1 in 67 English/Welsh Muslims are transgender

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

According to the ONS.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/why-does-the-census-say-there-are-more-trans-people-in-newham-than-brighton/

"Did you realise that one in every 67 Muslims is transgender? That adults with no educational qualifications are almost twice as likely to identify as transgender as university graduates? That the London boroughs of Brent and Newham are home to higher proportions of transgender people than Brighton and Oxford? These are some of the astonishing results from the 2021 census of England and Wales, which was the first in the world to ask about gender identity."

I thought it was strange the minute I saw the census results.

It's so mind numbingly stupid. The whole thing isn't worth the paper it's written on. Idiots.

It is shocking that they seemed to have only tested the question at LGBTQ+ events. Surely when you test a question you go to the ‘opposite’ group, those with no involvement in the issue, and see how they interpret it?

Could a few be teenagers who have got caught up in the social contagion and will grow out of it before long? Just in the same way that Covid or chicken pox is easily spread across different cultures?

Certainly in a secondary school near me teenagers who claim to be bi/trans/rodents are two a penny at the moment. In my day it was punk and we mostly grew out of that too thankfully.

I'm interested in "adults with no educational qualifications are almost twice as likely to identify as transgender as university graduates" I mean if its an innate thing, why would educational qualifications make a difference.

Or is it that this sentence is a bit arse about face and it's actually that being transgender is a hindrance to pursuing/achieving tertiary educational qualifications.

The question was for over 16s only.

I agree there are a huge number of trans identifying teens out there but end of year 8-year 10 seems to be the peak of it? Plus the temporary trans stuff is more prevalent in nicer, middle class areas than in the poorer places.

We need a schools census to understand wtf is happening with teens.

It means they don't understand the question - same as for those with English as a second/other language.

I thought this was the last ever census though?

No qualifications sounds like no GCSEs, not just degrees?

Just tried putting “does your gender identity match your birth sex?” Through google translate into another language then back to English. I got the following outcomes for different languages - the first two were the most common:

Does your gender match your birth gender?
Does your gender identity match your birth gender?
Does your gender match where you were born?
Does your gender identity match your birth date?
Does your gender identity match your gender by birth?
Does your gender match?
Is your gender identity male or female at birth?
Does your identity match your gender?
Is your gender identity the same as your birth partner?
Is your gender identity the same as your penis?

The last one!

Oh my giddy aunt!

😁I was randomly entering languages and forgot to note which that was!

As well as English not being many people's first language in Britain, I've come across a lot of "trans" identified white people who also identify as Muslim born again Muslim if you will, and that happened at the same time that they "became" trans which is probably muddying the waters as well.

Didn't mean for that to be crossed out, I was trying to put it between em-dashes.

Obviously that creates another huge issue for that community that TW are finding yet another female space they can identify into accessing as Mosques are sex-segregated.

Everything the census says about trans is unreliable and meaningless because of the nonsense questions asked, which assumed that everyone has a faith in magic pixie-dust gender identity, which is a false assumption.

I declared on the census that I don't have a gender identity that matches my sex at birth, explaining further that I have no gender identity whatsoever given that gender is the means by which sexist stereotypes are upheld. I expect that means I am counted under the "trans" umbrella by census statistics despite not being trans, but the only alternative would be to claim that yes I have a female gender identity which would have been a lie. It's a total nonsense.

I misread the sentence. I thought I saw university in there twice. Even so I don't understand how not having qualifications makes you more likely to be trans - or as I say, is being trans a hindrance to getting qualifications (in terms of poor mental health etc, not because I think trans people lack intelligence)

FPFW had to fundraise to challenge the ONS in the courts to stop them allowing sex to be self identified in the census. That's how captured the useful idiots running the ONS are:
:
https://fairplayforwomen.com/fair-play-for-women-wins-high-court-challenge-against-ons-census/#:~:text=in%20the%20Census-,Fair%20Play%20For%20Women%20wins%20High%20Court%20challenge%20and%20judge,self%2Didentified%20in%20the%20Census&text=Fair%20Play%20For%20Women%20have,sex%20as%20recognised%20by%20law.

In a society not captured by so many dodgy lobby groups, those in charge at the ONS would be sacked for these embarrassing inaccurate statistics.

Maybe having no qualifications is correlated with having autism, learning disabilities, or other neurodiversity. And in turn those difficulties are correlated with being transgender?

Several of the responses on this thread are actually good illustrations of the point made in the article, which is that the clarity of English matters and the quality of is largely determined by the quality of the questions asked.

If people don’t understand it, you get nonsense back.

I suspect here it’s largely that people read the thread title, but not the article itself. But the same problem will be caused by a terrible census question that requires people to be familiar with pretty niche debates and concepts to understand.

GIGO

Honestly the simplest explanation is probably right.

The data is utterly useless because the question was so poorly worded that significant numbers of people misunderstood it.

The correlation between people with low levels of education (more likely to have low levels of literacy) and people who speak English as an additional language (more likely to struggle with weird, nonstandard constructions and slippery neologisms) is pretty strong evidence that it was simply just a terrible question that has generated meaningless data.

It is not just the wording of the question either - it requires an understanding of a weird illogical ideology to understand it. Keir Starmer declared ‘no one is talking about it [gender ideology]’. That is clearly not true, a lot of people are. But equally there are a lot of people who aren’t because it hasn’t impacted on their lives, especially groups who are less likely to engage with UK media or social media (eg those with limited English or less education). So what does ‘gender identity’ mean to them? Did they test out the understanding of this concept outside the QWERTY community? Of course not!

I read that the best predictor of the percentage of transgender people in some area in that census is the percentage of people who don't speak English as their main language:

The more people who don't speak English as their main language an area has, the more transgender people the census reports from that area!

This strongly suggests that the results are because many respondents didn't understand what was being asked about in the first place. If this is the case, then the findings from the census are not useful.

Screenshot of the qualifications section of the census. No qualifications means no GCSEs, no certificates whatsoever

All the people I've ever known who would tick "no qualifications" were in that situation due to many years of missed school. The reasons were multiple and complex (prolonged illness, school refusal due to unaddressed bullying, caring responsibilities at home, and so on) but one thing these different people had in common? Poor literacy.

That's a major factor to why they had no qualifications. In my experience, those who'd had similar lives but who could read despite it, were press ganged into some sort of gateway qualification by desperate and worried school teachers.

The fact they didn’t road test the question on normies is the biggest 🤯

The sexuality question was for over 16s too but there was no validation to stop my then 15 yo completing it. 🤷‍♀️