Next month's census will conflate data on sex and gender

So I guess Fair Play For Women's concern is trivial and Stonewall are incompetent, then?

Not sure where you get that from?

According to FPFW, Stonewall "say it's simply too offensive and hurtful to ask a trans person a factual question about sex they were born."

However, I haven't seen such a statement on Stonewall's website, so I don't know if that is a fair summary of their position.

I was referring to your claim that they have a lot of influence in the ONS and want accurate data on transgender people. If Stonewall were behind the question, then they're not very competent.

The point in question is what questions should be on a census. I think it's a bit more than a stretch to argue that the requirement to provide your birth sex on the census form is some hard-won "right".

I didn't refer to anyone being white, poor or bigoted. Nor did I say that everyone opposed to trans inclusion is old, just that they are more likely to be old, which was not so much significant in itself, but only insofar as the other correlations it indicates.

You're demonstrating precisely the argument I was responding to in the first place. It is in the interests of anti-trans campaigners to portray the issue as being primarily one of an intra-feminist and intra-LGBT dispute - as I said, it gives a progressive veneer to their positions. And so they push to the front the kinds of groups and figures that support such a narrative, which media outlets often just accept and repeat at face value, partly out of gullibility, and partly because it makes for a more interesting and complex story. But it's not representative of the reality of the wider public's views of trans people.

I guess until recently it simply had not occurred to anyone that the question "What is your sex?" should require clarification. The current version of the guidance doesn't require either "birth sex" or "legal sex"; it says to use the sex shown on official documents, which in most cases can be changed according to the whim of the individual.

the question on sex is the same question from previous consensus tho, right? at least it says on the gov.uk website

'Sex data will continue to be collected in a way that is consistent with previous censuses.'

https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/censustransformationprogramme/questiondevelopment/sexandgenderidentityquestiondevelopmentforcensus2021#questions-recommended-for-census-2021

so if that's the case trans people have in previous consensus been declaring this based on birth sex or legal sex, so what's the difference now except there is an additional voluntary question that asks 'Is the gender identity you identify with the same as your sex registered at birth?'. how does that additional question change the sex statiatic as it's always been collected?

I don't think people are objecting to the additional question on gender ID so much as the guidance for the sex question, which says you should answer according to the sex shown on documents, which can be changed at will, rather than either your biological sex, which can't change, or your legal sex, which only changes if you get a gender recognition certificate.
I believe people are concerned not only about the direct effect this will have on the accuracy and reliability of the data collected, but also about the possibility that once the meanings of words such as male and female have changed in the census, their meanings will be increasingly distorted or misconstrued, either deliberately or inadvertently, in other contexts, by the ONS or by other public bodies.

regarding the guidance, which legal document can be changed at will? not a passport or a driving licence at least.

https://www.gov.uk/changing-passport-information/gender

https://www.gov.uk/id-for-driving-licence

but it doesn't matter anyway because when sending in the form you don't have to submit supporting documents, or do you?

According to a report in The Telegraph https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/02/11/statistics-gender-obscured-self-identification/, 'We are on the brink of losing robust, high-quality data on sex in the UK,' academics said. 'Once gone, we may never get it back'.
As well as academics, many feminist and LGBT organisations have expressed concerns. A group of them have issued a joint statement in which they announce the launch of a website on Sunday 21 Feb, where they will offer guidance for anyone who has concerns about this: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vTmFGaggvDjkOy1rJGlVv5kzJJL2YWQDmzyzSEwddp5Tp0eH20BsUYd1saEkzzQtokbZWcUJLLgrm-g/pub

Your links show that sex on a driving licence can be changed with a deed poll or statutory declaration, either of which can be obtained at will. To change your passport you need to provide a little more evidence, such as a letter from doctor or medical consultant.

You are entirely correct that, whatever the guidance may say, there is nothing that can stop people from lying if they really want to. Supplying false information to the census is an offence, and you could be fined £1000 for lying about you sex, but I'd imagine you'd have a fair chance of getting away with it.

your definition of 'at will' is not accurate tbh. to change your gender on a deed poll doesn't require a doctor's note - it requires medical evidence 'confirming your change of gender is likely to be permanent'. in other words just going to a GP one day and asking for a GP note isn't going to work. also you cant just use a statutory declaration to change your gender on a driving licence - you have to submit it with additional evidence. i'm not going to copy and paste the gov.uk website here cuz it's not relevant to the op; but if you're worried about it i would say go back and re-read it to alleviate your worry.

i can appreciate why the government wants a headcount for those who identify as trans/non-binary on a census, but it seems to me it's getting more information by asking the gender question, not less of it. they also have the information of who actually has a Gender Recognition Certificate so they can do the maths; so what is your real concern?

What was the original quote I noted in aid of then? That being the conclusion of it?

Indulge me sorry? After all, it is precisely an issue of the aforementioned (if with other arguments to and fro as well)
Indeed, most of the public couldnt give a stuff for the issue as, by rights, it is a non-issue for the vast majority of people. It has been made a point of contention by activists though (on both sides). Not least the ones, as you inference goes, who are so called bigots for not accepting the dogma propagated by certain groups.

I will say though, i do take serious exception to the use of the word progressive for regressive people and their politics though. As was discussed in another thread, cyber bullying/lynching, 'de-platforming' and generally calling everyone who doesnt side with you a nazi is literally the anthesis of progressive. Although that is another topic for another thread.

By presenting opposition to trans inclusion and rights as being motivated primarily by a feminist concern for women's rights, you are misrepresenting it.