A flawed population problem that appears to have greatly overestimated the number of trans people in the nation is the subject of an official investigation into Britain’s statistics quango.
In order to gain the public’s trust in federal statistics, a campaign group has demanded in writing that the watchdog take governmental action.
They claimed that action was necessary to prevent the incorrect issue from being asked again in the future.
It follows the 2021 survey in England and Wales, which showed there were 262, 000 transgender people, or 0.5 % of the people.
The review had never before asked respondents if they identified as a female other than their registered birth sex.
There were “patterns in the data consistent with some respondents not interpreting the question as we had intended,” according to the Office for National Statistics ( ONS ).
Is the identity you identify with recorded at delivery the same as your sexual, according to the ONS census?
Compared to those who spoke English as their mother tongue, people whose primary language was no English were four times more likely to identify as trans.
It resulted in inconsistencies like the fact that more people in the London districts of Newham and Brent identified as transgender than in Brighton.
The ONS stated that despite this, it still had” confidence in the female identity estimates as a regional level.”
The information on gender identity is “worse than unnecessary.”
Sexual Things, a gender-critical organization, has written to Ed Humpherson, the director of the Office for Statistical Regulation, to request an inspection.
The Commons public management and legal affairs committee was also urged to launch an investigation into what went wrong by Maya Forstater, the organization’s executive director.
The ONS belligerently followed them in the survey despite warnings from several that its questions and advice on sex, gender, and personality were confusing and the categories were muddled. This was a pricey error.
The resulting gender identity data are worse than useless because they give the impression that decisions can be made with clarity and details.
We are asking the national statistics regulation to thoroughly look into these information and see if they meet the standard for national data because the ONS has dug in and refused to acknowledge that they are uncertain.
The ONS research “undercut confidence in national data.”
Our conclusion is that data on gender identity ( including the gender of the people identified as transgender ) is not fit for purpose, the party stated in their email.
It was motivated by the adoption of ideas and inquiries put forth by lobbying organizations that aim to change intercourse with female identity.
The ONS’s analysis is insufficient and calls into question the reliability of national statistics. It lays the groundwork for more sex-related quality degradation, the wider deployment of a female identity question, and the use of related information, all of which have been shown to be uncertain.
The ONS has demonstrated its reluctance to accept convincing evidence that the female identity question led to unreliable responses.
In order to maintain public trust in federal records and to stop the erroneous issue from being repeated, we call on the Office for Statistics Regulation to get regulatory behavior.
They advised eliminating the female identity query from upcoming censuses” with an explanation and an explanation to dissuade others from using the same wording.”
They also stated that the ONS concept of” sex” should be changed to refer to natural sext, and the data should not be labeled as national statistics.
Ms. Forstater, Helen Joyce, Sex Things ‘ director of campaigning, and Michael Biggs, a part of the advisory group, all sign the letter.
For reply, the ONS was contacted.
