Category: Identity and Documentation

Nonbinary gender information and practical resources wiki

Posted by – January 27, 2013

nonbinary.orgYou may have noticed that this site has been conspicuously low on updates in recent months, and for this I apologise. I’m hoping that this will change in the near future, but in the meantime I wanted to draw your attention to a related project that I sent up last year.

Nonbinary.org has aspirations to create a nonbinary gender visibility, education and advocacy network, arguing for equal access to employment, services and medical treatment for those who don’t fit the gender binary. In its current state it’s a wiki open for anyone to edit, collecting information about all types of nonbinary gender identity and expression, including the kinds of practical resources that Practical Androgyny aims to provide.

Rather than focusing on androgyny or any other single presentation or identity alone, Nonbinary.org hopes to unite all gender variant and nonconforming people whose experience falls outside the binary. Rather than relying on the health, energy, attention and ability of one person, the wiki structure allows anyone to edit or add to the information and resources collected on the site.

Several people have already got involved. As well as articles by myself covering concepts such as the history and usage of the term genderqueer and agender identity, numerous people have contributed to the section on the recognition of nonbinary identities in the UK started by Lottiotta and there are lengthy articles on subjects such as nonbinary transition and UK NHS healthcare by MxZirself.

There’s a lot more work to do and numerous gaps in our coverage, and so new users are welcome and encouraged. If you’re able to provide resources and information relevant to your gender identity or expression, or to your region or country, do please consider getting involved!

United Kingdom Census 2011 – Summary and Analysis

Posted by – July 21, 2011

Logos for The Office for National Statistics and WhatDoTheyKnow.comEarlier this year I wrote about the controversy around the question ‘What is your sex?’ in the 2011 United Kingdom census. In that article I established that the question of ‘sex’ was intended to record how the respondent subjectively saw their identity and that the Office for National Statistics and the Census Customer Services were advising transgender individuals to choose the binary option (male or female) that most closely reflected their self-identity, rather than their ‘biological’ or legal status.

I also included my reply to the Office for National Statistics asking for clarification as to how those who identify outside of the gender binary and would not be able to choose either binary option should respond to the question, and whether those answers would be reflected in the census statistics in any way. Read the previous article here.

Sadly I did not receive a response to my questions, but other non-binary gender activists received advice from the Census Customer Services telephone line advising them to enter both male and female if they felt that this was most accurate. They were informed that they would not be prosecuted for failing to answer this legally mandatory question if leaving the question blank, ticking both boxes or writing in a different answer was a genuine attempt to answer the question accurately.

However, at no point did the Office for National Statistics indicate that such non-binary answers would actually be reflected in the eventual census statistics. In fact non-gender activist Christie Elan-Cane‘s 2008 census public consultation period call to add a third ‘non-gender specific’ answer to the ‘sex’ question received a response that showed no intention of recording non-binary genders, and I myself was advised in 2001 that my non-binary answer in that year’s census would not be recorded in the statistics. There was also direct evidence that the answers of people in same sex marriages and multi-partner relationships were being treated as errors and ‘statistically resolved’ in the census statistics.

It seemed that non-binary and genderqueer people talking to Census Customer Services were being given false hope that their answers would be meaningfully recorded in any way.

As such, in May I made a Freedom of Information request using the excellent online service WhatDoTheyKnow.com. In this request I asked the following questions:

Could you please explain:

1a) How is the ‘sex’ question used in census statistics? What is an
answer of ‘male’ or ‘female’ taken to mean?

1b) How the ONS compensates for the inaccuracies/ambiguity
introduced by conflating the separate concepts of sex, social
gender, legal gender and gender identity into one binary question?

2a) Does the census system accept answers for this question other
than responses of only ‘male’ or ‘female’?

2b) Will the figures be made available for the number of people who
answered census question 2 to indicate they are:

i) Both male and female
ii) Neither male nor female
iii) Some other sex/gender, indicated by adding an additional box
or writing an answer in the space around the question
iv) Abstaining from answering the question, indicated by writing
this in the space around the question or by crossing out or
otherwise spoiling the question

2c) Are such figures available for the 1981, 1991 and 2001
censuses? If so, where may I read these?

3a) Will people who indicated that they do not have a single sex
ever have their answer ‘corrected’ or ‘resolved’ to assign them a
single binary sex?

3b) If so, what criteria will be used to assign this sex? How is
this justified?

4) Approximately how many people had their answer for sex
‘corrected’ in the 1981, 1991 and 2001 census statistics for any
reason?

On the 27th of June, Paul Wearn of the Office for National Statistics issued the following response:

1a) Responses to the ***sex*** question, which has been asked since the
first UK Census in 1801, are used, together with age, as the basic
variable, by which the full range of other characteristics, such as
health, employment and unemployment in particular occupations and
industries, education levels, migration, etc are measured. Such
characteristics have always been measured by the sex as reported
subjectively by the respondent. Information on the category of transgender
is not specifically collected in the census since the small numbers
resulting would prevent ONS from disclosing any detailed statistical
information about them, even if a need had been expressed for the census
to collect such information.

1b) For the overwhelming majority of the population ***sex*** and
***gender*** will be the same, and no statistically significant
inaccuracies are introduced by conflating the two. Where someone has
ticked both options or left the question unanswered, a single response
will be created. This is not in any way intended to reflect the true
gender identity of any individual, it is simply done to ensure the
completeness of the final outputs as for every other census question
(except the question on religion which is voluntary). Note that the
scanned image of the original census record, which is stored for 100
years, will retain the original response.

2a) No, the census system does not accept answers to the ***sex***
question other than ***male*** or ***female***.

2b) i) Information on the number of instances of multi-ticking for any
question (including the question on sex) will be recorded, and could be
made available on request subject to the numbers not being disclosive,
once data processing is complete.

2b) ii) Item non-response for all questions (where respondents do not use
any tick or text boxes available) will be published as part of the data
quality report. If any other indication of being neither male or female
was specifically recorded, no figures will be available.

2b) iii-iv) No. This information would not be identified or captured in a
structured way, in the scanning process, although as noted above, the
scanned image will be retained and released in 100 years.

2c) Item non-response results for the 2001 Census are available on the ONS
website (which showed that 0.4% of the population did not answer the
question on sex), but none of the other information requested or item
non-response for 1981 and 1991 Censuses is available.
[1]http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/…

3a) The response as recorded on the questionnaire will not be changed.
However, the data processed from every such record will be edited to
assign the category ***male*** or ***female*** for statistical purposes.

3b) A probabilistic statistical system will assign the sex, based on other
characteristics. This system is called CANCEIS (Canadian Census Edit and
Imputation System), and is used by census offices worldwide.

The system identifies a “donor” record (someone who has answered the
question with a single tick, and has other similar characteristics) and
copies their response. This statistical method is known as
***imputation***.

4) Information about edited records is not available for 1981 and 1991.
ONS has published imputation rates for each variable from 2001 on our
website at
[2]http://www.statistics.gov.uk/census2001/…

Note that the imputation rate will include people who have left the
question blank and those who have ticked both male and female.

Summary

As far as the census is concerned there is no statistically significant difference between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. The census system does not allow non-binary responses to be recorded for sex, each person recorded must have a single binary answer. Those who answer with both or neither binary options will have their sex ‘created’ for ‘completeness’ by a process called imputation. This is not meant to reflect the person’s actual gender identity, only to make the data ‘consistent’ and complete. As such non-binary gender is not reflected in the census statistics in any way.

The actual answers that people entered on their census forms will be stored, but won’t be made available for another 100 years.

In previous censuses, the numbers of people who entered both or neither option, wrote in their own response or spoiled the question in some way were not recorded. However starting with the 2001 census, both the rate of ‘non-response’ and the rate of ‘multi-ticking’ was recorded and this information was made available in the Edit and Imputation Evaluation Report.

In 2001 approximately 14,000 people intentionally ticked both male and female as their answer to the sex question. A further ~185,000 people failed to tick either box. This totals ~199,000 people who had their answer ‘created’ due to ‘non-response’, which accounts for 0.4% of the census population. Interestingly a further 20,000 people had their single binary answer for sex changed for some reason. Stated reasons for correcting binary sexes include preventing the recording of same sex couples being listed as married or as the parents of a child. These assumptions/requirements are described as ‘hard checks’.

It should be noted that 199,000 was the lowest imputation rate for any question. Questions related to education and employment required as much as 16 to 18% imputation, accounting for as many as 5,400,000 non-responses. Even age and marital status had higher rates at 0.53 and 0.76% respectively.

The criteria for assigning a binary sex when respondents gave non-binary answers or failed to be consistent with expected (highly heteronormative) statistical structures is to identify a ‘donor’ record with similar characteristics for other questions, then take the sex from that household or person. Where possible entire households in a similar local area are used. The choice of sex assigned may involve matching features such as the person’s relationship, partnership, marital or parental status. This may involve judgments based on the sex of ones partner or co-parent, or whether one is a single parent. The report indicates that the validity of imputed sex data was assessed for sample areas by judging the ‘sex’ of the person’s name. By this criteria 75% of imputations were judged to be ‘correct’, with the ‘incorrect’ values more likely to be perceived male names assigned a female sex.

The Office for National Statistics has no plan to change the way it reports ‘non-response’ for the sex question in the 2011 statistics. We will eventually be given a similar non-response rate that will cover the total number of people who omitted or wrote in their answer for sex, and another multi-ticking rate that will reflect how many people ticked both male and female.

Those who answered with a single binary gender but also wrote in a protest at the nature of the question, clarified their gender in more complicated terms or added an unticked ‘other’ box will be recorded as the indicated binary gender. Their protests, comments or elaborations will not be available to the public until the year 2111.

Analysis

The Office for National Statistics has no interest in recording the number of transgender or non-binary gender individuals in the census statistics or recording information such as age, relationship status, health, ethnicity, religion etc related to these individuals. There is no demand for this information from the organisations that use the census statistics and there must be a ‘strong need’ for any information requested. The ONS believes the numbers would be too low to be statistically valid, or that releasing the data would reflect such a small population as to make any information released too specific and identifiable, violating the confidentiality of the respondents.

The non-gender campaigner Christie Elan-Cane advocated for the addition of a third option on the ‘sex’ question during the public consultation period before this census, but was told that people would find the option of identifying as neither binary ‘sex’ too tempting if it were presented to them. Helen Bray of the ONS also informed me that ‘[there is] some concern that such an additional category might encourage some people to simply not reveal their male or female identity, and this could interfere with the demographic analysis we undertake.’

The census statistical systems are designed to ‘resolve’ or erase non-normative genders and relationship structures that do not meet statistical expectations or fit recognised legal structures. The response Zoe O’Connell received from the ONS makes this especially clear. This erasure also includes the answers of binary gender trans* people who indicated that they are in ‘same sex’ marriages, ‘different sex’ civil partnerships or are the parent of a child with a ‘same sex’ co-parent.

In 2001 approximately 14,000 people ticked both male and female and 185,000 people ticked neither box, this accounts for 0.4% of the population. We will eventually be given similar counts of how many people failed to indicate a single binary ‘sex’ or who answered both male and female in the 2011 census. It will be extremely interesting to see if the rate of non-response or the proportion of multi-ticking has risen since 2001 in light of the (albeit limited) campaigns asking non-binary and genderqueer people to tick both answers.

Although “What is your sex?” had the lowest imputation rate for any question, the figures nonetheless indicate that there were almost two hundred thousand answers that were potentially attempting to accurately record a non-binary gender or intersex status, of which the 14,000 multi-ticked answers are highly likely to be intentional. Some of the ‘non-response’ answers counted may have actually indicated a non-binary gender or intersex status by writing this information into the space around the question.

However the ONS has no plans to report figures for the number of people who wrote in, spoiled, amended or clarified their answers on the paper forms. The individual answers will however be stored and made available in 100 years. Knowing these individual figures could be extremely interesting and would help to show how many people felt strongly enough about their non-binary gender to protest being asked for a binary sex on the census. However even with this information, the census data will never be a good indication of the numbers of non-binary people in the United Kingdom due to the intentionally limiting and misleading nature of the question.

We have no way of knowing, until the years 2101 and 2111, how many answers recorded as ‘non-response’ or even as a binary ‘sex’ in fact indicated an unambiguous non-binary answer by writing in this information. We’ll never know how many more people with non-binary genders opted to answer with their assigned or legal sex due to incorrectly believing that was what the census was asking for, due to the legally mandated nature of the question, due to using the online form which did not allow multiple, skipped or written in answers, due to someone else in their household incorrectly answering for them, or out of fear of the ramifications of indicating trans* status on a form that would be seen by their entire household.

Due to the ambiguous nature of the question (asking for ‘sex’ when supporting materials explain that gender identification is required), it is likely that some intersex people with binary gender identities gave non-binary answers to the question in an attempt to accurately record their sex.

Next Steps

Write to the Office for National Statistics requesting that the number of people who wrote in some kind of response extra to the binary options in the question of sex be counted and reported. Ideally this information would be further sub-divided into those who did this while ticking no items, ticking male alone, ticking female alone or ticking both. We would also need to know the number of people who completed the question online and were therefore unable to amend the question or give any kind of non-binary answer. When requesting this information, state that we do not believe that this would be a statistically valid reflection of the numbers of non-binary trans* people in the country, but we do feel that it would give a better reflection of how many felt strongly enough about their gender to clarify their answer or protest the question.

In addition to campaigning about the census now past, if you want the government to legally recognise the existence of non-binary genders and record accurate statistics about our numbers then write to your MP explaining how strongly you feel about this issue and how having your gender ignored and erased impacts your life. Also ask your MP to write to the Minister for Equalities Lynne Featherstone on your behalf to explain how important it is to you that National Statistics surveys and censuses record and reflect non-binary genders and other types of trans* experiences.

Should censuses continue after 2011 (this is currently in doubt), it will be important for more non-binary people to take part in the next public consultation process and advocate for a strong need for non-binary gender to be included in the questions asked.

Visibility and pressure from non-binary people is vital in ensuring that our identities are officially recognised in the future.


‎* The asterisk at the end of ‘trans*’ denotes that this is the wider inclusive form of trans that includes all transgender, genderqueer, gender variant and gender non-conforming people regardless of gender identity or expression.

How transgender organisations can demonstrate inclusivity

Posted by – April 28, 2011

Transgender 'No Entry'Some people with less common transgender identities express feelings of being made to feel excluded, erased or ‘not trans enough’ for general transgender spaces, organisations and even identity labels. However the organisers of these spaces intend that all transgender people should be welcome and included and do not wish to see anyone turned away.

There is a mismatch between how inclusive transgender organisations feel they are or should be and the message their terminology, resources and support materials are giving to non-binary, genderqueer, gender variant and gender transgressive people.

This article is directed at organisations already including or representing transgender people and aims to highlight how well-meaning transgender support and information materials can exclude or erase the experiences of transgender identified people who feel they are on the fringes of, or currently outside of the ‘transgender community’.

Defining ‘transgender’

The most basic way for a transgender organisation to show all transgender people that they are included and represented is to describe the organisation and give its definition of ‘transgender’ in a way that includes those people’s identities. If a transgender person reads an organisation’s materials and fails to see their own experience reflected or, worse still, sees their identity erased by a simplistic or highly prescriptive explanation of what ‘transgender’ means, they are unlikely to feel included or represented.

Before we begin to look at how to demonstrate inclusion of all transgender people, we require a definition of what ‘transgender’ should mean. Practical Androgyny’s definition is as follows:

‘Transgender’ is an umbrella term that can potentially cover all people who transgress or transcend (go beyond the limits of) society’s rules and concepts of gender. People may be transgender due to their self expression, identity or personal history.

Transgender is a wide and nebulous concept and so is mainly used as a ‘cover all’ term to allow all people who experience prejudice or discomfort due to their ‘transgressive gender’ to be described and protected (such as in hate crime or employment protection legislation).

Most people who fall under the umbrella of an inclusive ‘transgender’ definition are likely to have their own specific identity label that may or may not include some concept of ‘transgender’. Some people who technically fit the definition may even strongly object to being called ‘transgender’, however others in the same position may feel just as strongly that it applies to them. Some people with ‘niche’ identities under the transgender umbrella may also use ‘transgender’ as their main identity label, as this is more widely understood.

As with the label ‘queer’, the potential for who may be covered by ‘transgender’ is wide, but it is up to individuals whether they personally choose to adopt a ‘transgender’ identity (self-identification). However what is most important is that no organisation claiming to include, support or represent all transgender people should ever exclude or erase anyone who feels their experience or identity is transgender.

Examples of inclusivity

Many organisations provide similarly inclusive definitions of transgender. For example, the Transgender Education Network of Texas has a verbose definition of transgender, I’d recommend reading it in full, but here is a relevant extract:

Transgender Education Network of Texas defines the term transgender as an umbrella term applied to a variety of individuals, which have an internal gender identity (a self identification as woman, man, neither, or some other combination) different than their sex assigned at birth (the identification by others as a male or female based on physical/genetic sex), and/or individuals which may exhibit behaviors, or a gender expression that diverge from the normative gender role (woman or man).

[...]

A transgender individual may have characteristics that are normally associated with a particular gender, identify elsewhere on the traditional gender continuum, or exist outside of it as other, agender, Genderqueer or third gender. Transgender people may also identify as bigender, or along several places on either the traditional transgender continuum, or the more encompassing continuums which have been developed in response to the significantly more detailed studies done in recent years.

Definitions of transgender used for the purpose of protecting individuals from hate crime or discrimination tend to be equally wide. For example in December 1998, the City and County of San Francisco’s Human Rights Commission published Compliance Guidelines to Prohibit Gender Identity Discrimination respecting San Francisco Administrative Code Chapter 12A, 12B, 12C; and San Francisco Municipal Police Code Article 33. These explain:

Transgender is used as an umbrella term that includes female and male cross dressers, transvestites, drag queens or kings, female or male impersonators, pre-operative, post-operative or non-operative transsexuals, masculine females, feminine males, all persons whose perceived gender or anatomical sex may be incongruent with their gender expression, and all persons exhibiting gender characteristics and identities which are perceived to be androgynous.

Wikipedia opts to recognise that there are a number of different, possibly incompatible transgender narratives and includes the following overlapping definitions:

Transgender (pronounced /trænzˈdʒɛndər/) is a general term applied to a variety of individuals, behaviors, and groups involving tendencies to vary from culturally conventional gender roles.

[...]

The precise definition for transgender remains in flux, but includes:

“Of, relating to, or designating a person whose identity does not conform unambiguously to conventional notions of male or female gender roles, but combines or moves between these.”

“People who were assigned a sex, usually at birth and based on their genitals, but who feel that this is a false or incomplete description of themselves.”

“Non-identification with, or non-presentation as, the sex (and assumed gender) one was assigned at birth.”

Cultural factors

How an individual expresses their ‘transgressive gender’ may vary depending on background and culture. This can affect the type of language they use to explain their own identity, and the identities of other transgender people. It can even affect whether they see themself as transgender at all.

There are transgender roles within a variety of cultures and communities. Within Western culture there are several potentially transgender roles available within gay, lesbian, fetish and crossdressing subcultures, described through medical ‘disorders’ and treatments, and represented through the media or niche online communities.

Which of these roles (or explanations) a transgender individual is initially drawn to depends on their background and life experiences. They may continue to see themself and other transgender people through the lens of these roles even when moving from one role or subculture to another. For example, some transsexual men may still consider themselves to be part of the lesbian community while others would reject this strongly, and some transsexual women would consider themselves to be ‘full time crossdressers’ or ‘autogynephilic’ while others would reject this equally strongly.

There are many different ‘transgender communities’ based around different subcultural roles and philosophies, different in person or online groups and communities (such as social or support groups, club nights or gender clinics), and different writings and literature. Each of these communities may have their own differing transgender discourse and vocabulary, reached through consensus between its members. Each transgender community’s discourse may seem incorrect, exclusionary or even offensive to another transgender community, even when they are self-describing identical concepts.

Avoid oversimplification

Exclusion and erasure is often an unintentional consequence of attempts to make definitions and descriptions neat, simple and easy to understand. As an activist focused on practicalities, this author recognises that it is desirable to explain concepts so that they appear straight forward and compelling to laypeople. However this should never be done at the expense of people’s identities and experiences.

There is no single transgender narrative that covers the self definitions of all transgender people. It is not possible to make statements such as ‘all transgender people have a gender identity different to the one they were assigned at birth’ or ‘all transgender people are trapped in a body of the wrong sex’ without erasing the experiences and self definitions of some transgender identified people.

Not all transgender people subscribe to the concept of ‘gender identity’, not all transgender people experience discomfort around their body and/or their social role. Many transgender people identify with the gender they were assigned at birth but are driven to ‘crossdress’, request alternative pronouns or transgress gender boundaries in some other way. Even those transgender people who have ‘transitioned’ may still consider themselves to be members of their assigned sex, hold non-binary genders or to fit within both binary gender roles under some circumstances.

Do not force transgender people to adopt a prescribed transgender narrative or discourse in order to be included or represented by your organisation, unless you recognise and explain that you are explicitly excluding those who do not.

It is problematic when an organisation claiming to represent all transgender people explains transgender in terms that many would reject. It is especially problematic when such organisations seek to define how transgender people are legally defined or explained to the general public, their employers, medical professionals and loved ones.

Language that may exclude or erase transgender experiences and identities

If your definition of transgender and your supporting materials are explained in terms of a single simple transgender narrative, those who do not adopt this narrative or see their experiences reflected in it are likely to feel excluded or erased.

The following are examples of problematic language and concepts used by major transgender organisations at the time of writing. None of these would necessarily be problematic when explained within a wider inclusive description of transgender. They become problematic when presented as applying to all transgender people, through direct statements or by nature of applying to all examples and case studies presented.

‘Covers transsexual people and crossdressers’

In the 1990s it was common for many organisations claiming to be ‘transgender’ to see this as simply a term that covered both transvestites and transsexual people. This often went hand in hand with the equally outdated implication that individuals assigned male at birth and transitioning to or crossdressing as female were the default type of ‘transgenderism’.

It should not need to be stated that if your definition requires all transgender people to identify as either transsexual, transvestite or a crossdresser, you’re excluding and erasing a large proportion of transgender identifying people. However the following definition was found on the website of a major UK transgender charity that otherwise does admirable and important work:

Transgender: An umbrella term used to include transsexual people, transvestites and cross-dressers, as in “the transgender community.”

This author is informed that the charity is making an effort to be more inclusive and are already working with genderqueer identified people. I look forward to seeing their website and this definition expanded to include non-binary gender and genderqueer identities and experiences.

Binary gender only / Excluding non-binary and genderqueer people

Defining transgender solely in terms of the binary genders (female and male, man and woman, girl and boy) excludes those transgender people who have non-binary gender identities such as agender, bigender, polygender or intergender identities, or ‘third gender’ identities which are defined without reference to female and male.

The exclusion of non-binary gender may sometimes be explicit, for example a definition saying:

Those who seek to adjust their lives to live as women or men

Alternatively the exclusion may be through omission, by including a number of examples or case studies of transgender experience, none of which reflect non-binary genders.

As non-binary gender is a little-known concept, it is not sufficient to simply cover non-binary experience by implication, for example saying ‘an other gender’ instead of ‘the other gender’. While this is an admirable first step, non-binary gender should be spelt out explicitly.

If a list of transgender terms is provided, ‘non-binary gender’ and ‘genderqueer’ should be included within the definitions. One of the first things this author checks when viewing an organisation’s materials is whether ‘genderqueer’ (a term that has been in common use for over a decade) is mentioned or defined anywhere. Not explaining the concept of genderqueer or non-binary gender within explanations of other transgender terms is a clear sign that I’m not included, or at least not considered important.

When providing additional definitions, do not provide definitions of some specific identities under the non-binary or genderqueer umbrella while excluding others. For example if you list bigender, intergender and third gender but omit agender, those who are agender may feel intentionally excluded, or at least annoyed to have been overlooked when other specific identities were singled out. Also be aware that some people with non-binary genders may not include themselves under the label ‘genderqueer’ as this may have political/philosophical connotations in some contexts.

Static gender only / Erasing fluid gender and shifts in gender

Many transgender people experience their gender identity or gender expression as a fluid feeling that changes with time or setting. Some feel different genders on different days, or have different gender preferences around different groups of people. Some experience gender as a social phenomenon that is imposed on them by, or shaped through, their social interactions with others.

Some transgender people identify as having fluid gender that changes from day to day or moment to moment. They may express this through androgyny or by shifting between different gender roles or presentations at different times. Whether they identify as gender fluid or not, most people’s identity and/or self expression shifts over time.

Not all transgender people consider themselves to have been born transgender. Not all transgender people consider their past history of identifying as a different gender than at present to have been a falsehood or mistake. Not all transgender people consider their current gender identity or expression to be permanent.

Explaining transgender solely in terms of a static life-long gender identity or expression erases those whose gender changes over time. Using a prescriptive transgender narrative that expects life long consistency of identity excludes or alienates those who experience any degree of fluidity and fluctuation in their gender over whatever time scale.

Erasing non-binary transsexual/transitioning people

Often when an organisation successfully acknowledges the existence of non-binary identified people, it nonetheless falls short on inclusion when defining terms such as ‘transsexual’ or ‘transition’, for example:

Transsexual Person: A person who feels a consistent and overwhelming desire to transition and fulfil their life as a member of the opposite gender

Transition: The process of moving from living in one gender to living in the other

Many transsexual or transitioning people consider ‘physical sex’, gender roles, social perception and gender identity to be separate factors to their gender dysphoria. They may experience discomfort over their body but not their gender role, they may transition solely to change their body and not their social role or may wish to change their social role while feeling no discomfort over their sex. Many people with non-binary gender identities transition to change their body and/or social role. Many people who currently have non-binary identities have transsexual medical histories (such as this author).

Many people with non-binary gender identities take cross-gender hormones or undergo surgeries or cosmetic procedures to remove or alter sexual characteristics. As such it may alienate or erase these people’s experiences to describe such procedures only in terms of binary gender, or to make assumptions about the gender identity or pronoun preferences of all people undergoing them. E.g. not only transsexual women undergo facial hair removal or voice therapy and not only transsexual men bind their chests or undergo ‘top surgery’.

Similarly, social and medical transition need not always follow the same path or include the same elements. While many organisations recognise that some people choose not to transition ‘full time’ or choose to undergo hormone therapy without altering their social role, there is little recognition of less common transition paths such as surgery without hormone therapy or ceasing or ‘reversing’ hormone therapy after gaining permanent changes and/or undergoing surgery.

Glossing over ‘detransition’, non-transition or experimental identities

There is a tendency to gloss over or omit discussion of ‘detransition’ due to fear that this casts transsexual people in a poor light or makes arguments for the provision of transgender surgeries seem less sound. However doing so erases those whose end goal was to transition to a state of androgyny or gender neutrality, or who found that their gender dysphoria was abated through medical transition making some part or all of social transition unnecessary.

‘Detransitioners’ are often individuals with non-binary gender identities who found they did not fit a traditional ‘transsexual path’. ‘Detransition’ to some degree is not uncommon, what is uncommon is for such people to no longer identify as transgender in some way, or to regret the process of exploring and expressing their transgenderness in order to discover their comfort point.

While there may be a perception that non-binary gender or androgyny is often a ‘phase’ or experimental identity for those on the way to binary and/or transsexual identity, there are many who had the opposite experience of going through a ‘phase’ of binary transsexualism before settling into a non-binary gender expression (this author included).

Those who choose not to transition, to delay their transition or who choose to omit, ‘reverse’ or subvert any aspect of their transition are no less transgender than those for whom the traditional transsexual transition path turns out to be correct. Many transgender people feel that the concept of transition does not apply to them at all and that they are fully transgender without making any social or medical changes. This too is an equally valid transgender experience.

Gender identity

A common problematic approach is to define transgender solely in terms of ‘gender identity’, for example:

Transgender people have a gender identity different to the gender role they were assigned at birth.

This implies that those who transgress gender boundaries while identifying with their assigned gender are not transgender. This would exclude those who identify as transvestite or as a crossdresser, or pressure them to adopt a similar narrative incorporating the concept of gender identity. It could also potentially exclude those who experience gender dysphoria towards their body (often described as ‘sex’ rather than ‘gender’) but not their social role, such as self described ‘FtMtF’ and ‘MtFtM’ transsexuals.

The above definition could be made more inclusive by also mentioning ‘gender expression’ and society’s current expectations, for example:

Transgender people have a gender identity or expression different to the gender role they were assigned at birth or are expected to exhibit in adulthood.

Some transgender identified people feel that they do not have a gender, perhaps identifying as non-gender, agender, genderless or neutrois. They may or may not feel that this lack of gender constitutes a ‘gender identity’ and may or may not feel the need to ‘transition’ in some way in order to express it. Such non-gender people are likely to feel excluded by a definition that refers to all people having a gender identity, or that all transgender or transitioning people are motivated by their gender identity. Language such as welcoming people of ‘all genders’ is equally likely to cause unintended feelings of exclusion.

Feminine and masculine

Some transgender organisations recognise the potential for exclusion in the language of gender identity and attempt to be more inclusive by substituting female and male with the associated terms ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’. Some organisations define gender solely in terms of ‘expression of masculinity and femininity’. Others seek to avoid referring to gender assigned at birth (as in ‘FAAB’ or ‘MtF’) and so use ‘transfeminine’ or ‘transmasculine’ as substitutes (with the implication than all trans people are one or the other).

Many transgender people however reject the concepts of ‘femininity’ and ‘masculinity’, or identify with the side of that ‘continuum’ traditionally associated with their assigned gender. Transsexual men may see themselves as femme or feminine and reject the implication that they are at all masculine, transsexual women may equally see themselves as butch or masculine and reject the implication that they are feminine. Non-binary gender identified people, especially those who see themselves as non-gender, agender or ‘third gender’ are just as likely to reject ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ as they are ‘female’ and ‘male’, seeing both as false binaries (as does this author).

Using feminine or masculine to describe those who consider themselves to be the opposite, or who reject the concepts of femininity and masculinity as part of a false ‘socially constructed’ binary, is likely to cause those people to feel alienated, excluded, misgendered or erased.

Gender dysphoria and Gender Identity Disorder

Another common problematic approach is to define transgender solely in terms of ‘gender dysphoria’ or ‘Gender Identity Disorder’, or to use these interchangeably with ‘transgender’, ‘trans’, ‘transgenderism’ or the concept of being ‘gender variant’.

As gender dysphoria is tied closely with the ‘medical model’ of transsexualism and Gender Identity Disorder this implies that all transgender people are (or should be) some variant of transsexual. This restricts who may be described as ‘transgender’ to only those who follow the common transsexual narrative of feeling extreme discomfort with their ‘sex’ or ‘assigned gender’ that drives them to wish to present themself as a different gender role within society.

The treatment of ‘gender dysphoria’ and ‘Gender Identity Disorder’ is regulated by a medical organisation known as the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (previously know as the Harry Benjamin International Gender Dysphoria Association). This organisation effectively polices the definition of who qualifies as gender dysphoric, ‘suffering’ from Gender Identity Disorder and (due to the nature of their name) who is seen as ‘transgender’ by medical professionals.

Materials produced by organisations following the medical model tend to be heavily focused on gender dysphoria as a medical phenomenon that drives all transgender behaviours and identities. If crossdressing, non-binary gender or genderqueer identities such as bigender, agender and fluid gender are represented at all, these are described as driven by gender dysphoria, either as alternative ways of coping with gender identity disorder (manifestations of transsexualism) or as variations on it (perhaps the disorder is not felt strongly or is seen as ‘Gender Identity Disorder Not Otherwise Specified’). This can create an apparent transgender hierarchy and appear to relegate many forms of transgender to ‘transsexual light’, implying that those who do not transition experience the same feelings of discomfort as those who do, but are choosing to cope without ‘full treatment’.

A definition that places emphasis on gender dysphoria therefore implies that a level of discomfort or even suffering is required in order to adopt a transgender identity, leading to some genderqueer or gender variant people feeling ‘not trans enough’ or that their feelings of transgender identity are ‘appropriation’ if they feel transition is unnecessary or do not experience severe discomfort over their body or social role.

Such emphasis also excludes those who crossdress or transgress gender boundaries for other reasons, even though they may experience transphobic abuse/gender policing or consider themselves to be transgender.

It is not necessarily problematic for organisations wishing to represent and include all transgender people to make reference to the medical model and the phenomenon of gender dysphoria. As this is most likely the current dominant transgender narrative, it is likely to be incorporated into the self identities of many transgender people. However it should always be made clear that many other transgender people do not experience gender dysphoria and do not define themselves in terms of the medical model of transgenderism. These people’s experiences should not be forced into the narrative of gender dysphoria or be implied to be of lesser importance or significance than those who do fit that narrative.

It may be perfectly valid for an organisation to choose to only represent those who experience gender dysphoria and fit the medical model, but if this is the case that organisation should clearly acknowledge that it is intentionally excluding some transgender people who do not fall under its remit. It should not speak for these people or claim that they are not really transgender.

Trans vs Trans*

Many transgender organisations refer to themselves as ‘trans’, say they cover all ‘trans people’ or use ‘trans’ interchangeably with ‘transgender’. However, in practice ‘trans man’ is used exclusively to describe FtM transsexual men and ‘trans woman’ is used exclusively to describe MtF transsexual women. Therefore there is a clear implication that ‘trans’ refers to transsexual people, or at least those who have a gender identity different to that assigned at birth.

In the UK, NHS (medical) materials use ‘trans men’, ‘trans women’ and sometimes ‘trans people’ interchangeably with transsexualism or gender dysphoria.

Transgender people who identify as, or are commonly seen as, the gender role associated with the sex they were assigned at birth (men or women) are unlikely to feel comfortable describing themselves as ‘trans’, as others may assume that they are transsexual or appropriating transsexual experience (claiming to be ‘trans men’ or ‘trans women’).

As many transgender organisations and individuals use ‘trans’ and ‘transgender’ interchangeably, many gender transgressive, genderqueer or gender variant people who have every right to a transgender self identity, may nonetheless feel that they are ‘not trans enough’ to quality as transgender. It is not uncommon for people to use terms such as ‘genderqueer’, ‘gender outlaw’ or ‘tranny’ (note, others consider this offensive) to describe themselves while not feeling comfortable with ‘transgender’ or ‘trans’ for this reason.

Recently there has been a move in some online transgender communities to adopt the alternative inclusive abbreviation ‘trans*’ (the asterisk is a wildcard, denoting that several different suffixes could apply). This could be short for ‘transsexual’, ‘transgender’, ‘transvestite’, ‘trans man’, ‘trans woman’, ‘(gender) transgressive’ or ‘(gender) transcendent’. There is also the implication that the wildcard invites and includes the reader’s own personal self definition. As such trans* is understood to also include genderqueer, gender variant and gender non-conforming people, and all other potentially transgender identities.

The use of ‘trans*’ is a quick, shorthand way to symbolise that your definition of ‘transgender’ is the widest, most inclusive form.

One word of caution though, be wary of using ‘trans*’ to only mean non-binary or non-transsexual transgender people as this could lead to othering. Say ‘trans*’ only when you mean all transgender people. Do not imply that some people are ‘trans’ while other people are ‘trans*’, by definition ‘trans*’ must be inclusive of all.

Intersex

Be wary of including intersex in descriptions and definitions of transgender without clarifying that the majority of intersex people do not object to the gender they were assigned at birth or consider that their intersex status makes them transgender. Do not, for example, list intersex as one of many transgender identities. Intersex is a separate but potentially overlapping issue.

However do be aware of intersex issues and avoid erasing intersex experience by describing sex in purely binary (dyadic) terms, or implying that assigned sex and genetic or physical sex are always equivalent at birth.

Equally transgender people should be wary of appropriating intersex experiences by describing transgender as a type of intersex condition, their own gender identity as intersex (intergender would be more appropriate) or by using intersex people’s existence as an argument against the gender binary or in support of transgender rights. There are many more transgender people than intersex people and so our appropriation of their identity could easily drown out the voices of a group that already struggles for visibility. Allow intersex people to talk for themselves and choose whether they (personally) belong in our communities.

If a transgender organisation opts to also represent and include all intersex people, it should fully understand (preferably through first hand experience) intersex issues and expect to cover intersex people who do not consider their identity and experiences to be at all transgender.

Summary and recommendations

‘Transgender’ is an umbrella term that can potentially include a wide range of gender transgressive identities, self expressions, behaviours and personal histories. Organisations that wish to include all transgender people often unintentionally exclude or erase some transgender identities or expressions with their resources and choice of language.

When non-binary gender, genderqueer or gender variant people look through an organisation’s materials, they look for reflections of their own experiences. If an organisation aims to include and welcome all people with transgender identities, their materials should do the following:

  • Recognise that transgender is a wide umbrella term; define ‘transgender’ in a way that does not exclude or erase any transgender identified people
  • Do not simplify transgender experiences into a single prescriptive transgender narrative; recognise the diversity of transgender experiences, narratives and self-definitions
  • Never make statements about all ‘trans’ or ‘transgender’ people that only apply to transsexual or binary identified people; if you mean transsexual and/or binary gender, say this explicitly
  • Explicitly include non-binary gender, genderqueer and non-transsexual exampleswhen:
    • Including a glossary or list of definitions of transgender terms; at least include ‘genderqueer’ and ‘non-binary gender’
    • Giving examples of hypothetical transgender experiences to illustrate a point
    • Providing case studies or personal stories describing the experiences of real transgender people
    • Selecting ‘officers’ or board members to represent the organisation or be involved in its policy or decision making process
  • Recognise that non-binary gender, genderqueer and crossdressing people can also be transsexual; do not simplify definitions and descriptions of transsexuality to erase non-binary transsexuals
  • Recognise that some transgender people feel they have no gender identity or identify with the gender they were assigned at birth, but have transgressed gender and earned a transgender identity or status by other means; transgender men and women could have been assigned those genders at birth
  • Recognise that some transgender people reject the terms ‘feminine’ and ‘masculine’ or identify with the side of that binary ‘appropriate’ to their assigned gender; ‘transfeminine’ and ‘transmasculine’ can sometimes be misgendering or erasing
  • Recognise that some transgender people experience gender fluidity and do not expect their gender to remain the same in the future; some people experience gender as changing day to day or arising through their interactions with other people
  • Recognise that not all transgender people experience gender dysphoria or subscribe to the concept of gender identity, this may mean recognising and explaining that you are explicitly excluding some transgender people because they do not fall under your remit
  • Be aware that many people assume that ‘trans’ or even ‘transgender’ refer only to transsexual or gender dysphoric people, and so may need their identities listed separately to ‘trans’ or ‘transgender’ in order to feel included
  • Consider using the wider ‘trans*’ in the place of ‘trans’ when referring to all transgender, genderqueer and gender variant people, however do not use ‘trans*’ only when referring to non-transsexual people as this would be othering
  • Be aware of, but avoid appropriating or erasing intersex experiences; recognise that intersex is a separate but potentially overlapping issue to transgender

Neutrois Nonsense: SEPTA’s Gender Discrimination

Posted by – March 24, 2011

Example SEPTA Transpasses displaying dayglow green M stickers or dayglow pink F stickersBlog Neutrois Nonsense covers why SEPTA’s insistence on including prominent binary gender identifiers on monthly travel passes is discriminatory towards trans*, genderqueer, gender variant and non-binary identified people and likely to cause inconvenience or exclusion.

For those of you who don’t know, SEPTA is the SouthEastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority – ie, the one and only public transit system used in the metro-Philadelphia area. SEPTA has had a policy in place where they place tiny little stickers on your monthly pass – these stickers are either an M or an F, demarcating your gender. SEPTA authorities and other officials are supposed to enforce this compliance – that is, that your sticker does indeed match your gender, although obviously this means it must match your perceived gender. For transgender people, or even other gender variant people, this is evidently quite problematic.

Allegedly this practice is in place to decrease your chances of pass sharing. If you’re good at math, you will quickly calculate that this only decreases your chances of sharing your monthly pass with half of the people you could share it with.

Neutrois Nonsense: SEPTA’s Gender Discrimination

Change.org’s coverage of the story

Riders Against Gender Exclusion Facebook protest group

A call for examples

Posted by – March 24, 2011

Practical Androgyny needs you!

Examples of the following are needed for future articles. Please get in touch if you’re aware of:

  • Organisations that allow non-binary genders to be recorded on their registration/application forms, especially if you have visual evidence
  • Banks or credit card companies that allow their debit or credit cards to be issued without honorific titles (Mr, Ms etc) before the holder’s name, include the process required if this isn’t standard practice
  • Websites, especially social network and dating sites, that allow the user to specify ‘Other’ for gender and/or write in a free form gender field, especially if gender neutral or third gender pronouns are also used

The more examples we have, the more precedents we can present when lobbying other organisations for change.

United Kingdom Census 2011

Posted by – March 13, 2011

Here in the UK we’re asked to complete a census every 10 years. It is a legal requirement that all households accurately record certain details of those present on the day of the census, these details include each person’s ‘sex’. Unfortunately this question is worded simply as:

Tumblr user lottelodge shares a photograph of the 2011 'What is your sex?' question, the answers are stuck out and instead the following is written 'Sex is not binary. Gender is important. What about trans people?'2, What is your sex?

[] Male   [] Female

There is no separate field for gender.

Before the 2001 census, I wrote to the organisers inquiring how I as an androgynous individual with a non-binary gender identity should answer this question and why more options were not given. As it is a legal requirement to complete this question accurately, I was quite concerned by the fact that I could not do so given the options present.

At that time I was told that gender variant people are too small a group to be recorded in the census and that smaller minorities are not reflected in the census statistics as they could be identified within their communities which could affect their safety. I was told that I would not be prosecuted for leaving the question blank, but that my answer would not be reflected by the census.

Unfortunately having searched through several boxfiles of papers, I have been unable to find my 2001 reply, or else I would quote from it directly.

Having seen that the 2011 census was still phrasing the question in the same way, I wrote to Census Customer Services at the Office for National Statistics in February asking for guidance on how the census records non-binary gender. The relevant excerpt of my letter follows:

I wonder if you could give me some guidance as to how I should answer certain potentially ambiguous census questions and how the census will record certain types of information. I could not find any guidance at http://2011.census.gov.uk/

I notice there is no question referencing ‘gender’ only ‘sex’. Will there be any attempt to record the number of transgender or non-binary identifying individuals in the country? Does the census distinguish between sex and gender at all?

How do you define ‘sex’ and what criteria would define whether an individual should answer female or male? Is this a question wishing to record a person’s primary or secondary sexual characteristics, chromosomal sex (which most people have not been tested for), personal identity (more rightly called gender) or legal status (in which case if ones passport disagrees with ones birth certificate, which should one answer)?

How does the census record individuals who are neither female nor male due to being intersex, transgender or transsexual currently in the process of transitioning to a binary role or transitioned to a non-binary role?

I recently received a reply from Helen Bray of the ONS, which was forwarded on to me by Rosemary Byatt of the ONS’s Parliamentary and Legal Support department. The relevant excerpt follows:

The primary purpose of the census is to give accurate and authoritative count of the number of people in England and Wales and to provide a benchmark for annual mid-year population estimates for local areas. Apart from serving essential needs for national and local population statistics, information of sex, age and marital status is key for estimating demand for local authority services, such as facilities for the young and elderly. The data are fundamental to major statistical series allowing age- and sex- specific rates for morbidity, mortality, fertility, marriage and divorce to be calculated.

One of the criteria for including any question or response category in a census is that there must be a strong need for information to be collected. Consultation with census users on the content of the 2011 Census did not identify a requirement for options for non-gendered or transgender. Nor do international agencies such as the UN Economic Commission for Europe and Eurostat recommend the collection of such information in a mandatory population census. In addition, collection information on such a small population subgroup would raise confidentiality issues. There is also some concern that such an additional category might encourage some people to simply not reveal their male or female identity, and this could interfere with the demographic analysis we undertake.

You’ll note that this response gives no guidance on how gender variant individuals should respond to the question and instead implies that all people will have a ‘male or female identity’ which the census must not confuse.

You’ll also note that this response implies that those who don’t answer with their ‘sex’ (implying agender on non-gender identity) and those who answer both male and female (implying non-binary or bigender identity) will not be recorded in the statistics, due to the ‘confidentiality issues’ of which I was advised before the 2001 census.

If one was feeling cynical, one might suggest that the Office for National Statistics might not have any idea how much of a minority non-binary and transgender identified people are as they haven’t asked this question in previous censuses and surveys. One might also point to serious flaws in their reporting on sexual minorities in previous surveys.

As there is still a legal requirement to answer this question correctly (albeit one under which only 38 of the more than 1.5 million households who did not complete the 2001 census were prosecuted), I wrote back pressing the matter of how non-binary gender individuals such as myself should respond. Here is my letter in full:

Dear Helen Bray or whom this may concern,

Thank you for your reply to my previous email dated 1st of March explaining why no options other than male or female are provided for the question ‘What is your sex?’ and why no separate question for gender is included.

I am still however uncertain as to how I should complete this section of the census.

I have a non-binary gender identity, in that I am something other than the binary genders of female and male, man and woman. In addition to this I have a highly androgynous appearance so that I am treated as both or neither of the binary gender options as I go about my life. I am seen as non-binary gendered by my friends and family, I am open about my gender identity to all, including my employer. I transitioned to this state through the aid of the NHS, I am seen as neither sex by my medical professionals. I have lived this way for a decade.

I can say with absolute honesty that it would be inappropriate for me to give a single answer of ‘male’ or female’ for the question. I feel that the census should reflect the reality of my existence, rather than some arbitrary and inaccurate binary option. I do not consider the sex assigned to me by the state to be accurate, I have lived with both binary sexes on my passport at different times.

If I were to choose to leave the ‘What is your sex?’ question blank, in order to reflect that I feel myself to have no binary gender, how would this be reflected in the census statistics?

If I were to choose to answer the question by indicating that I am both female and male (as I am treated as both by different individuals and groups during my day to day life), how would this be reflected in the census statistics?

If I were to write in my own gender identity and/or gender presentation, such as ‘Other’ or ‘Androgynous’, would this be recorded? Would I be penalised for not fulfilling my legal obligation to complete the census correctly?

Before the 2001 census I made similar inquiries and was informed that gender variant people are too small a group to be recorded in the census and that smaller minorities are not reflected in the census statistics as they could be identified within their communities which could affect their safety. I was told then that if I left the ‘What is your sex?’ question blank, the census statistics would not reflect this fact. In effect you would arbitrarily assign me an incorrect gender, just as the person who forwarded your letter on to me did when they addressed me as ‘Mr Titman’(!).

Could you please confirm whether my understanding of the 2001 policy still reflects the policy in place for the 2011 census? Is there any way that my non-binary gendered life will be accurately reflected in the census statistics or will my gender effectively be erased?

Thanks again for your help answering my questions. As before, please be aware that I may share your response with other transgender, non-binary and gender variant people who have similar questions to my own.

I look forward to your reply,

Nat Titman.

I have not yet received a reply from the Office for National Statistics and I was planning to delay writing this article until I had one. However I recently read an article by a guest blogger at Shakesville explaining how they had been given verbal agreement over the telephone saying that respondants cannot be fined for ticking both ‘male’ and ‘female’ if this is the most accurate representation of their gender achievable using the layout given.

The blogger goes on to suggest that all non-binary gender identified people should tick both or write in a third option and that somebody somewhere will have to ‘work out how to take account of it in the statistics’. They also suggest writing to your MP about the status of non-binary gender in law and official statistics. Something I also recommend.

In light of that article and the discussion around it, I felt that I should publish this article early without a further response from the ONS. I think that what I have currently is enough to strongly imply that anyone who gives a non-binary answer to the question ‘What is your sex?’ will not be recorded accurately in the census statistics. I’ll update again once I hear back from the ONS, which will hopefully be before Census Day (Sunday the 27th of March 2011).

If you wish to contact the ONS yourself on this matter, you can email Census Customer Services at census.customerservices@ons.gsi.gov.uk

If you have received information regarding this matter from Census Customer Services or any other organisation or individual involved in the 2011 UK Census, please add your experiences in the comments.

Update: Having received some feedback from people claiming that the ONS are only interested in ‘biological sex’ and not any other aspect of gender, I felt I should update to say that that’s demonstrably not true. Transgender identified individuals including transsexuals in transition who have phoned the census helpline have been instructed to choose whichever ‘sex’ they feel best represents their current identity. See the comments at the Shakesville article for others confirming this is their experience.

The responses I received from the ONS indicate that the statistics gathered will be used for a variety of purposes that would relate to a number of different factors including legal status, ‘birth sex’, ‘hormonal sex’ and social role. By conflating all of these aspects into a single simplistic question of ‘sex’, the ONS is inherently reducing the accuracy of the data recorded.

Finally, if the ONS was really interested in biological sex, they would provide an option for intersex people who were born with indeterminate ‘non-binary genitalia’ and/or a ‘chromosomal sex’ other than the most common XX/XY configurations to indicate this. As the majority of intersex people live comfortably within binary roles and see their intersex status as a medical issue, I’d say that such a question would be an invasion of privacy.

Update 2: The online UK Census Guidance for Students actually spells out how trans* indivduals should complete question 2:

Transgender or transsexual: select the answer which you identify yourself as. You can select either ‘male’ or ‘female’, whichever you believe is correct, irrespective of the details recorded on your birth certificate. You do not need to have a Gender Recognition Certificate.

So that’s an official UK Census publication explicitly defining the question of ‘sex’ as concerned with recording gender identity and not ‘biological sex’. So why do those of us who identify outside of the gender binary not have an option on the form?

Update 3: Post-census follow up Freedom of Information request analysis article here.