Sex Matters - Respond now to the consultation on digital ID - 5th May deadline

[KnottyAuty]

https://sex-matters.org/take-action/respond-to-the-consultation-on-digital-id/

Make sure the government gets sex right on digital ID – respond before Tuesday 5th May.

I’ve just done this and come to check if there was a thread. Cheers Knotty 😊

Well done! Im yet to have a look but it’s on the list for this weekend

On my list too!

Done

Thanks for reminding us and posting the link, Knotty.

I must admit, I am confused. On the Sex Matters page, there's this:

It will include a person’s full name, date of birth, nationality and a photo, but not their sex.

Also this:

People should have the option of not having their sex on digital ID. But if they choose to have sex included, it should be accurate.

I don't understand why we want ID cards to include sex as optional for those who want it. Surely, it just opens the whole system up to abuse? I know Sex Matters say that recorded sex should be accurate, but when has that ever stopped anyone from lying about their sex? And who is the government going to employ (i.e. pay money for) to check that every marker on every ID record is "accurate." No one in government or civil service is either competent or available enough to do that!

Feminists have been arguing for more than a decade that we can always tell who is male and who is female. Why should we need to use digital ID to "prove" we are female (to date, use single-sex services, use the gym, etc. )?

Doesn't encouraging a "let's hope this is accurate " marker on an ID just make a mockery of everything we have been saying? And throws caution to the wind in the face of those who will exploit this potential loophole? Won't this potentially reduce "female" to a digital footprint, rather than a biological reality?

Just leave sex off the digital ID. I want people to go back to accepting the reality of their senses, and to be able to challenge those living within their own fantasy bubbles. And, we see things are starting to move in that direction, finally, albeit slowly. Why would we want to set that back?

Allowing the inclusion of sex on a digital ID could be the first step to self-id by the back door.

Or am I missing something here? Happy to be corrected.

Done. Top tip for anyone else - it’s probably easier to complete on a pc than a phone!

I think the idea is for Sex to be cross-referenced with original birth certificates, which are being digitised (for people born in UK).

More details here: https://sex-matters.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Putting-sex-on-digital-ID-briefing.pdf

@BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth people lie but (a) it can eventually be checked against the birth register which does keep the birth sex even after a GRC and (b) there can be penalties for providing false information or for not correcting it in time which is one of the questions in the consultation.

The optional bit helps because single-sex services can be "no sex marker no access". The sex marker is not just "optional for those who happen to want it" it can be required for those who want to access a single-sex service or used to prove their sex when they need to.

Some feminists may argue "we can always tell" but I don't agree. Yes we can nearly always tell but I can't always tell myself, OK given enough time and the right context yes I'll be able to figure it out but that's not "always". And it's better for all sorts of reasons (including the number of trans people who have ASCs) to have an objective marker for sex that isn't the judgment of the poor receptionist.

Nothing's perfect and I think this is better than trying to ignore sex. I get why the govt doesn't want to go there but I do!

Why do you need people to prove their sex? I thought you lot can always tell!

And thanks @KnottyAuty - mine is done.

The more interesting question is why do some people not want their true Sex to be recorded on a digital ID?

Yes, I hear what you're saying about the poor frontline staff. I certainly wouldn't want to be one of them!

(my bolding)

Re

a) it can eventually be checked against the birth register which does keep the birth sex even after a GRC and

(b) there can be penalties

part of my concern is who is going to do the checking, who will impose penalties (will the penalties be punitive enough to deter the chancers?)

I am not confident that any government will be willing to put enough money into a process to cross check ID information and enforce penalties. The current government won't even enforce laws we already have.

Re

services can be "no sex marker no access".

I'm afraid I could never agree to this, especially if a woman would be required to have a digital ID in order to prove she is a woman. If another form of more common ID can be substituted, that might mitigate some of my objections, but some women will never have the "correct" form of ID.

But, I still would object to being forced, for example, to prove my "female status" at age 86, poorly, and in need of same-sex intimate care. It would be insulting to have to do this simply because some men won't obey the law and the government won't enforce it. It's not just about gym access and online dating.

I think we both want the same outcome here, but I think we disagree about how to get there!

Thank you for the link. I will take a closer look.

At first glance, from Sex Matters'
Putting sex on digital-ID - a briefing:

Re verification (of sex, to confirm what is on the digital ID)

"For those born in other countries, other reliable administrative data sources would need to be found."

This will be a problem, for example, if a woman is from the US. Most states will not release personal birth, marriage, or death information about an individual to anyone (except the individual personally or that person's parents or legal representatives) until that person has been dead already for 20 or 30 years. Catholic records in Canada are normally not available online; one has to visit personally and convince the local parish priest to let you see them.

Believe me, I do a lot of family history, and these are stumbling blocks every time.

Many birth, marriage, and death records are therefore not available online, and simply would not be available to UK civil servant "checkers."

How will these women's sex markers be verified? How will mine be verified? How will a woman who has come from a war zone that no longer has verifiable records, be "verified " as a woman?

As I understand it, digital ID will be voluntary, so I don't feel the need to complete the consultation either way, and I'm not saying that the government has actually given any of this enough thought. But, it's not as easy as saying "well, there will be a way of verifying the information, so what's the harm?"

@BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth But, it's not as easy as saying "well, there will be a way of verifying the information, so what's the harm?"

I'm not sure that anyone is saying that exactly, and there are certainly good arguments for and against Digital ID in general. For me it is more a matter of, if digital ID is going to be available as an option, I don't see why it shouldn't have a sex marker in it. If proof of sex is going to be very difficult for some people born overseas then Sex Matters are suggesting ways that can be overcome, if the person involves wants their sex to be recorded on the ID.

If they don't want to record their sex then that won't matter, in the sense that the Digital ID is not going to be compulsory anyway.

I think I'm mostly concerned with two things:

1. That we might be heading towards a situation whereby women (actual women) will have to prove they are women in order to access female single-sex facilities and care, simply because some men are not being required to follow the law: and
2. That having digital ID at all could eventually create "digital" women (and women who don't have access to the correct form of ID will not be able to "prove" they are female).

I suppose these are different arguments, and I can see what Sex Matters are trying to achieve, I think. I'm just wary of where this might lead.

And angry that we even have to be discussing this, when a simple "no, you are a man" would have sufficed 10 years ago, if the powers that be had cared enough about women's rights.

I thought one of the reasons for bringing in digital ID was verification in recruitment scenarios and was aimed at immigration, so that employers could check someone is entitled to work in the U.K. Therefore, similar logic would apply here - imagine if you are recruiting for a position that has a single sex exemption (care home workers for intimate care, prison officers, nurses, counselling services, or a political shortlist) and you want to make sure you are only interviewing women - but you are only looking at applications, you don’t have the person in front of you. In such scenarios accurate sex on digital ID would be crucial, especially in a world where you can’t rely on passport or driving licence ID.

Right to work in the UK for immigrants is already digital.
https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work/get-a-share-code-online

those pushing for digital ID as a way to control immigration are Trojan horsing

@SpiritAdder Ok, but Im just making an analogy. I’m not for or against Digital ID for immigration. My point is that if you are in a recruitment situation where you are screening applicants, there are scenarios where a reliable indicator of sex would be important and cannot necessarily be obtained elsewhere unless you ask for original birth certificate. So you can see why Sex Matters would push that as being important.

One of the points I made (I hope not too confusingly) is that checking and proving a non-UK citizen's birth/actual sex (on or for one of these new digital IDs) could be nearly impossible, depending on what country they were born in, and how those records are held and released (or not). So you might not be able to get one of these new digital IDs with your sex on it anyway.

The government was until recently pushing these IDs as mandatory (this was dropped), for the right to work in the UK "for everyone."

Conveniently leaving out the fact, as the PP has said, most non-UK residents already have some form of digital id.

I think for a lot of countries, passport sex is reliable. It wouldn't be for countries that have self-id.

Not to add to the confusion, but some countries systems for banking, finance and immigration are so outdated that lesbian couples have to choose one of them to be put in as a Mr.

So a digital ID that is then checked against other records in other countries could well result in the wrong sex.

The problem is that (as the government are proposing), you cannot have your sex on your new digital ID without the government having some way to confirm that this is your correct sex. They would need to see an unaltered birth certificate or record of some kind ( they mention marriage before a certain date, for example ) before they issue the digital ID.

If your country of origin cannot or will not produce a birth record to prove your sex, and you wanted to use your digital ID to prove your sex, you would not get your digital ID.

So by the time you got to the recruiter, who asks to see your digital ID, it's already too late. Either they accept your birth certificate (if you have one), or you can't have the job.

In which case, why would you need a digital ID? Just use a birth certificate.

https://sex-matters.org/take-action/respond-to-the-consultation-on-digital-id/

Ps. Since my posts have pushed Knotty's original link to Sex Matters way up the line, just reposting it for anyone who does want to read what they have to say!

Sorry, Knotty!

I haven't filled this in yet (it's on my list for this weekend) and so am not fully familiar with the questions asked, but I'm of course on board with "if there is a sex marker it should be accurate". I think it's important that it should be opt-out - that is, if you get an ID card you get a correct sex marker on it unless you specifically ask not to. That is part of what it takes for it to be reasonable to use this for access to single-sex services. If a woman needs them but has deliberately opted out from having her sex recorded on her card, I am, tbh, relaxed about the fact that, as a consequence, she may not get the single-sex service she turns out to need. In all cases I can think of, there should also be a mixed-sex option she can use, even if, as it turns out, it makes her uncomfortable. You choose to deny your sex, someone else later doesn't recognise your sex as a consequence, karma, innit.

However, as I understand it, the idea is for the whole card to be opt-in - nobody is to be forced to have one. I'm much less comfortable with the idea that opting-in to having an ID card should be the only way to get access to single-sex services. People are unhappy with ID cards for all kinds of reasons.

Probably the best is the enemy of the good. Eventually, we really do need people to be able to prove their identity and any time someone does that, proving their sex should be a consequence. Let's not kid ourselves that rape crisis centres will immediately be able to demand an ID card showing F, though.

@BridgetPhillipsonIsACowardlyJobsworth what about if digital ID becomes more widespread, it’s 20 years from now, you’re recruiting and you want to know birth sex? wouldn’t you want to have a reliable marker?

Since we have destroyed the reliability of passport sex, if we do bring in digital ID, shouldn’t we make it accurate from the beginning?

Im struggling here. I know these things can be complex but surely there should be a reliable sex indicator that is useful for many purposes (recruitment , law enforecemet , whatever) and if a new ID format comes along, why wouldn’t we want it to be right first time? We don’t know what the world will look like in 20-40 yrs and I don’t want men in women’s spaces because we can’t screen them out. No system is infallible but we could at least try to put back the certainty we used to have with passports.