand science without telling me you are a fucking muppet who doesn't understand science.

This is for a report on the disadvantages that WOMEN face in public spaces

Literally renders anything that follows it utterly meaningless.

When will everyone wake up from this madness...

🤦‍♀️

Why didn't they just say 'Some people won't like the terms we use, but don't hurt us, please.'

I wonder why all the data is in binary terms? What possibly be leading all the other researchers to think the humans they study fall into two groups?

Also, any sex marker data that is NOT in binary terms (anything but M, F) will be useless for analysis. It will either be discounted or grouped together as a category without a definition ("other"). In cases where local law allows another marker (X, O, blank) there's often no clear definition of what that marker means even in that specific jurisdiction and it's certainly not consistent across jurisdictions. It can be used simultaneously for intersex, elective "nonbinary", "genderfluid", "switching Pips Bunce-style" or "none of your business"/"prefer not to say". All that does is reduce your useful sample size.

With that kind of disclaimer, I'd be more worried about whether the M/F designations are accurate. I could theoretically have a GRC that says I'm male and it would make no difference to how my female body is treated in, and experiences, public space --- even if I actively showed people my paperwork whenever I'm out in public.

I'm currently looking for a new job and any company that flaunts this kind of nonsense is completely avoided. I often wonder just how many applicants this kind of thing deters!

I think this is actually a disclaimer written by someone who does understand science but they are trying to fend off potential attacks by people who might be offended by their data driven not feeling driven approach

"We absolutely accept that sex/gender are not binary", doesn't sound like that to me...

I know people running smaller business/clubs etc etc who are writing disclaimers like that not because they believe them but because they are scared of backlash and negative reviews etc

Oh dear god

Seriously, this shit just makes my head hurt.

Major international company wrote that

Fucksake

Fair enough then I retract my comment

D'you know, this has just about topped out my fuckery tolerance.
When will this total bollox end?

I've had e fucking buff now 😑

*nuff

Lol, so true

@Pumpkinsbeinghitbyfallingapples I think what you wrote now also applies to major companies sadly. I wonder if they are high up on the Stonewall index due to writing this guff

@ImperfectAlf just about topped out my fuckery tolerance

Yep, me too. That's why I had to let my fury out here.

@LK1972. Yes, Stonewall Champions indeed.

If they're conflating sex and gender then the concept isn't coherent enough to be anything. Sex/gender isn't binary because it's inherently meaningless.

I suppose it's code for 'we're not T**fs' but it is pretty depressing that they can't just say men and women are used as sex class descriptors.

Oh absolutely but I have a lot less sympathy for major companies. I do feel for small/sole traders who are struggling enough in the current economic climate, and have seen others being targeted and feel like they have to pacify people.

Psychology research at undergrad level has conflated sex and gender for a number of years now.

They bang on about statistical reliability (good!) and then entirely fudge the "Are you m/f?" question by adding in various identities as though they're equal to sex, including "other" after a list of at least four options. And then treat it as though it's the same as asking the sex binary question.

It's a bloody nonsense. And if it's consistently happening at undergrad level, then it's pretty embedded socially, as these kids are being taught it's properly scientific before going in to the workplace.

@aweegc our kids are being taught all sorts of bollox. It's almost a full time job counteracting the total shite they are fed these days. I'm losing all hope.