ONS on sex, gender, and the census.

[ArabellaScott]

https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2025/03/26/gathering-insights-for-harmonised-standards-on-sex-and-gender-identity/

'The latest research shows Census 2021 gender identity estimates can provide a broad indication of the size of the trans population in England and Wales and insights into some characteristics, including age and housing. However, it also confirms patterns in our data suggest that some respondents may not have interpreted the Census 2021 gender identity question as intended and therefore may have unintentionally responded as trans, most notably those with lower levels of English language proficiency.'

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/culturalidentity/genderidentity/articles/census2021genderidentityestimatesforenglandandwalesadditionalguidanceonuncertaintyandappropriateuse/2025-03-26

Translation:

'We introduced a stupid and confusing question without clear explanations and now the data is fucked'.

I wonder if they’ve been captured by Stonewall?

As Sarah Ditum so well-expressed and summarised the many failings and harms of these useless data:

Among the biggest losers in this are trans people. When sex markers are changed on health records, trans people can miss out on the medical care appropriate for their sex. Or think of the census question: if you trusted those results, you’d believe that the most urgent need of trans people in England and Wales was remedial English classes. As Sullivan has stressed in her interview rounds, good data is good for everybody.

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/confusion-sex-gender-nhs-data-r9qrgl5zn

https://archive.is/gMQQ7

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/onsrelationshipwithstonewall2022to2023

1. ONS was not a member of the Stonewall Diversity Champions scheme in the financial year 2022 - 2023.
2. As we were not members of this scheme in 2022 to 2023 no membership fee was paid.
3. We are not currently a member of Stonewall's Diversity Champions programme.
4. Following a search of our purchase order records, we can confirm that no other money was given to Stonewall from the central budget.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/aboutus/transparencyandgovernance/freedomofinformationfoi/onsstonewallmembership

1. ONS has held an annual membership with Stonewall since at least 2006. As financial transactions are only available from April 2006 onwards (because transactions prior to this date were recorded on a financial system which is no longer accessible), we cannot confirm whether this membership was in place prior to that.
2. Since April 2006 we have paid an annual membership fee to Stonewall. These payments come to a total of £33,975.
3. The benefits of membership include:
4. Support to enter the Workplace Equality Index and Global Workplace Equality Index, providing tailored email and phone support and advice through a dedicated account manager. This enables us to benchmark and understand how effective our practices are with regard to inclusion and diversity.
5. Use of the Diversity Champion logo on promotional materials and being listed on the Stonewall Proud Employers site. This supports the attraction and recruitment of talent to the ONS.
6. Access to a series of seminars and webinars, discounted rates to workplace conferences and facilitated introductions to other employers. These activities support us in identifying and implementing best practice.
7. Access to resources around LGBTO inclusion, policy reviews by the Stonewall team and receiving discounted rates to the Stonewall Empowerment programme.

(2021)

I believe there were senior influential civil servants with a personal interest in promoting trans ideology involved. As has been pointed out countless times, once the self interested start pushing their own political ideology in the work place, others find it extremely difficult to challenge - especially when any challenge is labelled as "anti trans" and "bigotry".

Hence our major statistics authority in the country beclowning themselves with these incoherent questions and "apology / not an apology" for failing to use accurate data. And as usual there are no consequences for those pushing this in defiance of the Nolan Principles - just promotion.

No wonder the civil service is viewed with contempt by so many when they repeatedly undermine all the good work they do with this nonsense.

Still falls into the ‘no shit sherlock’ category. They knew this was going to be an issue and they blithely ignored the warnings.

I'm sure there was a transwoman working at a fairly senior level. Possibly the one who wore steam punk type attire. Stuff that no woman would get away with wearing to the office.

Trans staff may be triggered by census data, government statistics body feared

https://freespeechunion.org/trans-staff-may-be-triggered-by-census-data-government-statistics-body-feared/

However, on November 8th last year, Jen Woolford, the ONS’s director of population statistics, hit back at the regulator, saying in a roundabout way that she felt there was no problem, and that the ONS continued to have “confidence in our gender identity estimates at a national level”.
Less than two weeks later, on November 22nd, Ms Woolford decided to write to ONS staff about the controversy over the data in her capacity as “sponsor” of the organisation’s “LGBTQ+ and Allies Network”.
The message was co-authored with the ONS’s deputy national statistician for health, population and methods, Emma Rourke, and Darren Morgan, its director of economic statistics production and analysis. Like Ms Woolford, both are sponsors of the LGBTQ+ and Allies Network.
The statement, titled “a message of support for colleagues in the LGBTQ+ community”, began by noting “recent media coverage of our statistics around sexual orientation and gender identity.
“Over the past few weeks,” the message continued, “we have been speaking with trans colleagues and those in the wider LGBTQ+ community about the impact this has had on their wellbeing.
“In light of this, we want to reaffirm our commitment to providing an inclusive workplace in ONS where everyone can feel safe and can bring their full self to work.”
The message went on to signpost employees to services if they had been “impacted” by the situation, before adding: “Please support colleagues during this time and recognise that we are all impacted by this situation in different ways.”

And no woman would want to wear

No shit.

They were warned about this. They ignored it.

I would just eye-roll along FAFO lines, but - also as predicted - as we know, the data being predictably fucked-up impacts us all, it doesn't just make the ONS look like the clowns they are.

When public bodies, publicly funded, ignore warnings and mess up like this, why do the head honchos not have to resign?