Statistics what now?
Below you will find the proposed statistical standards for three variables: gender of person, sexual orientation of person and LGBTQ2+ status of person. These include classifications for the main components of sexual orientation – sexual identity, sexual attraction, and sexual behaviour, which can be measured separately.
Yay, clarity at last.
Gender refers to a person’s social or personal identity as a man, woman or non-binary person (a person who is not exclusively male or female). Conceptions of gender are influenced by several factors, including biological characteristics, cultural and behavioural norms, and self-identity.
Um. There are persons who are not exclusively male or female? According to Statistics Canada?
I guess not Yay clarity after all.
Gender includes the concepts of:
gender identity (felt gender), which is the gender that a person feels internally
gender expression (lived gender), which is the gender a person expresses publicly in their daily life, including at work, at home or in the broader community.
A person’s current gender may differ from the sex they were assigned at birth (male or female), and may differ from what is indicated on their current legal documents. A person’s gender may change over time. Some people may not identify with a specific gender or with the concept of gender as a whole.
So it means everything and nothing, which for most purposes translates to nothing. If it describes everything it describes nothing, it’s just a bunch of slop thrown at a wall. It’s hard to see what a bureau of statistics can do with it. I suppose you can collect stats on what people say about themselves, but really, who cares?
Usage
Sex and gender refer to two different concepts, but are interrelated. While sex is understood in terms of biological features, gender is a multidimensional concept that is influenced by several additional factors, including biological characteristics, cultural and behavioural norms, and self-identity. Caution should be exercised when comparing counts for sex with those for gender. For example, female sex is not exactly the same as female gender.
I love that “for example,” as if they’d chosen “female” at random. Pff. Female is the sex that everybody gets to redefine, whether the “females” like it or not. “Male” has to be left alone, because males have important shit to do, but women are just an extra, a frill, a bit of trivia, so redefine what they are for statistical purposes.
The variable ‘Gender of person’ and the ‘Classification of gender’ are expected to be used by default in most social statistics programs at Statistics Canada. The variable ‘Sex of person’ and the ‘Classification of sex’ are to be used in conjunction with the variable ‘Gender of person’ and the ‘Classification of gender’, where information on sex at birth is needed, for example, for some demographic and health programs and to estimate the transgender or LGBTQ2+ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, Two-Spirit or another non-binary gender or minority sexual identity) population. In statistical programs, gender may be reported in terms of a person’s felt or lived gender, as well as how one is perceived by others, depending on whether information on gender is based on self-reported data or done by proxy.
Very statistic. Much precise.
Per below, is Statistics Canada planning on tracking Species-Felt or Biological- next?
A couple of points:
1. “A person’s gender may change over time.”
No kidding! Gee, what happened to, “it’s innate,” and “born that way”? The TAs shift ground and change their statements at the drop of a hat. Very convenient.
2.
In STATISTICS?!? Really? The statistical “default” characteristic to be measured is made-up “gender identity,” while the objectively observable and determinable characteristic of sex is ignore or secondary?
WTH does “Statistics Canada” do with the people — who they admit do exist — who ” … may not identify with a specific gender or with the concept of gender as a whole.” Leave them blank? WTH do you think you are measuring, Statistics Canada?
“… sex at birth …”: as opposed to just “sex”? Or perhaps “sex as observed at birth”? Are they implying that “sex at birth” is something different from “sex at adulthood” or “sex”? Is this a deliberate avoiding of the question?
No, sex is understood in terms of reproductive function and there are two sexes, male and female. Being clear about what’s being collected is necessary if you want useful demographic data. Ahem.
Maybe ‘sex’ is what you are chromosomally – ie XX or XY, with other less frequent options (like XXY or XXX) that come with serious other bodily consequences. Maybe ‘gender’ is best kept what sex you wish you were, though a word exclusively used in happy days of yore for the description of French verbs and other grammatical niceties.
Which still leaves the problem of people who each identify as a member of a non-human species, like say, a male or female giraffe, or who consciously or otherwise resemble other non-human primates, such as knuckle-walking gorillas, and of either male or female persuasion. (I have known a few in my time.) So, what to do about them.? It’s a tough one. And we haven’t even begun to consider male giraffes who wish they were female gorillas, etc, etc, etc.
As that former Australian PM once said: “Life wasn’t meant to be easy.” If he was still around, he could say it again.
But enough of this. As an XY, I’ve got more important shit than this to do.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1634840/
They also say that being homosexual is being attracted to people of the same sex or gender, which most homosexuals would not say is true. I wonder how many put Martian gender as I did… :-)
“ Um. There are persons who are not exclusively male or female? ”
Well to be fair there are intersex people, though I know that’s not what they meant.
Why are they using ‘male or female’ when they mean, and should be using, ‘masculine or feminine’? When were those words declared to be no longer a part of the English Language?
Eh? They don’t mean masculine or feminine.
RE: the erasure of women. This nonsense is a HUGE weak spot for the Dems. Clips like this will doom them.
https://twitter.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1526983113141891073
Great, Canada is now wasting time recording the degree to which some narcissists believe they match / mismatch current sex stereotypes.
Oh god. That clip.
Bishop: What do you believe a woman is?
Ms Aimee Arrambide [with a “duh” overtone]: I believe everyone can idennify for themselves.
She sounds like Kelly Kapoor.