Can it be called "assigned sex at birth"?

@ellaanais As I noted in my comments earlier, due to the effect of sex hormones and what these statistics are used for, it makes little sense for trans people to provide their assigned birth sex for this question. It's also quite distressing to list yourself as your birth sex when it has little bearing on your current identity.

@LisaAtStats I would say it's not too difficult for binary identified trans people to answer this question (I answer it with my current sex) but many non-binary trans people may find it distressing to answer this with only two options, neither of which is entirely accurate for them.

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?

@deb (topic expert) can you please give us a demographers view on why sex and gender identity should be (or don't need to be) kept distinct...

Also just going to provide (or attempt to...) a few definitions for people who are not familiar with some of the terms being used here. I am not trying to incorporate every nuance, just give a general simplistic understanding.

Binary: (in this context): male or female.
Non binary: (in this context): doesn't identify with either male or female
Cis / cisgender: someone whose sex assigned at birth and gender identity match (i.e. a newborn announced as a girl grows up to identify as a woman) (seemingly a lot of the population - many of whom are unaware of this word / these words)

It is important to get something straight from the beginning. The current definition is not biological but medical. There is not a “distinction between males and females based on the biological differences in sexual characteristics,” except by fiat, standardisation.
In life, each element of ‘sexual characteristics’ as it has been called, in themselves are not indicative of anything by themselves. The development of ‘sex biology’ is not a linear process. Moreover, it is the brain and associated biology which ultimately determines one’s ‘sex biology. (I don’t have time and space to go into the complexity of biology, although it is interesting.)
That is to say, ideological hegemony has been used to create a binary for political and not biological purposes. This brings it back to a circular issue of gender identity.
When one is born, a ‘sex’ is assigned. This is an assigned sex, not one’s sex identity. That is a political sex.
The question needs to be asked: Is this about an imposed sex or sex identity?
Sex identity cannot and should not be decided by doctors. That is an abuse of human rights.

Thanks for the invite to this conversation Lisa and thank you everyone for your thoughts and input.
Sex is one of the four key ingredients for demography – the others being age, location and ethnicity. One of the main demographic uses of Census sex data is for population estimates and projections. There is high demand for this information at regional levels for planning service provision.
While sex is the term described by legislation, the actual Census question design is not so proscriptive. It is entirely open for people to describe themselves as male or female: (eg Are you…?) We understand that the data we collect from this is self-defined at the time of the collection and represents how the individual sees themselves. Demographers recognise that people may not fit within either of these two categories and we are investigating the implications of changing how the data is collected.

Deb Potter

I have been told that adding intersex will causes issues with demography. Can Deb Potter please explain why? and secondly how this explantion justifies the exclusion of a group of people who at estimation should be between 2-4% of the population?

Hi and welcome @rogenasterling. If we do more testing and research around introducing 'intersex' to the 'Sex' question, as currently recommended here, then any issues for demographers could be addressed then and weighed up with other issues.

Thanks for sharing your concerns about the wording and conceptualisation of Sex. Others have discussed the difference between Sex and Sex assigned at birth. When is there a need to differentiate between these two? (or between sexual identity and assigned sex if that is the preferred terminology).

Thank you @lisaatstats for your reply, but the human rights need for intersex inclusion is clear. This is something that you seem to agree on.
This leaves to important questions in your answer which are very important for the people on this discussion board:
First, what is the testing and research you mentioned?
Secondly, what issues need to be addressed and weighed up?

If you are focusing the question on identity, rather than biology, the situation becomes clearer and simpler. Having discussions previously, this is never really made clear and the explanations traverse biology and identity and do not demarcate between the two.

Hi @rogenasterling : a generic answer to your questions, as Statistics New Zealand follows a process, and this is not really the forum to go into detail. But briefly, when proposing to change responses we research what those categories could be, test to ensure aspects like understandability, and that the concept of the question has not changed, and examine the implications of changing how the data is collected (as mentioned by @debpotter). It's often iterative as this process often brings up issues that need to be addressed.

Issues raised here in Loomio and in the (more formal) submissions process will also be addressed within the process. At the moment this includes issues such as: do we want to collect sex or sexual identity and in what ways do the differences matter? is the definition appropriate?

What other aspects do people want considered?

Hi everyone

A proposal has just been started, stating the sex question needs to be clearer. You can find it, and vote, at the top right of this page. This will be the first of a series of proposals.

Proposals are being used to try and sum up the discussion and get a quick snapshot on what people’s views on this issue currently are. Proposals are a way of not only checking where everyone is at with their thinking but drawing more people into the discussion. You can find a guide of how to use proposals here.

Proposals are not being used in the 2018 Census engagement discussion as a final decision making tool.

The proposal closes on Tuesday at 4pm. However the discussion stays open until the 10th of June, so feel free to keep talking!

I agree with the two people above. Sex is much more complicated than the 'definition given by Stats NZ'.
However, if they continue as they currently do mixing 'assigned sex' and identity, then nothing will change.

Right from birth, a person's sex begins to develop and this continues at least through adolescence and then through the rest of one's life. Sex is a combination of both physical and social elements, which becomes one's sex, and part of one's identity.
The biological is complicated, and cannot be taken as a glance between the legs at birth, nor what is assigned by medical professionals if there is any 'ambiguity.
The biological elements will not not come to light till late infancy. moreover, only that person will know their sex. That person will connect the 'biological' elements, including those of intersex conditions, through the brain with any other aspects such as physological which becomes the sex that person identifies with.

So when it declared that sex question of sex needs to be made clearer, then really what is the judment of sex? Medical? or?
The proposal is no further ahead than when this discussion began about one month ago.
The only reasonable answer would be to state one's sex as one of three options: male, female, or non-binary (I choose non-binary, as there are many possible names to cover those who are not fitting with the binary of male-female - this is a secondary discussion once this option becomes accepted).

Thanks @duncanmatthews, @jenniferkatherines and @rogenasterling for starting off the voting and your valuable comments alongside.

We are aware there are a lot of people watching these discussions, who haven't yet commented. These proposals are also an opportunity for those people to get their point of view heard. I think this proposal is a good platform to start from, allowing comment from people with a variety of views, before initiating proposals that delve deeper into the issues. It can also help identify future proposal ideas, as you have done @jenniferkatherines and @rogenasterling.

This thread has had some interesting discussions about the purpose and use of the Sex data, as well as what is meant (by Statistics NZ, by others) by 'Sex', so for us the last month has been very useful and has prompted some possible solutions. It would be great to have more discussion, by both old and new members, in the next couple of weeks.

I agree with Kay's comment. Those who have legal douments as X should have the option of that on the census. It is the least complicated, verifiable (somethings Stats NZ is worried about), and provides dignity and human rights to those of us who are not binary, including intersex people

Also with room for intersex people

So a next step, as identified by @jenniferkatherines and @rogenasterling, seems to be to discuss what we mean by sex.

So if we mean sex and not gender identity, and not sex assigned at birth, and not sexual identity, what do we mean? If we want to collect data about people's current 'sex' which intersex people, trans people, non binary people, and others can answer, what should the concept of sex include and exclude?

Or should we be collecting something else?

Gender(sex) identity is the actual correct term, but beecause that now has a connotation of 'transgender', people are confused. Gender identity is the self-authored and identified perception of who one is. This male be male, female, or a non-binary identity.
Biology is only one part of our sex identity, the is a large social compontent as well which together make one's sex identity.
Ideally, it should be self-identified.
The only option is to refer to passport or driver's licence.

If it is seen as important, as a matter of human rights, for people to have an alternative to male and female. Why now just add "other" to the options and leave a ......................... for people to fill in a term which they feel describes them. I cannot think that this will apply to a huge proportion of the population.

As many people have referred to, both the NZ Transport Agency (who issue drivers licences) and The Department of Internal Affairs (who issue passports) allow for the option of 'indeterminate / unspecified' ('X').

NZLA refer to 'sex / gender' where DIA refer to 'sex / gender identity'.

In this Census discussion the needs and rationale (and proposed answer categories) for Sex (whatever we mean by that) seem to be very different from those in the Gender Identity discussion, so Statistics New Zealand would need to differentiate between the two.

How do we do this? What do we call it? Sex identity and Sex assigned at birth have been suggested - and these are different concepts. Or another suggestion was to drop sex and ask about gender identity. Thoughts, anybody?

I feel like a broken record here but sex assigned at birth is not an appropriate question to ask and makes little sense in how the statistics are used for health. Gender/sex identity is at least a little more accurate with regards to health needs.

Like Megan, I also feel like a broken record.
Sex assigned at birth cannot be used. It is the imposition of an identity by an outside source that may or may not relfect the person. A person's sex identity (culmination of both biological and social characteristics) is the only way.
Gender is the modern name for sex. Sex has been divded from gender by medicine specifically to enable its access and production of human bodies. (I don not have time to go into history here.) Thus, what is called gender today, is what is referred to in the past (prior to the word gender being used) as sex.
I acknowledge that the law states that Stats NZ must count sex, however, in law, the only characteristics used to define sex and gender ( the social-biological).
The law, must rely on reality, not a legal fiction. Sex as a binary is a legal fiction to uphold socio-political ideals.
It is time for Stats NZ to apply human rights of sex/gender identity as self-determined and autonomous. Failing to do that, it an abuse of human rights and something, the department cannot afford to go down.

Sorry @meganbowradean1 and @rogenasterling that you feel like broken records - yes you both have stated your positions quite clearly before. I am hoping to also get replies from other people in this thread (or new people) who haven't addressed these questions, before going onto other questions...

With respect to views expressed by Rogena, and to some extent by Megan, I think questions in the Census on Sex and on Gender Identity, should consider including the option of legal status even where this status is deficient on a scientific basis. Showing respect for a person's self identification as being the most important attribute in recognising gender would be a positive move and possible if society was equal and fair and any needed medical procedures were available and fully funded. That isn't the case now.

To show that there is an unrecognised need for greater support in health services, education, accommodation and a whole range of institutional services requires statistics we haven't got now. If a person has fully transitioned and has documents of identity matching their gender identity and requires no more health service support than any other New Zealander, that person may wish to identify sex (as legally defined on documents) and gender identity (as self identified) as the same. People should have the option of consistent identification. Some people may be willing to tick an additional box for sex assigned at birth if this is different. Other people may find this insulting and intrusive.

Some people find a range of questions on the Census insulting and intrusive e.g. level of income. Providing information is sought for valid reasons, made anonymous, and kept confidential, and there is the ability to not answer a question, I think questions clarifying the legal inconsistencies should be considered.

If the Census recorded people who identify their sex (as legally defined on documents) and their gender identity (as self identified) as being different, that would enable a start to be made on quantifying gender diversity in the population. A measure of diversity would be relevant for planning services and funding for some people who are marginalised and need more support than they currently receive. Other posters like Kabel have referred to the broken record of describing needs that are ignored because the size of the group isn't proven.

Enabling post-transition people to exclude themselves from a gender diverse group where legal sex does not match gender identity may result in an under-estimate of potential population diversity. This should nevertheless be implemented to recognise the reality of transition. This aspect of the questions could be reviewed in subsequent years.

For now, I think it is important to include (legal) Sex and (self identified) Gender Identity, and to permit Prefer not to say for either option. The data gathered is likely to be an underestimate of gender diverse people but it would still provide more information than we currently have.

Loomio discussions AND the submissions close on the 30th June.

There has been some high quality discussion in this thread and I strongly encourage you to make a formal submission.

While all the discussions on Loomio will be formally assessed, your best opportunity to influence census content is to make a submission.

In the Preliminary Views paper there is discussion about the intersex population. In this thread the discussion has been wider than consideration of the intersex population. So I am going to open up a proposal to check what people think. Apologies if you think I am going over the same ground...

Hi everyone

A proposal has just been started, stating that adding 'intersex' to the 'male' and 'female' responses would allow people to answer the Sex question.

You can find it, and vote, at the top right of this page.

Proposals are being used to try and sum up the discussion and get a quick snapshot on what people’s views on this issue currently are. Proposals are a way of not only checking where everyone is at with their thinking but drawing more people into the discussion. You can find a guide of how to use proposals here.

Proposals are not being used in the 2018 Census engagement discussion as a final decision making tool.

The proposal closes on Monday at 4pm. However the discussion stays open until the 30th of June, so feel free to keep talking!

The question and commentary are contradictory. Some may say No don't add intersex because (like some doctors) they only recognise M or F as valid options. Some may say No because including intersex but not transitioning people would ignore reality.

Yes
"Adding 'intersex' to the 'male' and 'female' responses would allow (SOME) people to answer the Sex question." more easily.

This addition would be better than no change.

The Preliminary Views paper mentions the intersex population. However discussion in this thread has included other populations. So is adding ‘intersex’ (or biologically intersex or something similar) a solution ('agree’), or does the solution need to be broader than this ('disagree’)?

And yes, the solution should be broader than M, F, and I.

I would prefer M, F, I, and X or M, F, and X where X is broader than I. I do not want to have just M and F as this doesn't reflect reality and is unhelpful in health and service planning.

I don't want to answer this question. Binary responses are sometimes inadequate (just like only M or F).

Prefer to add "other" with space for respondents to put their own category

It's all closing today - Loomio discussions and the submissions.

So there is still time to make a formal submission or put down your last thoughts here.

Thanks for contributing.