Variations in sex characteristics (VSC): experiences of life in the UK for people with VSC and those who care for them

[IwantToRetire]

Analysis of the responses to the government’s call for evidence (2019) - Published July 2026

https://www.gov.uk/government/calls-for-evidence/variations-in-sex-characteristics-call-for-evidence/outcome/variations-in-sex-characteristics-vsc-experiences-of-life-in-the-uk-for-people-with-vsc-and-those-who-care-for-them

Saw this a while ago, and thought given posts on previous threads, some might be interested.

Have only skim read and cant understand why it has taken 7 years to do an analysis. And do wonder if the call for evidence had been say a year ago whether responses would be different.

It looks like VSC is the new DSD - I wonder why they didn't use DSD which seems to be the accepted medical term?

This caught my eye:
There is no comprehensive estimate of the number of people with VSC in the UK. The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights estimates that between 0.05% and 1.7% of infants will be born with varied sex characteristics (United Nations, 2015).

Does that figure of 1.7% look familiar? It's the number of 'intersex' births, according to Anne Fausto-Sterling in “How Sexually Dimorphic Are We? Review and Synthesis.” [2000].
She later rowed back on that figure, and came up with 1 in 100,000 instead.

The figure 1.7% had legs. To this very day it appears as 'proof' that human sex is not binary, and that 'being intersex' - which is rarely defined precisely - is 'as common as being red-haired'.

In fact, 'red hair' is a red flag in anything about sex and gender, because it indicates that the 1.7% figure has been taken on board, hook line and sinker.

So it's interesting to see it crop up as a legitimate upper figure here - quoted from the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, not the WHO
the United Nations estimates that anywhere between 0.05% and 1.7% of the global population is born with what it terms ‘intersex traits’ (United Nations, p.1, 2015). The latter figure, suggested by Blackless and others (2000) is the most frequently cited. [my emphasis]

Yes, the latter figure of 1.7% from the year 2000 may well be the most frequently cited, but even Fausto-Sterling doesn't stand by it.

I haven't read it all yet. Please tell me it doesn't mention red hair!

It's a very small sample, isn't it?
Analysis is based on 2 groups of respondents:

• those who have variations in sex characteristics
• those who look after people who have variations in sex characteristics in a personal capacity, such as parents, legal guardians, or carers.

The rounded sample sizes are 120 and 80 respondents, respectively. This analysis should not be interpreted as representative of the population with VSC, or those who care for people with VSC, as a whole.

YAWN. 🥱

Why the yawn?

It's hot, it's been a long and exciting day, it must be near KrazyKatty's bedtime - that's the only possible explanation for yawning

Just another FWR poseur who thinks they are more sophisticated than the rest of us.

Lately there seems to be a cult within FWR of those who want to show they are above the herd.

Or of course they just dont understand the implications, and the Government doing a report like this (even if it took 7 years!) which I doubt matches the rapid and often distortion of how this condition can impact on individuals.

Let alone of course being hijacked by the rainbow umbrella.

More renaming, have they asked the people who have DSD conditions if they want to be renamed.

"While the Office for Equality and Opportunity has made every effort to ensure the information in this document is accurate, they do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of that information."

Oh that's alright then, so long as they're not talking through their arse, we can have confidence in this report.