Kia ora, talofa, hello, and welcome to the Census 2018 discussion on Gender Identity. Statistics New Zealand wants to know what people think, so here’s your chance to have your say. I am really looking forward to hearing from you on this topic.

I am also facilitating the discussions on sex and sexual orientation.

Similar to my post in the Sexual orientation discussion, the gender diverse world gets excluded and ignored enough just because somebody doesnt know how to talk about it. Removing gender entirely is such a waste of an opportunity to use those numbers in bettering the services the gender diverse community use and therefor betting the lives of these New Zealanders. Don't exclude people and their journeys just because you don't know how to talk about it.

I appreciate Statistics New Zealand's concerns on inclusion of gender identity questions in the census, as to potential confusion among the cisgender population due to the lack of education around gender identity.

I do hope that Statistics New Zealand is however exploring alternative options for collecting nationwide statistics from gender minorities. Statistics are important for presenting to government departments and NGOs to recognise areas in which the community is discriminated against, beyond the current reliance on individual experiences. Statistics New Zealand is still in the best place to collect these statistics, due to the lack of large organised bodies representing the interests of gender minorities in New Zealand.

Thanks for starting the discussion @kabelmanga1, and welcome. Just to clarify, the census is still proposing to collect sex and gender identity has never been included. Kabel has used the term 'gender diverse' . Other people who are reading this - are there other preferred terms?

I agree with Megan, possible confusion simply isn't good enough a reason to exclude this question.

The statistics that this would provide would give many of us really strong backing in our advocacy work for trans communities.

I do a lot of work in advocacy for trans youth. We got some hard stats in the Youth12 study last year on trans and gender diverse youth, significantly around health and wellbeing - and they're not positive. But having those stats has definitely made a difference, we've been able to say definitively that this is happening, that we have higher rates of mental illness, abuse, suicide, etc, and that something needs to be done. But those stats alone aren't enough, and census data would make a real difference.

The other problem with collecting data on sex is that the term is ambiguous - you're going to get a lot of confusion from trans and gender diverse people about what you mean by that, because as a trans woman given only an option for 'sex' on a form, I'm going to write down "female". I know what you mean by sex, and I understand what you want me to say, but my identity as a trans woman is more important to me and more significant to your data than the sex I was assigned at birth. The solution to this confusion and this potential loss of important data isn't clarifying what sex means, it's including gender identity in census questions.

Perhaps you can answer this @LisaAtStats but I am wondering why there seems to have been little produced from the submissions Statistics New Zealand took on developing a statistical standard for gender identity. Many of the things that are being said here I and others submitted back in July-August 2014 i.e. a good 9 months ago.

@Alana (topic expert) can you let @meganbowradean1 and the rest of us know where the Gender Identity statistics standard and classification is at? I know you've been doing a lot of work on it lately.

And welcome to @jenniferkatherines. Just adding a link to the Youth12 project you mentioned.

We also have an introductions page if anyone would like to introduce yourself, tell us if you represent just yourself, or an organisation or group of people, why you've joined the forum etc... (it's great to have you here).

I agree with Jennifers comments re asking and using the term 'sex'. I think 'gender Identity' is the more important term to use.
This comment in the intro also worries me...
"People may confuse or not understand the difference between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ which are conceptually different, and not interchangeable."
I think the only people who will be confused by those terms are those who are non gender variant in some way. To me the majority to transgender folk, if not all, understand the differance between ones 'sex' and ones 'gender' and 'gender identity.'
I also agree with Jennifer in that while the TG community may be a small percentage of the population, it is a hugely unknown and under recognised community. Albeit that other agencies such as MoH, DoC and NZTA may collect some data, it is limited to only those who use those departments and doesnt cover (supposedly) all NZers. So there data would not be as applicable as that of Statics NZ.
In trying to work with agencies, their funding, interest is very much based around being able to show them numbers.
Collecting these numbers, imho, is of the utmost importance to the Transgender community and those with the potential to offer them help.
Thanks.

We definitely need to be capturing this information - it's critical to identifying potential issues or opportunities. If we accept that gender and sexual orientation is not binary, its more complex than it used to be - but this isn't a valid reason for excluding it. The same issue would've happened a few generations ago around relationships - you were married or single. Now we accept relationships are more complex and yet we seem to able to cope with them.

After reading this thread I agree with majority of the commentary and my question would be what data would Statistics NZ and/or the community wanting to be gathered in relation to gender identity? If the answer to that question is to quantify the amount of people within the queer community or the people who do not conform to the gender binary then that's a self identification question - do you identify within/as "x" (the term best suited can be used). However, if the information wanted is something else I hesitate to encourage questions that may be offensive or invasive to be included within the census.

Amber raises an interesting point that I dont know how to answer. 'What question would you ask?'
See I believe in the binary but am happy if others dont. I also dont belong to the queer community.
I am a sex change female and so really these days just female. Would tick female, never an 'x' box. I would tick a Transgender box but not a queer box.
I know many Transsexuals who would feel as I do.
We need the information and dont see how anyone should take offense or feel these type of questions to be invasive. They are information gathering that is need and will help the various communities.

Many New Zealanders are more knowledgeable about gender identity than Statistics suggests. Yes, there are ongoing discussions about which terms to use. Discussions about whether New Zealand European or Pakeha is the preferred term has not prevented the Census from asking about ethnicity. Decisions about which terms is a detail that can be resolved. Getting the questions about gender identity and other aspects of diversity are important for decisions on funding and need for relevant health services. Standards New Zealand has developed a Rainbow inclusive workplace standard, and drivers' licenses and passports and some official forms have three (or more) gender options and there is no good reason for the Census not to continue this pattern. In fact, it is even more important for the Census to include this to ensure that Government decisions based on population diversity can start having a statistical rather than anecdotal basis.

My comments in the "sex" discussion would also apply here - I refuse to tick male or female regardless of my biological gender. I might use gendered public bathrooms, but I draw the line at any form that supposedly defines who I am.

I feel like the really important paragraph there, is the one from HRC - its really clearly laid out that insufficient data is limiting and something needs to be done about that, and the census is probably one of the better ways. Because I'm fairly certain that I have never been included in any other survey like that - it seems that data will be missed in a lot of places. And its needed data as the others have said. Also just because no other countries have done this so far doesn't mean that we shouldn't think about it.

Would be interested in more answers to @amberigasia's question about how people would use data on gender identity?

In an attempt to unworry you @rachealmcgonigal, about our statement above “People may confuse or not understand the difference between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ which are conceptually different, and not interchangeable": as you state "the only people who will be confused by those terms are those who are non gender variant in some way". And these people who are non gender variant in some way are (we presume) a large majority of people. But @kayscarlet is also suggesting that many non gender variant people are aware of the difference between 'sex' and 'gender identity'.

Hi and welcome also to @damianlight @chrose @rowanburnettjones - thanks for your contributions to this great discussion.

Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity - which yes, can be different to biological sex or at least sex assigned at birth. Many people taking part in this thread can probably confirm this, including myself.

@Guy Marriage, this is meant with respect but did you read the first sentence in the header? Gender and sex are basically the same, you are correct but sex and gender identity is totally different. This shows a good example as to why the question is needed to be included as for no other reason it will make people think and help people to understand their are differences between sex/gender and gender identity.
@CH Rose, agreed. Sexual orientation has nothing to do with gender identity. Totally different and unrelated in anyway.

@Lisa, How would the statistics be used?
Well several have commented re dealing with various health institutions and that is an obvious one. I, like many others, have tried to lobby DHB's, MoH and other health agencies but it is hard when there are no statistics to show the numbers affected or the potential numbers. Currently, numbers are merely a pick them out of the air game or use some poor overseas university numbers gathered from a population base that may have some similarites but are different than here in NZ. It is too easy for the institutions here to dismiss them as the numbers here and be told the numbers here cant be that big.
I have no problems with how others identify but it has also become clear to me over the years, that while I use to feel Transsexuals were a minority within a minority, I am no longer sure that is the case. I have now met and found so many Transsexuals who are what many call 'stealth'. They are happy in who/what they are and just living their life in the real world. As bank tellers, checkout operators, lawyers, parts managers and more.They will tick 'F' or 'M' on your statistic form, based on their gender identity. But they too often still have needs non gender variant people dont understand and are not being met. Trying to argue for them is hard when we cant show numbers.
What question do you ask? Well even here is hard and we have seen earlier mentions of the Transgender community and the Queer Community. I know many who will not tick the boxes. I personally will not tick the 'Queer Community' box and even the 'Transgender Community' box isnt really right but I would feel right ticking a 'Transsexual community' box. I think what is needed is not what community we belong to but how we chose to identify. ie, I would tick 'female' and also 'Transsexual'. I know alot the same as I.
Being able to bore down would provide useful and meaningful numbers. In dealing with health dept's I was once told 'Transsexual' is an outdated term and no longer used. Rubbish, as there are many who still use it but it is hard to show the numbers. Alas the Transsexuals are too busy existing, worrying and working for their hormones, surgeries, life and dont wish to stand out so alas it is too often the voices of the young non Transsexual, Transgender or Queer folk who are standing up and speaking up. The Transsexuals are not being heard or represented as their numbers are not seen. Yet they all too often have the greatest needs.
They arent being recognised as there is nothing to show the numbers out there in NZ. We desperately need statistics to show the numbers.
Other ways, beyond health, that the numbers can be used is championing other GVT departments such as education, employment, Police, Corrections and more. Just in being able to show NZ society that the Transgender/Queer communities make up a significant section of NZ. I believe it will be way larger than most assume.
I also think the collection of these figures will also help Internationally and with various UN agencies, to show NZ is taking positive steps to be inclussive to all. Overseas, hopefully it will help show other countries they may well have a sector that is bigger than they realised and therefore they need to be looking at those communities within their own countries. From Australia with its TG/TS/Q communities to the PI countries and their gender variant communities.
I am sure I have merely scratched the surface of the ways the numbers can be used. For now, all we have is to 'assume' and that just means we make an ass out of u and me.

@Guy Marriage, happy to discuss as long as it stays amicable. No disrespect is ever meant from me but I am a driver not a diplomat.
You are correct in that gender and sex are basically the same. As much as we oft hear arguments saying what about chromosomes, who has ever had their chromosomes checked in the world? Sex/gender is basically decided at birth by the Doctor/Midwife who spreads a babies legs and depending upon what they see, will announce 'boy' or 'girl'. That is what decides sex/gender.

But 'gender identity' is totally different. That is how we identify. I have several Transsexual friends who I am jealous of, who are so feminine in appearance, mannerisms, emotionally and yet still have a male appendage between the legs. There is no way I would ever regard them as anything other than female.Their 'gender identity' is female and you would not spot them as anything other than female and yet while it has been made easier in recent years to change, they still have an 'M' on their birth certificate in the 'sex' category. It will cost them to have the mistake corrected.

Gender is totally different than gender identity.

I still choose to identify as 'Transsexual' but many friends have told me that I should drop it as I am no longer Transsexual but just another female. My gender/sex is female, medically and legally but I choose to identify as Transsexual as I try to help those who follow my journey, with their own.

@ Guy Marriage, thanks. I believe in standing up and answering questions. Its only if we allow questions and answer them, that others can understand. Alas too many Trans/Transgender/Queer folk take exception to questions and so too often stymy learning and understanding. Often putting the backs up of those who are trying to understand.

Agreed and understand that we dont want the questions so hard they confuse people but really how hard is a question 'How would you describe your gender identity?' Then with a list of male, female, Transsexual, Queer, Crossdresser, etc and including 'other' and the ability to write it. People also need to be able to tick male or female and another option.
Is that really too hard or confusing? Am sure it would help give the show of numbers, most of us seek.

Currently the health system uses population based funding formulae for determining how much funding to allocate to different types of treatments and training of health practitioners etc. This may work out OK for determining levels of provision for e.g. treatment of diabetes and training for people to manage their condition. In the case of people who are transgender and who wish to transition, including seeking medical treatments including surgery, underestimates of population numbers mean there is less provision than would be expected. Some transgender people don't want medical treatments, but I understand that many do. Overseas research indicates that around 1 in 300 people are gender diverse. It would help with health service and health workforce planning is we had New Zealand numbers too.

Since we are part of the Pacific, there may be many names for personal identities (like fafa'afine or takataapui). Rather than name them all, having a drop-down box for more common choices, and allowing a write in option for other identities would be helpful.

I think the confusion is a false flag. Even if they're confused about the presence of the question, a cishet person is going to look at the options present for sex and know what to pick, and the options for gender identity and know what to pick.

If they've never questioned or wondered if their identity doesn't match that assigned at birth, they will pick male/man and female/woman without much hesitation. They may wonder why you're asking, but that's not really a valid reason to neglect to ask a question where the data output drive quality-of-life improvements for the trans community.

@Kay Scarlet great points thanks. and @Nat.

@Guy Marriage, the terms used by Kay - fafa'afine or takataapui, relate more to Gender Identity, not sexuality.

Personally, I know many Fafa'afine and imho they are different than alot of TS/TG/Q but one needs to understand them. They are beautiful. But it honestly isnt sexuality but gender identity.

Thanks @Rachael I need to be careful which thread I am posting in ;-) Gender identity and sexual orientation are definitely different.

Fafa'afine is a gender identity term for Samoan people assigned male at birth who identify with the spirit of a woman. Takataapui is a Maori term, originally for intimate friend of the same gender (LGB) but now often used as an umbrella term for Maori people with LGBTIQ identities.
Identity can be complex (see thesis) but questions can be simple.
http://www.google.co.nz/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCkQFjACahUKEwjL9cas_6TFAhXk4aYKHQYyADk&url=http%3A%2F%2Fresearcharchive.vuw.ac.nz%2Fxmlui%2Fbitstream%2Fhandle%2F10063%2F3179%2Fthesis.pdf%3Fsequence%3D7&ei=28ZFVYucGuTDmwWG5IDIAw&usg=AFQjCNGklzxXMFbwMhCnm3u8YZEIebG4Vg&bvm=bv.92291466,d.dGY

@Kay Scarlet, Thanks. Personally I believe Identity is not complex at all. If we are allowed to identify as we wish and believe correct.
It is only when you introduce GVT dept's, University Students and Professors, Acedemics and Statistics folk etc that it becomes complex.
I am who I am and you need to accept that, rather than tell me I am not who I am.

@Guy Marriage, sorry you feel you have to agree with me. You dont.

I think this discussion highlights why it's so important that these questions are asked - it's clear that there are different opinions on how people describe their gender identity. And, without wanting to offend anyone, it's very much based on each persons own experience. What we need is more information which the whole point of the census - collect as much information as possible from almost everyone.

Is it a tough question to ask? Not really, you offer as many choices that make sense and allow people to put other and describe it.

One potential benefit of these discussions is education and helping people to understand the topic and issues better, so welcome to @guymarriage, and great to see you asking some clarifying questions. And thanks to those who have answered - it's great to see people with different views having calm discussions Also welcome to those 'likers' out there (who haven't posted) but are still letting us know what you think.

Also a usability hint: if you put a @ before someones name (as you can see people doing) the system notifies them to let them know they have been mentioned.

Could the census not include a definition of each option to make the distinction between sex and gender identity clear to respondents? It's not a terribly complex concept, and should be easily explainable in a paragraph, perhaps paired with a URL linking to more information. Make the question optional, and include a 'Refused' option to facilitate those that find the question too difficult or foreign.

Absolutely 100% support gender identity being a part of the Census. Gender minorities are hugely and massively marginalised - many people don't even know that they exist!! Allowing people to represent themselves and compiling nationwide statistics to get an idea of the prevalence is a good start. As a Pasifika country I do believe that terms such as takataapui and fa'afafine should be indluded as they are different than words like "transgender" or "genderqueer". I think also this is a situation where people should be allowed to select all that apply. Like if "female" and "male" are options and so are "transgender" "genderqueer" "agender" "cisgender" "fa'afafine" "takataapui" etc and someone might select "cisgender" and "male", or "female" and "transgender" or "transgender" and "fa'afafine" because many people would use more than one of these terms to describe their genders.

I am going to copy & paste my response from the sex thread because it is more of my thoughts for this topic too:

"I think the really important thing - both for the sex and gender identity question - is to get an idea of how many people in New Zealand are not cis. Could it not be possible to preface any gender or sex questions with this query? And from there people could select male, female or other, with other splitting into a number of pre-defined options and an ability to write in?"

@guymarriage , that's categorically not true. The word cis has been used for much longer than that. Also, your options would not be of much use to many of the organizations who would make use of these statistics - it does not show who is transgender at all, for one.

However - I do think that "are you non-cis" isn't the way to go, although the sentiment is ideal: something like "Is the gender you were assigned at birth the one you still feel you are?" or similar, perhaps?

@guymarriage ...because the OED, and not even the well-known OED, is the marker for when words have been used? Has it occurred to you that maybe queer communities have been using them for much longer and perhaps lexicographers don't pay attention to them?

Upon thought, actually: since to the best of my understanding it's recommended that transgender people mark their sex as the gender they are living as (I'll say more about this later), it might be ideal to simply ask "Are you or can you be reasonably described as transgender?"

This would be clear as well as including people like myself who only identify themselves as transgender when needed for statistical purposes because their gender identities are culturally specific.

Anyway, on sex: as somebody who is both intersex (biologically ambiguous) and has a gender identity which is neither male or female (often described as non-binary), I'd strongly suggest that in accompaniment to this the options for sex are expanded to include a "neither" or "X" as is seen on passports.

I don't understand why we wouldn't list the most common eight-ten and capture the stats. If people identify with more than one, let them.

For ethnic groups (which some people might argue is self determined), in 2011 and 2013 there was eight options plus an other.

@damianlight - this is true. I feel that the ethnicity options are also inadequate (I'm mixed-race), but that is definitely a workable option. Honestly I think most groups would be happy with any data at all on trans stuff - wouldn't it be odd if we suddenly went from not a single check box to eight?

I agree, the more precise information the better, as long as we're able to access that data and reasonably sum it down into 'x amount of our population ID as some form of transgender or may reasonably be described as transgender'. But at the same time, if Stats NZ are still concerned about confusion, having a long list of options may not be ideal right off the bat - a write-in field is always good. Additionally, the results from a write-in field in 2018 could be used to determine a list of options in future Censuses.

Perhaps a write-in as an extension to the question I proposed, I guess? “Are you or can you be reasonably described as transgender?” and then "If you ticked yes, what is your gender identity?" or similar?

Great conversations going. Its good.
I dont think you want to just focus using the word 'Transgender' tho. Reason being, I know people who will identify as Trans, Transsexual, Queer but they will not identify as Transgender. I believe you need a list to allow people to select 1 or more and an 'other' where they can write in. Transgender just needs to be one of the options. We need this to cover as many as possible and then users of the information can add them up, depending upon the usage.

As to the write in idea, I dont know too much of how each paper is worked upon but would suspect its some computer reader that is set to check if boxes are ticked. Anything written in would require a human to read it and input it into a computer. Therefore I'd suspect the more tick boxes you have, that a computer can read, the better it is.

Yeah, to clarify, I didn't mean just to straight up throw the word cis in with no explanation - my preference would be for the word to be used and then defined, as this would also further the prevalence of the term in society.

I agree that too many lists and checkboxes at this early stage might be difficult to handle - what about a question to get real statistics on how many people aren't cis in New Zealand, followed by a write-in box? Those responses could be used to form a list for the next census - then we'd know for sure what the most prevalent terms in the community are. It could be something like "Does your current lived gender identity reflect the sex you were assigned at birth?" with an "If yes go to question ##" and an "If no, please write in your current lived gender identity". Or something to that effect.

I also agree that there is no one umbrella term that all trans people are comfortable with - whatever words you use, someone will feel uncomfortable. I think framing any questions more towards "are you cis?" rather than "are you trans?" will help.

@guymarriage But when you're dealing with such a marginalised community as the trans community, isn't it more important to make us comfortable than the people with all the power? ("straights" as you put it, which is incorrect - that is applying a colloquial term for a sexuality to an entirely seperate issue. There are many straight trans people and many not straight cis people.)

Additionally, I believe that if the term was used and explained, the majority of cis people would happily identify as such. In my experience, the people who object to the term are a minority - mostly people uncomfortable with a spotlight being shown on trans issues at all.

Stepping away from the conversation a bit, just to clarify that the form is available online yah? @Lisa? I just wonder about youth or anybody else who is not out, handing a form over to family or house mates with all this information on it.

Hi – early on in the thread, Lisa mentioned you wanted an update on gender identity work here in SNZ. Back in July/August 2014 many people made submissions to the paper “Gender Identity: Developing a statistical standard”. The public response was great (thank you to all that took the time to make submissions). We took all submissions into consideration and they helped us develop the statistical standard for gender identity. This statistical standard is very near completion and will be released soon. This standard was developed as an Official Statistics System initiative. This means it has been developed with a particular focus for government agencies, however, it will be freely available for anybody to use.

@guymarriage What is your objection to the term "cisgender" and do you have the same objection to "heterosexual"? Cisgender is to transgender what heterosexual is to homosexual: a simple, descriptive antonym. The prefix cis- has been an antonym to trans- since Roman times. See: cisalpine vs transalpine Gaul.

@guymarriage It has been in usage for over 20 years in academia. All words have to start somewhere, heterosexual only came into widespread use ~50 years ago.

It's a bit of an odd objection considering that it's only recently that trans issues have entered the public consciousness so the lack of widespread use of cis is unsurprising.

That probably comes down to visibility. How aware of gender issues are your parents or grandparents. Its common language amongst people who talk about gender and are aware of anything different other than cis. Most people just dont know that there is a word for non gender diverse people but thats just the word for it and the appropriate term to use. its literally the heterosexual equivalent when talking about gender. It is common language in all of my work places and social settings and always has been.

@guymarriage I forgot to tag you in the above message. I in no way live in an academic world and cis is the common word in every area of my life because the people in my life actually talk about gender. Its literally the heterosexual equivalent in the gender world. It comes down to visibility. Like Megan said, its unsurprising that its not common language outside of queer and trans communities but because outside of our communities, we are invisible.

@guymarriage I would also point out that by labelling yourself "straight" or "normal", you're implicitly labelling heterosexual trans people as "not-straight" and all trans people as "abnormal". That is why cisgender exists. It's a neutral descriptive antonym.