TL;DR: A new Review of public data collection and research has been published. It was commissioned by the previous Conservative government and led by a prominent ‘gender critical’ academic, and could impact the way all public services collect information on sex and gender.
The Department for Science, Innovation & Technology published its new review of data, statistics and research on sex and gender on Wednesday. Known as the Sullivan Review, it was originally commissioned by Conservative Science Minister Michelle Donelan and was led by Professor Alice Sullivan - gov.uk
LGBTQIA+ advocacy groups quickly called out the clear biases in the Review’s motives and personnel. Professor Sullivan is a prominent proponent of so-called ‘gender critical’ views and sits on the advisory board of anti-trans advocacy group Sex Matters - Sex Matters website
If the government chooses to accept the Review’s recommendations, it could inform the data collection policies of all UK public bodies, including the NHS and the Office for National Statistics. Health Secretary Wes Streeting said in a tweet on Thursday that he will act on the Review’s findings - Twitter
As reported by TransActual, the Review also contains input from multiple other people linked to Sex Matters and other so-called ‘gender critical’ campaign groups. There is no evidence that any trans+ researchers contributed to the Review - TransActual
What were the findings of the Review?
The Review focuses on ensuring that data about ‘sex’ is prioritised over data about ‘gender’ or ‘gender identity’. It draws on anti-trans dogwhistles to define the term, saying it “simply means sex, in other words biological sex”.
It recommends that all public bodies collecting data, including in healthcare, legal and administrative contexts, should collect data on sex using the question “What is your sex?”, with the only allowed responses being “Male” or “Female”. It allows that questions about “gender identity” may be important, but only for the purposes of identifying trans or gender diverse people.
It also specifically recommends that the NHS should not allow patients, especially children, to change their gender markers in the data the NHS holds on them.
Trans+ youth support charity Mermaids said in a statement that it is “deeply concerned” about the Review, pointing out that “a simple male-female sex marker oversimplifies human diversity” - Mermaids
Analysis
Data collection is important. At QueerAF, we love to get nerdy about statistics - and that’s not just for fun.
The data collected by researchers helps us learn about our place in society. The data collected by public bodies helps to deliver us the services we need to live happy, healthy lives.
But data can also be dangerous. When data collection is motivated by prejudice, it can lead to excluding certain people from research, denying them access to public services, or identifying them as targets for other discrimination.
That’s why the Sullivan Review matters - and why it should never have been carried out by a team with such clear interests in promoting anti-trans policy.
The Review’s recommendations lay the groundwork for erasure of trans+ and gender diverse people. In particular, it explicitly denies the reality of intersex people’s experience, and disregards the validity of non-binary identities.
And as Mermaids point out, the policies it advocates for will create real barriers to trans+ youth accessing services such as healthcare. Many young people would rather avoid accessing healthcare than risk being repeatedly misgendered or having their privacy invaded.
Our NHS and other public bodies exist to serve us. We all deserve to be properly represented in the data they collect about us.
First Cass, Now Sullivan
Another year, another government Review full of 'gender critical' bias.
We've been here before. Sometimes it can feel like a real slog to keep dispelling the misinformation and biased recommendations of reports like these ones.
But we're here, every week, to do just that. Week after week, QueerAF's reporting on the Cass Review has helped our community learn about how we can fight back against the so-called 'gender critical' agenda, and helped LGBTQIA+ voices get heard in the halls of power.
We'll do the same for the Sullivan Review - but we can't do it without your support.
It's our members paying just a few quid a month that lets us pay our journalists and investigators to dig into these complex policy issues and produce clear, useful explainers for you to get yourself informed over your Saturday morning coffee.
Will you help support our work for years to come?
Please upgrade today. You can get started with just the price of one of those coffees.
