OUGCRN Prof Alice Sullivan and Prof Jo Phoenix

[Signalbox]

Just linking this interview with Jo Phoenix and Alice Sullivan.

[TheBiologyStupid]

Thanks - will try and watch ASAP.

[Litterpicking]

This is an extraordinary story of quantitative social scientists politely querying why ONS was originally planning to ask participants of the recent Census for their gender identity and not for their sex. It's never been a problem until recently when the gender/sex issue has been politicised. ONS brought in a panel of people of so-called "data users" to debate the issue..including a theologian! None of these "data users" were empiricist researchers. These people seemed to be determined to undermine the scientific gathering of statistical "truth" for political and ideological reasons..a fascinating discussion. Thank you for posting it.

[TheBiologyStupid]

ONS brought in a panel of people of so-called "data users" to debate the issue..including a theologian! None of these "data users" were empiricist researchers.

Yes, that was the thing that stood out to me. How on earth this nonsense became so pervasive and unchallenged in serious and responsible bodies like the ONS is one of the most troubling aspects of all this.

[Signalbox]

@Litterpicking

This is an extraordinary story of quantitative social scientists politely querying why ONS was originally planning to ask participants of the recent Census for their gender identity and not for their sex. It's never been a problem until recently when the gender/sex issue has been politicised. ONS brought in a panel of people of so-called "data users" to debate the issue..including a theologian! None of these "data users" were empiricist researchers. These people seemed to be determined to undermine the scientific gathering of statistical "truth" for political and ideological reasons..a fascinating discussion. Thank you for posting it.

It is extraordinary isn't it? It must've been so frustrating for them. And as Alice says it was completely illogical to bring in a new GI question but then to also to turn the sex question into a GI question which would mean there was no meaningful data about sex.