Профиль

There’s an even more sinister angle to Johnny Depp’s ongoing “comeback” tour as the new Scrooge—it’s a Paramount production and part of a slate of Ellison-backed conservative cultural takeover attempts. It’s angled around MeToo rejection and the manosphere. spitfirenews.com/p/johnny-dep...

Rob Ford appears to have deleted all of his posts where he conceded that maybe Sullivan has gone too far. Fascinating. Silencing in academia or lovebombed?

I mean in the context of the census there's this thing you can do which whilst an imperfect measure certainly captures it better than saying trans people misgender yourself: 1. Ask people their sexgender 2. Ask them if they consider themselves to be trans or have a trans history.

And the obvious issues with trying to rely on her suggestion for recording birth sex

So perhaps you could consider not standing by calling Sullivan an "excellent social scientist" who "only" wants to record Saab and gender identity, given her actions since?

That is true of most cis people, but as someone who knows many trans people I cannot think of a single one who would answer the way *you* want them to on a census. I really suggest reading the linked article btw, highlights the absurdity of recommendation 20 for "interviewer identified sex"

A trans person’s medical needs and the information required to satisfy those needs are fundamentally non-binary and very diverse. “Birth sex matters medically” is plainly false because it is unsafe to make any inference based on one or two bits (literally digital bits) of information.

If most people will answer it according to their actual lived identity then what is the actual use of asking it?

And, of note, she actually complained in the press about a study using data from this because despite doing exactly what she asked for the study authors decided that a person's reported gender was more relevant to a study on how people perceive themselves as masculine/feminine Vs "observed sex"

Her proposals around interviewer observed sex do not work in the real world, unless you believe that 7% of Austrian women are trans. transsafety.network/posts/europe...

Also on the census- you cannot force trans people to give the answer you want them to. The census could say "put your sex as written on original birth certificate" and I would still put the one that's actually relevant to my life and how it is lived. I suggest reading this article that covers how

What she has done is shit all over the careful, thoughtful work the NHS was doing previously in collaboration with clinicians and trans groups to actually capture relevant info with ability to opt bits in/out and now we have a massive privacy breach for trans people that will cause harm as a result.

It is what has happened here, it is what she has advocated for because she was in the group making the decision and I find it hard to believe if she objected to it/thought it went too far that she would be celebrating it on twitter as she is now.

And that maybe her data record preferences might actually be causing harm? Including that she completely failed to consider that transgender women need breast cancer screening?

So, given this was brought in by Sullivans report, and that she served as a key part of the NHSE consultation group to bring this in, are you prepared to consider maybe she doesn't actually have trans people's best interests in mind?

Hi @thetimes.com It is almost 4 years now since you pushed the story that "1000 families" were due to imminently sue the Tavistock, a UK gender clinic. If you check now, you will see that the law firm's page promoting that propaganda is now a 404 error. pogustgoodhead.com/cases/tavist... 1/

There is no opt out. Clinicians are instructed they must fill it out and must share it automatically.

For comparison, the previous statement on data sharing and sexgender.

There was sex (what is now equivalent administrative gender) and a different optional gender field that is now gender identity. But new

Because it is "mandatory" data to share.