• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Fair Play For Women

Fair Play For Women

  • Prison
  • Sport
  • GRA
  • Language
  • Changing rooms
  • Resources ▼
    • Take action! Here’s how
    • Key facts
    • UK law
    • Science
    • Sex vs gender
    • Consultation submissions
    • Materials
  • About Us ▼
    • Review of 2022
    • Our aim
    • Our beliefs
    • Our spokeswoman
    • Our history and achievements
    • Our supporters
    • News
      • Newspapers
      • TV Interviews
      • Radio interviews
    • Contact
    • Donate
You are here: Home / Language / What do we know about the research ONS used to justify changing the meaning of sex in the census?

What do we know about the research ONS used to justify changing the meaning of sex in the census?

21st February 2021 by FPFW

What sex are you?

This question has been asked in the national census every ten years since 1801. No guidance needed. It was assumed people understood this rather basic question, and easily picked from the two options, male or female, without any thought or difficulty.

You may remember filling in a paper copy of the census. This year for the first time most people will complete the census online. The ONS is estimating its on-line returns will reach 70% up from 16% in 2011. This means guidance on how to answer a question “What is your sex” will just be a click away.

Feminists, data experts and transactivists have been arguing about what the wording of that guidance should be. The guidance literally defines the meaning of the word ‘sex’ in the census so it really does matter. So, the Office for National Statistics did some ‘research’ in October 2020 to help them decide what guidance to give people on how to answer the sex question.

What do we know about this research?

The regulator, the Office for Statistics Regulation, told the ONS they “should share the outcomes of this research in a transparent and open way”.

They haven’t published or shared any of the details from this research. But, by piecing together what they’ve reported, provided to data users or to the media, already we can see a few problems with what they did.

It consisted of ‘in-depth interviews with trans people, traditional women’s groups and the general population’.

People were shown one “what is your sex?” question, with four different options for the guidance on how to answer it.

It’s not a representative study.

The 52 people were not selected at random, so they are not representative of the views of the wider population.

Some were selected via a ‘professional agency’. … a professional agency that is able to supply trans people for surveys.

The research sample was biased in favour of trans people.

Out of 52 people interviewed, 16 were trans people and another 7 were “trans allies”.

We also know that “these groups are not mutually exclusive so one participant may be in more than one of these groups”.

In other words “transwomen are women” so they can give their views on behalf of “trans people” and also “women”.

None of the many women’s groups who have been active in opposing self-ID were included.

The questions were loaded to give ONS their preferred outcome.

It wasn’t just the people they talked to in the research, it was how they talked to them. Three of the four guidance options were couched in direct, neutral terms. But we know one of the four options was soft and friendly, saying “It’s up to you how you answer this question.” This was the one asking about identity on legal/official documents. No wonder people liked it.

This type of bias breaks every rule in the book on how to perform ‘qualitative research’.

Which women’s groups did they talk to?

The ONS said that “14 women’s groups were represented”. Sounds good. So who were these women’s groups”? The ONS has so far named only four:

SWARM Collective, a sex workers’ group whose policy states ‘transwomen are women’.

Women’s Equality Party, which very publicly ejected a spokeswoman who questioned sex self-identification and puberty blockers for children in 2018.

Women’s league for peace and freedom, an international movement headquartered in Geneva which has had no involvement in this debate as far as we can tell, neither in the UK nor elsewhere.

MIND Women’s forum. Perhaps they mean this network at the mental health charity Mind. Also not involved.

They avoided women’s groups that might disagree.

ONS said the research would: “consider the reaction of the whole population to the guidance in the Census 2021 context, but particularly those with strong views on which of the options to take forward”.

Fair Play For Women has strong views. We told them so at a meeting in June 2020. They didn’t show us the options, or ask us for a view on which to take forward.

Woman’s Place UK has strong views. They were quoted in The Times back in 2017 discussing the sex question in the census. In 2020 they commissioned the publication of a report on the topic, called Sex and the Census. They hosted a webinar called Sex and the Census. They obtained and published legal advice on the matter. They weren’t asked either.

In fact, there are now over a dozen groups, all UK-based, concerned about the ONS decision. None of these groups are new (they’re all easier to find online than MIND Women’s Forum). Not one of these groups was asked.

Now these groups have launched a campaign website, #SexInTheCensus, to call attention to the problem of this self-ID guidance, and suggesting easy ways for people to register their disapproval with the ONS for messing around with the meaning of sex.

Plus, there’s our judicial review. If the ONS does not withdraw its dodgy guidance, they’ll have to listen to us in court. Our legal crowd funder has already raised over £42,000 in a matter of days. Please donate if you can.

It really would have been easier and cheaper all round if ONS had just listened to women in the first place.

This small, biased study was used to underpin their decision to redefine sex in the census.

This secret study revealed that asking trans people about what sex they were born could mean “some individuals would exert pressure on others to disrupt the census by discouraging completion”.

They concluded that:

“The highest negative impact on accuracy and reliability is anticipated if sex registered at birth was collected due to the likely negative impact on response rates caused by the perceived invasion of privacy.  The data need is not considered to be strong enough to justify collecting this.

The least impact is anticipated if sex as living / presenting is collected. However, the adjacent concept of sex recorded on legal/official documents is also anticipated to have low impact”

In other words trans people would be so upset with being confronted with factual question asking “what was your sex registered at birth” that transactivists would organise protests encouraging people to break the law and not to fill in the census. This clearly alarmed ONS who appear to be more worried about the trans backlash than getting good data.

This study was used to justify ONS redefining the meaning of sex in the census to include forms of self-identified gender, despite there being a separate question specifically for gender identity. Their guidance allows the use of ‘legal documents’ that can be changed with a single note from a doctor or just filling in a form.

“If you are considering how to answer, use the sex recorded on one of your legal documents such as a birth certificate, Gender Recognition Certificate, or passport.”

Maintaining public trust in national statistics is vital.

The ONS’s approach to developing its guidance on the sex question is now under the spotlight, and it doesn’t look good.

Last minute U-turns, shoddy science and listening to lobby groups instead of data experts.

If the ONS don’t withdraw their unlawful guidance everything will be aired in the High Court for all to see.

Our Chief Statistician should be prioritising facts not feelings.

And the public needs to trust that our national statistics are free from interference by ideological pressure groups.

Read More:

Sex in the Census: Our legal challenge to stop the ONS redefining sex

ONS boss reverses commitment to collecting high quality sex data in Census.

Stop conflating sex and gender identity – they are two different things!

 

 

Filed Under: Judicial Review, Language

Primary Sidebar

Categories

  • Biological sex
  • Children
  • Gender Identity
  • Male violence
  • Scottish GRA reforms
  • Silencing women
  • Policy guidance

Our materials

  • Our factsheets
  • Our short films and animations
  • Our memes
  • Our research

Our latest articles

  •  Man or woman? This sex offender is both
  • A welcome announcement from British Rowing
  • Fair Play For Women and the international campaign for women’s sport
  • World Cycling – better late than never
  • British Cycling bows to the inevitable

Archives

Footer

Prisons, crime and protecting women

  • The facts about transgender prisoners
  • Prisons timeline – how did we get here?
  • Karen White & prison review
  • Sex attacks in female prisons
  • Refuge shelters deeply worried
  • How do women in prison feel about sharing with transgender prisoners?
  • Can you believe what you read about sexual and violent crimes?
  • The judicial review of prisons policy
  • Factsheets

Sport and the human body

  • A progress report on the fight to restore fairness in female sport
  • Sport timeline: how did we get here?
  • Biological sex differences
  • Chromosomes, sex and gender
  • The science and statistics behind the transgender debate
  • Testosterone suppression in “elite athletes” – what do we know?
  • Safeguarding in sport still matters
  • Male inclusion leads to female exclusion
  • What you can do

Making policy and the law

  • Scottish government is forcing sex self-ID on whole of UK.
  • The Equality Act 2010 and women’s rights
  • GRA reform
  • Advice and guidance for policy makers
  • Changing room policy advice
  • What can I do now?
  • Take Action: Say NO to letting Sex Self-ID in through the back door.
  • Public opinion on the tension between women’s rights and trans demands

© 2023 · Fair Play For Women

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt out if you wish. Read More

Accept Decline Cookie Settings
I consent to the use of following cookies:
Cookie Declaration About Cookies
Necessary (2) Marketing (1) Analytics (4) Preferences (0) Unclassified (4)
Necessary cookies help make a website usable by enabling basic functions like page navigation and access to secure areas of the website. The website cannot function properly without these cookies.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
wpl_user_preference fairplayforwomen.com WP GDPR Cookie Consent Preferences 1 year HTTP
YSC youtube.com YouTube session cookie. 52 years HTTP
Marketing cookies are used to track visitors across websites. The intention is to display ads that are relevant and engaging for the individual user and thereby more valuable for publishers and third party advertisers.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
VISITOR_INFO1_LIVE youtube.com YouTube cookie. 6 months HTTP
Analytics cookies help website owners to understand how visitors interact with websites by collecting and reporting information anonymously.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
_ga fairplayforwomen.com Google Universal Analytics long-time unique user tracking identifier. 2 years HTTP
_gid fairplayforwomen.com Google Universal Analytics short-time unique user tracking identifier. 1 days HTTP
vuid vimeo.com Vimeo tracking cookie 2 years HTTP
IDE doubleclick.net Google advertising cookie used for user tracking and ad targeting purposes. 2 years HTTP
Preference cookies enable a website to remember information that changes the way the website behaves or looks, like your preferred language or the region that you are in.
We do not use cookies of this type.
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
Name Domain Purpose Expiry Type
_gat_UA-109881507-1 fairplayforwomen.com --- Session ---
GASessionCookie fairplayforwomen.com --- Session ---
rtc linkedin.com --- Session ---
_wpfuuid fairplayforwomen.com --- 11 years ---
Cookies are small text files that can be used by websites to make a user's experience more efficient. The law states that we can store cookies on your device if they are strictly necessary for the operation of this site. For all other types of cookies we need your permission. This site uses different types of cookies. Some cookies are placed by third party services that appear on our pages.
Cookie Settings