'Nonsense' of gender data collected by public bodies set for review

[Rightsraptor]

'The Science Secretary, Michelle Donellan, will on Tuesday unveil a review into "the utter nonsense" of public bodies being urged to collect data on self-identified gender rather than biological sex.' (From the Daily Telegraph, online edition, 2nd October 2023)

Well, thank goodness they are starting to see the light and not a moment too soon.

Prof Alice Sullivan is going to head the six month review.

I'm not writing more at the mo because of dying batteries and it's some horrid time of the morning when I should be sleeping, but I couldn't wait to share the good news.

Is that the sound of wheels falling off the wagon?

Took them (the Government) long enough. They were warned and warned. And meanwhile that muppet Gillian Keegan remains in Education ffs and Penny Mordaunt - one of the MPs directly responsible for this mess - hasn't gone away.

(Use Airplane Mode or archive . ph to read the whole article, if you don't have a subscription to read it).

From today's Telegraph:

Ms Donelan has been moved to act by examples such as the NHS sometimes using a person’s stated gender rather than their biological sex in data records.

The review will last six months and be headed up by Prof Alice Sullivan, the head of research at UCL’s Social Research Institute.

It will analyse the collection of research and statistics by all public bodies on sex and gender, with specific recommendations to be made at the end.

‘Utter nonsense’Ms Donelan will say in her speech on Tuesday: “To those who think they have the right to impose this utter nonsense on science, let this message go out from this conference hall today… We are safeguarding scientific research from the denial of biology and the steady creep of political correctness.”

She will also say: “We are making a stand before it suffocates British identity and values entirely… That is why we are depoliticising science, because science is the most extraordinary force for good – from curing disease to growing our food – [and] we must keep it that way.”

The intervention comes as the Conservative Party hardens its position on the importance of biological sex being recognised amid the debate about transgender rights.

The issue has played an increasingly prominent role in British political discourse, with all parties facing pressure to make clear how they would strike the right balance.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/10/01/gender-versus-sex-science-secretary-review-bodies-data/

A new pattern is emerging where there’s less pussyfooting around language, which is interesting. Imagine the reaction if that statement had been made three years ago. The power of manufactured outrage is gradually being whittled away.

I know it’s taking a very long time for all this to break, but the gradual change in the rhetoric must be fascinating to a dispassionate observer in terms of watching what seems to be a very extreme form of mass hysteria or McCarthyism (hopefully) being corrected.

Does anyone know whether Prof Alice Sullivan has drank the coolade or not?
I may be a bit paranoid but after the Barislow(sp) fiasco I just don't trust anyone who works at ucl

Sounds promising. I hope they genuinely DO somehow depoliticise it, though, so that Labour don't feel compelled to undo it all when/if they get in.

So a politician is going to call 'gender identity' utter nonsense?

The fallout will be interesting.

I thought sullivan was not gc? Maybe I'm thinking of someone else. Tbf it would be nice for all scientists and anthropologists to recognise sex but they don't anymore.

Professor Alice Sullivan was instrumental in getting the census to recognise sex, wasn't she? And she's worked with Fair Play for Women. I think she's an excellent choice.

Yes, Alice Sullivan is an excellent choice.

There's definitely a public figure in science with the forename Alice who has drunk the koolaid but I think it's a different Alice. I think it's important that this review is done by someone who isn't firmly in the GC camp though. If the review is dismissed as terfy propaganda then there's no benefit to it.

I hope the report is able to make recommendations which find a reasonable balance that data collectors can use which respectfully asks for and reports on the protected characteristic of biological sex as distict from gender, respectfully asks for and reports on the protected characteristic of trans status with a wording which doesn't require people to necessarily share the faith position in the concepts of gender ideology to answer the question, and gives people the freedom to make a separate statement of their gender if it's important for them to do so, in a way that is fine to leave blank for those who don't consider themselves to have a gender identity.

It will be a difficult balance to find because it is an article of faith on one side that everyone has a gender identity and good data collection needs to be worded in a way which simultaneously respects that "some* people believe this whilst also respecting that other people consider that belief to be fundamentally sexist and offensive, but that nost people are far too busy just getting on with their lives to have time for the amount of navel-gaxing required to work out which side they are on and just need the questions to be in plain English.

"Utter nonsense".

Where does that fit into the degrees of the Overton window?? 😁

• Unthinkable
• Radical
• Acceptable
• Sensible
• Popular
• Policy

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window

@OlizraWiteomQua I think you may be thinking of Alice Roberts.

I think it's blown the bloody doors off.

Alice Roberts is the useful idiot who refers people to clownfish when they suggest humans cannot change sex.

Hinesian levels of clarity and intellectual honesty, which is worrying in someone who holds a post dedicated to furthering the public engagement with science.

Brilliant news and doubly good that it is Alice Sullivan who knows what a woman is. She did sterling work trying to prevent the census being a train wreck

It’s such a shame they haven’t already clamped down on this dangerous nonsense and it’s taken a looming general election for them to act, but very good news.

Well that's a great start to the morning!

The problem is it’s going to be seen as a hatchet job on GI, biased from the get go. It would be more helpful to frame it as an analysis of how the inaccuracies and confusion can be addressed in future so we get fantastic data. Going in to address ‘the gender nonsense’ will undermine acceptance of the results.

Good!
It's important both are recorded though for proper insight and data collection . I would add especially with regard crime, but it's especially everywhere.

It is very good news that Alice Sullivan is in charge of this.

Alice Sullivan is the perfect choice - she is a social scientist who really understands data. She was part of the campaign to make sure the Census recorded sex accurately, did an excellent article on the failings of the Census to collect accurate data on trans identity:

https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/what-the-census-reveals-about-trans-people-in-britain/

Rest assured, @Hoardasurass , that Dr Alice Sullivan has most definitely not drunk the Koolaid.

I wonder what Labour's reaction to this will be?

Perhaps. I think it depends whether Labour are really determined to die on genderwoo hill, so to speak. Given public opinion, I highly doubt it.

I think they will be happy to allow the Tories to fix all the obvious 'nonsense', avert as much potential damage as possible, and then I would expect a faint pretence at outrage followed by a swift shuffling of the work done into the long grass.

Both parties will have their public face to present, the Tories may choose to do this 'outrageous anti British' sentiment, and Labour will probably opt for 'we care about progressive genderfeels' as a public line.

Behind the scenes, there is no way that science and data can support 'gender identity' as a thing. It's not defined, definable, or measurable, and there are very real impacts on people as individuals and society as a whole.

So I suspect everyone is well aware we can't treat NHS patients on the basis of 'gender identity' or base any substantive decisions on it.

Michelle Donelan is saying all the right things here but why the hell aren’t they taking action now? Why allow the police to continue to record male rapists as female? Why not clarify the meaning of the word sex in the EA? By the time this report comes out we’ll be in election campaign territory and then if Labour gain power the report will just get buried and nothing done at all.