New guidance on collecting and reporting data about sex and gender identity in official statistics

[Imicola]

I've not spotted another thread on this, but I've just been made aware that the Office for Statistics Regulation has finally produced new guidance on how producers of official statistics should collect and report data about sex.

I've not read it in full yet...what I have read makes clear arguments about the need to ensure clarity around the use of terms (it doesn't provide standard definitions, but includes the interpretation of terms that they use, which I think seem clear), that sex and gender shouldn't be used interchangeably and that Sex is a protected characteristic.

I'll have a more detailed look later, but the one concern I have is that while it talks about ensuring the right response options are available (e.g. it talks about gender identity options including non-binary or whatever), it doesn't include anything mention of ensuring response options are available to cover those who don't believe in gender ideology/don't have a gender identity. In my view, any data collection which fails to provide response options which accurately reflect this means that factually incorrect data will be collected about some individuals, and this would be in contravention of the GPDR principle of accuracy (and will also undermine the quality of the resulting data).

There is an email address for feedback, so once I've read it all I'll send some in.

Collecting and reporting data about sex and gender identity in official statistics: A guide for official statistics producers – Office for Statistics Regulation (statisticsauthority.gov.uk)

How about, what is your sex, as shown on your birth certificate?

Sorry meant to add, as someone up thread suggested, a more legitimate question would be one based on protected characteristics ie (to paraphrase) has a GRC or is in the process of applying for one.

Hardly any of them have a GRC or necessarily want to apply for one, but still have protection under section 7 EA 2010. So that won't give a realistic picture either.

@IwantToRetire the guidance is helpful as it makes it clear definitions like gender identity should be defined in each questionnaire. This is good practice.

I agree there is no standard definition of gender identity, because there isn’t one, and it’s going to be interesting what definitions are put forward.

WRT the ONS with the exception of the complete fuck up on the Census they really do try to be clear on definitions and methodology etc. This guidance should help ONS but other organisation.

You can change that. Mad, but true.

I only found out today (reading an athletics thread) that there is a different process for correcting your birth certificate (say if you have a later diagnosed DSD or there was an actual error or lie) than for changing it when you get a GRC. It looks like a bespoke service where you write to the Registrar and explain what's happened. So I think the ONS can cope with covering these outliers.

I'm really pleased to see some official guidance. It will make raising issues around sex/gender at work much easier. Recently I gingerly poked my head above the parapet in an EDI discussion to point out that it wasn't clear if the figures in front of us were reporting on "sex" or "gender", but I felt really nervous to do even that. No one knew how to respond because they'd clearly never considered that the two were not equivalent (and no one knew the answer either).

It would be fantastic to be able to reference ONS guidance to my colleagues in future - because in our normal roles we would all consider ourselves analytical and data-driven. Coming at it from a "we need to follow best practice to ensure the data is clean and measuring what we think is measuring" or even better "we need to be extra careful because of protected characteristics and GDPR" is just the lever needed to start making rational evidence-based decisions rather than defaulting to a reflexive #BeKind.

Having "gender" offends gender critical people. Having "sex" offends transgender people

Transgender people must recognise their own sex in order to want to change it.

It’s like saying some people will be offended by being asked their age. You can’t deny it isn’t what it is just because you don’t like it.

Gender critical people think gender identity is a belief, so you won’t always get useful answers.

Non-binary people have no gender - that’s their gender identity - but if gender critical men or women put “none” instead of “man” or “women,” that would be poor data.

”Sex on original birth certificate” seems entirely unobjectionable.

The law also 'thinks' gender identity is a belief; that's how the right not to go along with it is protected.
If forms had 'sex' with the correct two options, and also something like 'do you have a gender identity?', people putting 'no' wouldn't create bad data. It's the terms sex and gender being conflated into one that creates problems.

If forms had 'sex' with the correct two options, and also something like 'do you have a gender identity?', people putting 'no' wouldn't create bad data. It's the terms sex and gender being conflated into one that creates problems.

Exactly. If I am asked if I have a "gender identity" it's exactly the same as a question asking what religion I have. There has to be an option to say n/a.

At the moment I write that "I don't have a gender identity but my sex is female" in the free text field for people to describe their special glitter genders. So maybe I get put down as "agender" or something 🤷‍♀️

I do that. Presumably we both get put down as 'transphobe'. Or 'bolshy cow'. I hope so anyway

Yes #goals

So what's the actual difference between non binary people and gender critical people, given both have no gender id?

What is the important piece a data to capture? Is it the belief in gender ID? If so, perhaps people who self identify as cis should be included?

I actually find myself broadly agreeing with DadJoke here. There's a first time for everything! We basically need two separate, clear questions, and just asking 'sex' or 'gender' doesn't cut it. I could go with the suggestion above for

1. Sex on original birth certificate - M/F
2. Do you have a gender identity - yes, no, not sure

For 2 - yes there would be further questions, e.g. M/F/non-binary/other. (Or would non-binary people answer 'no' to 2, in which case we'd need further questions for 'no'?) I've included 'not sure' for the many people who still don't know what the whole thing is about.

Would 2 keep everyone happy though? No solution seems to keep everyone happy! It could be done as something like 'What is your gender identity?' M/F/None/N/A/Not sure/other'

Would 2 keep everyone happy though? No solution seems to keep everyone happy!

As long as sex is there, means actual sex and I can say n/a to "gender identity"
I have no interest in how many subcategories the Special People have for all their meaningless identity labels.

It's a bit like "what religion are you?"
"I'm an atheist"
"But are ye a Catholic atheist or a Protestant atheist?"

Me too, although I can phrase it as ‘I don’t have a gender identity, my sex is female’ or as ‘Gender is a sexist & misogynist concept & I’m surprised X isn’t aware of that, my sex is female’ or as ‘Gender is sexist bollocks, my sex is female’ depending on the context.

Transgender is not a protected characteristic.

The protect characteristic of gender re-assignment is:

41.This section defines the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act as where a person has proposed, started or completed a process to change his or her sex. A transsexual person has the protected characteristic of gender reassignment.

42.The section also explains that a reference to people who have or share the common characteristic of gender reassignment is a reference to all transsexual people. A woman making the transition to being a man and a man making the transition to being a woman both share the characteristic of gender reassignment, as does a person who has only just started out on the process of changing his or her sex and a person who has completed the process.
Background

43.This section replaces similar provisions in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 but changes the definition by no longer requiring a person to be under medical supervision to come within it.
Examples

A person who was born physically male decides to spend the rest of his life living as a woman. He declares his intention to his manager at work, who makes appropriate arrangements, and she then starts life at work and home as a woman. After discussion with her doctor and a Gender Identity Clinic, she starts hormone treatment and after several years she goes through gender reassignment surgery. She would have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act.

A person who was born physically female decides to spend the rest of her life as a man. He starts and continues to live as a man. He decides not to seek medical advice as he successfully ‘passes’ as a man without the need for any medical intervention. He would have the protected characteristic of gender reassignment for the purposes of the Act.

So this is another example of where we shouldn't let the weasel words of Stonewall ie gender identity' be taken as meaning the same as the protected characteristic of gender re-assignment.

Gender identity doesn't even really equate with religious belief either, because if having a religious belief was as fluid as gender identity, one day you would be Christian, next day a Buddhist, then a weekend as an atheist.

There is no requirement to have a GRC or even be preparing to get one to be protected under the gender reassignment characteristic.

You said you paraphrased that someone with that protected characteristic "had a GRC or was preparing to get one". That's only going to catch a minority of this population currently, asking about this doesn't map to the entire population of "transsexuals" covered by the Equality Act.

I'm not saying that "non binary" people fall under the Equality Act PC. I don't believe they do. Only "transsexuals" (MTF and FTM)

As I discovered in a mammogram appt, the one that women get invited to after they've turned 50, that I have no recorded sex on the NHS system but they had assigned me the gender of female!

I really must get around to sorting that out. How dare they assume my gender! Or if I even have one. I may have identified as a man for all they knew! Of course if I had identified as a man and the sex was left blank would I have got the you are now 50 letter that I only got as I'm female

You've failed to read the quote from the act I posted later.

ie it is quite clear it should ONLY cover those moving toward re-assignment / GRC not the wide ranging nonsense from Stonewall.

ie Gender Reassignment as per the Act if NOT gender identity which is a fashion trend or lifestyle choice.

You can't conflate "reassignment" with "working towards getting a GRC". They are not the same thing. This has been discussed for years here @IwantToRetire and any male who identifies as a "woman" on a permanent basis can claim protection under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment. The act of adopting female pronouns or "living as a woman" as TRAs would call it (whatever tf that means) in other ways is considered "gender reassignment" in and of itself. It's a nebulous process which is never defined in the law.

I know what the Act says. TRAs claim it includes non binary people, genderfluid or whatever. I disagree, but it's not about GRCs.

If I am wrong we would be in a stronger position. I'd be very happy to be proved wrong. But I am not.