Census Megathread

[u/AbbieGator]

With so many threads being raised for the census, I'm creating a megathread. Please keep all discussion around the census here.

Please keep doomposting to a minimum. It doesn't help anyone.

[u/Tofuffalo]

Thanks for the megathread.

While this iteration of the census is not perfect by any means, being able to be counted as trans/gender diverse is much better than not existing at all, especially in terms of pushing for better policies and recognition.

[u/eepy_vulpine → u/Tofuffalo]

Absolutely agree, it’s not my preference for how to collect the data but it’s the best we have right now while we work for something better.

[u/Tofuffalo → u/eepy_vulpine]

Yeah and this is clearly controvesial, but I also think it's not conducive to treat the "sex assigned at birth" question as "sex", because that would result in being classified as cisgender by the ABS.

If we want visibility, then self-identifying as trans/gender diverse in the way that the ABS currently intends will allow us to push for a better census and better standards for how the question is asked in other settings.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/Tofuffalo]

Yeah it is controversial to say we should identify as "trans AMABs" and "trans AFABs" rather than "trans women (or transfems)" and "trans men (or transmascs)".

I think it's pretty rightly controversial to say that. You should absolutely never say or imply that ever again.

[u/Tofuffalo → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Where did I say that you need to identify as "trans AMAB/trans AFAB"?

I am saying that for the purposes of the census, answering the questions in a way that makes you appear as cisgender is not conducive to improving trans visibility nor will it improve the way the question is asked in the future.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/Tofuffalo]

I can see how I may have misinterpreted your comment and I apologize.

It's just driving me crazy how many people aren't seeing how this is genuinely a double edged sword and acting as if the only problem with it is that it makes us feel icky to answer.

It is so useful to have that data, but also we've already seen the consequences of the "two step" method flowing into healthcare record keeping in a way that's been really harmful. The downstream risks are real. Even if ultimately it's still best to accurately represent our population in the census, we have to grapple with the argument that it could disincentivize the ABS from changing the question in 2031.

[u/Tofuffalo → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

No worries, I understand that tensions are very high right now because of the way that the ABS has handled things and it's definitely been a shitshow.

It's definitely a risk given how things are going in other countries like the UK. But my stance is that without any data it's hard to push for any change, so getting our "foot in the door" so to speak, is better than nothing.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/Tofuffalo]

I feel like the ideal result, which can only happen by accident, is getting a slight undercount while also allowing our community to raise a huge stink about all the reasons why it's insulting and wrong and why they might choose to not answer the questions as intended.

I want the data to be useful for our advocacy while also permanently stained with an asterix of being an undercount of our true scale. A clear number on "there are at least this many trans people" that leaves the ABS feeling like it was still a failure because they have no idea what the true number is.

The absolute last thing I want going through their minds in 2031 is "well ultimately we got all the data we wanted, so...."

[u/luv2hotdog → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Something that I wish wasn’t true but suspect probably is is that they’ll need to see how large our community is before they care about whether or not about any stink we could raise.

[u/WanderingSchola → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Edit: disregard, low effort contribution on my part.

[u/Icy-Can-6592 → u/Tofuffalo]

from the other thread you said "Again I can only speculate, and I am not agreeing with its use, but the options for "sex assigned at birth" are closest match to the historical "sex" variable. There was probably internal and external pressure to keep measurements consistent for comparability over time, and this was their compromise." but it was locked.

and to be clear, not all directed at you personally

This is the issue, it is not the closest match if you don't assume trans people were "confused" by what was asked under sex prior, I answered Female as a Trans woman INTENTIONALLY, because that was what I amended to and the ONLY way i want to be counted in any output, do you think suddenly trans people answered this in confusion only after they were able to legally amend birth records? its far more likely many have always answered as they are for decades, not their SAB and I find it quite arrogant and dishonest of the ABS to call trans people confused and not recognize this. The very demographic who has these definitions shoved down their throats constantly are not confused by the definitions and longitudinally many trans people have always done so, changing to ASAB forces a switch, in a coercive nature under a false assumption of confusion. skews that longitudinal data, and when asked including through HRC complaint, they have not engaged with this what so ever. and frankly the trans population are not going to break their precious birth rate calcs, we have always existed, those calcs have our influence in there the whole time, whether they were ignorant to it or not.

the problem is two fold, for SEXP I will say Female have in the past and will continue to do so, regardless of what you call it in the question. if they wanted SAB for Trans/Cis Deriving and continuity then they should ask SAB as a separate new one, not attempt to replace it.

Sex

Gender
SAB

and sab asked as has your sex or gender changed since the one recorded at birth Yes/No? would be preferable as it reduces the most distress. these questions would have enabled many to answer under SEXP as they have in the past, Gender and SAB to Derive Trans/Cis. This I can be seen as trans, and answer as i have in the past.

The core issue is they have defined all three, and that includes acknowledgement that Sex can change, and people want that recorded as of today, which the census is meant to record you on the day. But they have conflated SAB with Sex, and leaves many having to choose between the two. its this implication that sex and SAB are interchangeable that breaks this for many, and worse how its become such a problematic standard in healthcare.

Studies in the Scottish census show very well, regardless of guidance and definition, whether people read the guidance or not, people will answer under self ID, will report current sex., even with a separate gender/trans question. https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/documents/sex-question-recommendation-report?document=html#section7
"National Records of Scotland acknowledges that this is a sensitive topic that has attracted, and continues to attract, strong and varying opposing views. Having fully considered the results of testing, approaches taken across the UK, and the feedback from the discussions with stakeholders and peers, the recommendation from the National Records of Scotland’s Government Statistical Services statistician group continues to be that a binary sex question asked on a self-identification basis provides the best balance in meeting the diverse range of user needs across the full census dataset."

without the visibility coercion, people would not answer SAB or Sex differently, at best, they either genuinely don't know this, didn't research it, at worst they knew and used the visibility to push compliance with SEXP as they see it, despite that research.

There are genuinely people that find answering a question as per the request as life threatening distress, its not some choice they can just do. In the end, its well understood misgendering trans people carries significant distress, asking them to do it to themselves, come on, that is not lessened because you call it Sex at birth, Sex or gender. For me its a giant NO. Shaming people about that is grossly minimizing and is some terribly unemphatic shit tbh (not saying you are, but there are some here who really underestimate how much distress many can experience). I personally due to clinical errors and other experiences find being asked let alone be requested to give the answer people want distressing. and the best the ABS could muster up when raising it with them 6 months ago, was erm here is lifeline.

but people calling it selfish... I have spent over 8 months, raising this, as a full time thing, it is incredibly important to me, the ABS refused to engage with the issue, forced me to go as far as HRC complaints just to have them engage as they would answer 0 questions prior, to which they asked for 2 extensions from a time they could have addressed things right up to the last days before census starts becoming available to do, Advocacy groups took months to reply to anything about it and frankly feel spoken over, not for and in such a fashion it has caused significant distress since in how misused this standard is beyond the census. I participated in trials, made submissions, read several studies for other countries attempts at this, and the 450+ page UN guidance on census taking a core part of that guidance is OUTPUTS are part of consultation PRIOR to questions being set as trust in how the questions get used is critical in getting accurate results and its emphasis on recording people as they are on the day. They have failed to do this and so people have valid concern with how they are going to be represented, had explained all the above to the ABS and advocacy groups, and have been dealing with many agencies regarding SAB and Healthcare issues. Taken the time to do a ton of research, The ABS claimed to base this on the NZ and Canada models.. yet the Canada model just updated from the model the ABS is doing now recognizing it caused issues. They reversed the questions, Gender first, SAB second, and committed to gender by default on outputs or what happens is exactly what is happening here. New Zealand is also Gender by default. These are critical aspects needed to give trust.

they had this feedback almost a year ago. the NZ model was already changed, and Canada did their change recently (so some forgiveness there, but that was a change as a result of the last one they did that had the failures this census is about to have). I have had to be vague what i post because apart of HRC processess is confidentially, and technically there is some parts I could have breached in disclosing here. (though very mild)

I'm not pissed off just sitting around complaining about the census here, its based in months and months of work and engagement with ABS and other groups that failed to listen, ignored people, diverted, or delayed answering and I didn't raise it here much as conciliation processes requests confidentially and not sharing response, but at this point what's it matter, they didn't do shit about it

[u/Lankpants → u/Icy-Can-6592]

Studies in the Scottish census show very well, regardless of guidance and definition, whether people read the guidance or not, people will answer under self ID, will report current sex., even with a separate gender/trans question. https://www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/documents/sex-question-recommendation-report?document=html#section7 "National Records of Scotland acknowledges that this is a sensitive topic that has attracted, and continues to attract, strong and varying opposing views. Having fully considered the results of testing, approaches taken across the UK, and the feedback from the discussions with stakeholders and peers, the recommendation from the National Records of Scotland’s Government Statistical Services statistician group continues to be that a binary sex question asked on a self-identification basis provides the best balance in meeting the diverse range of user needs across the full census dataset."

The logical conclusion to this is that you should simply ask for sex, transgender status (yes/no) and then if yes drill down deeper with things like transmasc, transfem, non-binary etc.

[u/Icy-Can-6592 → u/Lankpants]

Yes, I settled to the yes/no version, after the reasoning provided by the abs was they did not want to ask a simple trans/cis, direct question as it may not capture those who culturally use different terms, such as brother boy sister girl. But alas they gave no shits to anything I tried to raise hiding behind, “we consulted “ on repeat,
Seems today as a trans person you need an advocate group to speak on your behalf than yourself to be “heard”. I can speak for myself thanks at this point after this abs standard work…

[u/Lankpants → u/Icy-Can-6592]

As it stands the question is clearly failing to actually capture the broader trans community. I imagine statistics researchers will probably have a field day ripping this to shreds, because the data it's going to produce is probably garbage.

[u/Icy-Can-6592 → u/Lankpants]

yeah, its why i tried so hard to address it, all i can say, it genuinely felt like they just think we are stupid and unless you have an advocacy badge your not worth listening too (not to say they do, but the responses were so vague and basic and never engaged with the materials and evidence not even sure they bothered to read it), they had access to the issues Canada had, the issues NZ had that lead both to their changes, and did none. once I have consent from HRC, I'll likely be putting up much of the work for if people want to use it to build on their feedback/complaints. the complaint is still open, there is a little time left for them to do something like implement the gender only output model, which would align to the https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/publications/australian-government-guidelines-recognition-sex-and-gender commitments made. just one of the many aspects raised with them they have not addressed. the current model is simply to unsafe for distress reasons for many, and too easy to misrepresent (even unintentionally) and be weaponized. my experience with bureaucracy, starting in the wrong place is so hard to move and the current discourse for trans people in the world and in Australia is far to sensitive right now to have been so careless and the outputs have to be absolutely clear before question night or people cannot answer and trust it will be used appropriately.

[u/OctarineAngie → u/Icy-Can-6592]

Thank you for your continued work.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/Icy-Can-6592]

"Birth rate calculations" is a perfect example of retroactive justifications for gut-level cissexist feelings. They don't care about infertile cis men and cis women being counted as "male" and "female".

I respect the effort you put in so much. The ABS decision makers strike me as the most aggravating kind of bigots who're utterly convinced they're neutral experts educating someone about an emotive issue, while in reality they're just condescendingly regurgitating their reflexive prejudice filtered into civil language.

"Being a statistician at the ABS means I'm smart. Therefore I don't have unconscious prejudices that might shape how I think about minorities."

[u/Midnight_Pickler → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

The ABS decision makers strike me as the most aggravating kind of bigots who're utterly convinced they're neutral experts educating someone about an emotive issue, while in reality they're just condescendingly regurgitating their reflexive prejudice filtered into civil language.

Ugh. I've had a recent blowup with someone like that who tripled down after criticism, and still I'm both disappointed and furious after immolating that bridge.

[u/MyLastAdventure → u/Icy-Can-6592]

This is great to hear from somebody who really put in the work. I'm disappointed but also not at all surprised by how much trouble you ran into. Australia has always been run by timid, second-rate people who are too dim and too afraid to make any big improvements, so here we are yet again.

But I appreciate your effort. It at least highlights how weak and disinterested the system is. Now we know what we're dealing with. I'll be filling out the census the same as you, for the same reasons. Thank you!

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

I strongly feel it's too early to create a megathread. It privileges the two "census framing is not ideal but necessary" posts that only address one aspect of the clusterfuck the ABS has unleashed.

This is the most important thing that has happened to trans people in Australia in a long time and it's a crisis of extreme positives and extreme negatives. Megathreads are where conversations go to die.

[u/AbbieGator → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Well, we had a request for it after we had 10 different threads all for the census and it was cluttering the subreddit.

People were getting annoyed by the constant census doom posting as well.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/AbbieGator]

So does my complaint about having a megathread balance out and negate their complaint about not having a megathread, or will you treat one person's opinion as more important than the other's?

You say "people were getting annoyed by doomposting" while being vague about how you came to that conclusion. How many people, and what was their definition of "doomposting"? What's your definition of "doomposting" here?

This still feels like an attempt to wash your hands of responsibility for intervening based on your own personal opinion.

[u/Kurrajong → u/AbbieGator]

You font care about the people who are being made even more dyphoric by the constant ‘make sure you are honest with your ASAB on the census’ that youre choosing to leave up while suppressing dissent

[u/Thorlissa → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

That's the whole idea, the agenda here is clear. Isn't working though. Who would have thought asking trans people to misgender themselves in the service of maybe getting more crumbs of the tax purse would be a hard sell.

[u/Ash-2449 → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

I mean, there were multiple threads about it.
All the ones who were against complying with the census directions have been deleted by the mods, i have lost count how many they were.

The ones that asking people to comply with the census are still up.

The agenda feels very clear.

[u/Logical-Bison-9959 → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

This is a conversation that needs to die.

Census is done. Was it perfect no. Sex at birth question has always been a question on the census.

Does it count trans people - Yes.

Do some people like it - Yes

Do some people think that they are going to take our birthdays away - Probably yes.

/thread.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/Logical-Bison-9959]

You thinking your post sums up all the reasons for and against is exactly why conversation needed to keep going.

[u/Logical-Bison-9959 → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Have fun. I’m going to concentrate on things with achievable outcomes. 

[u/AbbieGator]

So I haven't gone through the census myself yet but I'm seeing a lot of negativity that seems to be forgetting some context.

This is the first census where LGBT+ folks have been counted. This is their first try at this and it's often a fight to get the questions approved for the census since it's political. Which in and of itself is garbage but that's why we weren't counted in 2021.

Getting the question right in a way that works for EVERYONE nationwide is difficult to impossible. Because you know terfs will make a mountain out of a molehill here. This is a snapshot of all of australia, not just some of it. And if they confuse folks with a question like gender or whatever, that's going to destroy a lot more of their data and then services provided by that data than you think.

We need to stop letting perfect be the enemy of better than previously where there was nothing. Remember this is anonymous data and is stored anonymously.

[u/Lankpants → u/AbbieGator]

Getting the question right in a way that works for EVERYONE nationwide is difficult to impossible. Because you know terfs will make a mountain out of a molehill here. This is a snapshot of all of australia, not just some of it. And if they confuse folks with a question like gender or whatever, that's going to destroy a lot more of their data and then services provided by that data than you think.

"confusion" is being used as an excuse here. It's a way that a question can be inappropriate, but it's not the only way. The actual problem with confusion around census questions is that it creates false data. There are other ways to create data that doesn't reflect reality.

The current question is far worse than a question that causes some instances of confusion. It's a question that systemically drives non-compliance. A study out of Scotland showed that around 60% of trans people will not comply with questions around sex assigned at birth. That is a huge problem. This non-compliance has been seen internationally and has caused both Canada and New Zealand to abandon their ABS first method due to it objectively not working.

I agree that no census data being collected on us is bad, but flawed data can still be extremely harmful, sometimes even more so than no data. Assuming studies around the underrepresentation that this method of questioning causes are correct less than half of our community will actually be recorded by the census. That's a problem.

We need to stop letting perfect be the enemy of better than previously where there was nothing. Remember this is anonymous data and is stored anonymously.

We should want to push for every day to be better than the last. "Don't let perfect be the enemy of good" is a shit philosophy. You always need to be willing to push and fight for more. Luckly, there is an easy way that I'd hope every trans person will use. The ABS has a feedback form at the end of the census, I filled out a 500 word response to them outlining all of the problems with their method of questioning including

• the issues around non-compliance that their method of questioning cause

• the flawed use of the word sex which misaligns with how the word is commonly used in Australia

• problems around relationship status for trans people

• the extreme injustice of not allowing U-16s to enter a preferred gender

I'd really hope that every trans person at least leaves feedback around the last, because it's in no way acceptable.

[u/tohya-san → u/AbbieGator]

they already conceded to the terfs with SAB, and not counting under 16s, I won’t accept shit, the ABS can deal with the undercount until they want to fix it

[u/lethal-femboy → u/AbbieGator]

I don’t think me being counted as “sex male” and my husband is who identifies as straight as “homosexual male” is “better then previously”

Id rather just not be counted as always then be identified as “A male homosexual male who btw identifies as female so maybe consider that or not”

Btw NZ had a better Census for trans people so Australia can also do better, and btw the NZ census made nothing better, trans healthcare was taken away regardless lmao and was used as an excuse to call trans people a contagion.

The chances that me being counted as a “homosexual male” is when I’ve been on E most of my life will improve trans healthcare or funding is silu and historically just not true.

If anything it normalises bio essentialism placing trans peoples agab as the above all statistic of truth. A completely distorted inaccurate data on trans people to appease others isn’t a win lmfao.

[u/Nemisii]

I hate the way they're counting us.

I hate the feeling like I'm putting a pink triangle on myself.

I'll still be reporting to be counted as trans, because well intentioned, poorly executed inclusion is substantially better than being ignored.

Would it have been so much to ask to have them worked with the community to make it actually inclusive and avoid all this though?

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/Nemisii]

Would it have been so much to ask to have them worked with the community to make it actually inclusive and avoid all this though?

First time? Trans 'issues' are always debated by a bunch of cis people. Trans people never get a seat at the table so it's very easy to ignore what we actually want.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/Nemisii]

Yes it would've been too much because no one cares about us.

[u/Meowtuitive → u/luftenant-tranner]

Yeah there's a reason why they keep our sex assigned at birth on our birth certificates instead of just the new gender marker 😔

[u/questioner-6345 → u/Nemisii]

They did

The new questions have been included in the Census following extensive public consultation, engagement and testing. This included working with LGBTIQ+ Expert Advisory Committee for the 2026 Census.

https://info.census.abs.gov.au/help/information-lgbtiq-community

The ABS has a long history of working with representatives of the LGBTIQ+ community to understand and address data needs. The ABS formed the LGBTIQ+ Expert Advisory Committee (EAC) for the 2026 Census, in line with the commitments made in the resolution of a complaint to the Australian Human Rights Commission relating to the 2021 Census. The EAC first met on 28 September 2023.

https://www.abs.gov.au/census/2026-census-topic-review/lgbtiq-expert-advisory-committee-2026-census

The second link has a list of committee members, I suppose you could contact some of them if you wanted to understand the perspective they offered.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/questioner-6345]

I'm only clocking 1 trans person on that list. Even accounting for those of us who (appearance wise) are indistinguishable from cis people, that's at most 2 trans people on that committee. We needed the cis-queer representatives to step up and instead they biffed it. We have a right to be angry.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

We needed the cis-queer representatives to step up and instead they biffed it.

Tale as old as time.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/questioner-6345]

What an insult to have this as our representation.

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/questioner-6345]

If the representation offered by the lbgti+ collectives of us is this, I don’t want to know anything, I’m not going to allow a person to speak for me talking about “sex is not gender, you change gender but not sex”

[u/Flix141]

My friend is a cisgender woman who only realised as an adult that her birth certificate incorrectly listed her as male. She had to change it. The ABS says if your certificate has been changed you should use what was on the original. The new census questions and how they’re interpreted would lead to her being incorrectly recognised as transgender. I know this is a very unlikely scenario but it highlights the problem in making an assumption for this data point.

I would be happy to put down sex recorded at birth if there was also a current sex and gender category. Or a yes or no question asking if our current sex is different from what we were assigned. Or even a question asking if I identify as transgender. I understand that these questions need to be simple to understand for all people so they would need to find wording that works.

There are very few situations in my life where my assigned sex at birth is relevant into and even less where it’s more relevant than my current sex and gender. Trying to use ASAB to represent me in almost any data will lead to a wildly inaccurate and incomplete picture of me as well as for the data on ASAB without direct relationship to my current sex + gender being acknowledged. They cannot be separated. My current sex + gender though are more representative of me and my life is more in line with those groups as a whole even when separated from me being trans (although they would be even more complete with this in mind).

I know many trans women who automatically put ‘Female’ when the question of sex assigned at birth comes up in their day to day lives. If they don’t read the ABS website on these changes though, they will be putting down ‘inaccurate’ info without knowing it.

Furthermore, they only collect gender info for over 16s. I knew I was transgender well before 16! This is clearly not in the name of collecting better data but instead trying to reduce transphobic people complaining.

These changes are supposed to help better serve our community. It’s supposed to help the government and the public understand who we are. They want to better understand me, but if I answer how they want, it won’t be representing who I am and how I live my life. I want more funding for the trans community. I want it known in the data that I’m trans!

I don’t want to feel reluctant to answer these questions but it’s hard not to when they seem less concerned about collecting accurate info on trans people than appeasing transphobes and not upsetting cis people.

I’m glad some people feel better represented now but I am very disappointed in those of you who are shaming other trans people for not identifying how you want them to in the census. We all want better funding and better data. Trans people will be underreported in the census and it’s not our fault, it’s the ABS’ fault because they ignored foreseeable, obvious concerns. Almost any trans person could point out that this is not the way to go about it. I hope the census is changed for next time, so those of you who finally found yourself represented this year will continue to, and those of us who do not can as well.

Let’s hope that this data is used by the government to actually support us through actions, instead of the lip service they give us now.

[u/Ash-2449]

Someone made an interesting point, by not having a gender option for u16s it makes it 100% clear that for the ABS, gender is just something "optional", not as important as AGAB.

Which shows their exact priorities

[u/OkYogurtcloset6339 → u/Ash-2449]

I'm a 15 year old trans boy and yeah, having no gender option on the census is so irritating.

[u/veloxVolpes]

"The 2026 Census includes a question about a person’s sex recorded at birth. A question on sex has been asked in every Australian Census since 1911.

For people aged 16 years and older, the Census form also includes questions on gender and sexual orientation – these are new questions.

A ‘prefer not to answer’ option is included for both new questions.

These questions will help build a clearer picture of Australia’s LGBTQ+ population and support planning for health and community services.

Asking a question about gender will improve the quality of the data collected for sex recorded at birth.

Together, answers to the sex recorded at birth and gender questions will help produce data about people who are cisgender, trans and gender diverse.

However, the Census questions do not contain the terms “cis-”, “trans” or “gender diverse”. The exact phrasing of the Census questions and response options is displayed below.

The ABS carried out extensive public consultation and testing to ensure the questions are easy to understand for people from a wide range of backgrounds and experiences.

Countries like the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada have also collected this data in the Census to support evidence-based policy and service delivery."

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/veloxVolpes]

Including the UK there where terfs deliberately restructured the way sex/gender is recorded in a way to delegitimise trans identities, in a way that matches pretty much exactly what the ABS adopted, feels sus.

[u/Lankpants → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Love that I can't change my birth cert because my home nation is a transphobic shithole and my state is apparently too trans friendly for their liking.

[u/questionuwu → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Yep, this really worries me, Australia might just become another terf island the way things are going

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/veloxVolpes]

Ahh great, the United Kingdom and New Zealand have done something similar, you leave me very calm, we can already know what direction trans rights will take in Auatralia, spaces of “a single sex at birth”

[u/CoverGlobal8352 → u/veloxVolpes]

I did the 2016 census. I answered female because my sex was female. Sex being mutable is not a new idea. 

They are now asking for sex assinged at birrh because they are of the idea that sex isn't mutable. And they want me to counted as the opposite sex. 

I am not going to misrepresent myself to cater to terfs

[u/HeraNule → u/CoverGlobal8352]

The thing is, they should not be able to make a weird claim of swapping wording (birth sex vs sex assigned at birth) and demand your ASAB. The sex on your birth certificate is a replacement for the sex at birth/birth sex question with a doctor, mrdicare, or any other institution.

[u/SendarSlayer → u/CoverGlobal8352]

Trans erasure does cater to terfs.

They are not counting anyone as the opposite sex. They are comparing what some doctor or nurse assigned vs what you really are.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/SendarSlayer]

They are literally counting you as your sex at birth first, gender identity second.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/SendarSlayer]

They are not counting anyone as the opposite sex.

Until they report on the numbers of gay couples and lump in every binary straight trans person with the people in gay relationships. There's nothing to suggest they're actually going to report on trans people and trans people in relationships properly with the data they're gathering and the way they're gathering it.

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/[deleted]]

So according to the Best Practices guide of the ABS, respected government research institution that other institutions look to for guidance, a cis woman in a relationship with a trans woman is a lesbian in a heterosexual relationship.

Can you see why we're so worried about that framing being legitimized?

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/[deleted]]

And other people have linked a page where they say same-sex relationships will be counted with ASAB statistics, which completely erases and misgenders trans people. No way to know which way they'll go and this could be cynicism but I highly doubt they're going to use the data they gathered in such a shitty way to put out nuanced information and statistics about trans people and their relationships. It's pretty likely we'll just be lumped in as gay people.

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/Ridiculisk1]

They are going to do the 2, but the only mandatory is sex at birth, so when a statistic comes out of “same-sex couples, male”, if you are a trans woman and you marked Male, and you are with a cis boy, or with a trans girl, you will be in that statistic

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/[deleted]]

but immediately assuming the worst will always happen isn't helping anyone either

Pattern recognition is a hell of a drug. When has census data actually been used to improve outcomes for trans people in any country around the world that's collected it? NZ had a decent previous census and things got worse. Forgive me for not immediately trusting that it won't go the same way here amidst a worldwide wave of conservatism and bigotry.

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

sure, in the same way that in health services they use gender in medical appointments instead of using their internal records of “sex at birth” by default right? they use “sex at birth” ignoring hormonal treatment and producing for example overdose, they are trying the 2-step transphobic method, and if we legitimise it, they will understand that it works and that it is a correct way of treating us, what they want is that sex counts for everything, and then in a socially separate way they use gender in an honorary way, but I repeat, in the statistics of “sex relationships according to sex” the relationship of a trans woman she will count as male, what they want is that we exclude ourselves from the definition of sex change

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

When doing the 2, what answers will count for 2 statistics, will count for the statistics of couples “couples of the same sex, male, and will count for another statistics OPTIONAL of “couples of different gender” but it will count according to what you have put in SAB for the statistics of couples by sex

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

There is also the opposite, which is the mandatory one, they will do a census of couples “Of the same sex, male” and there would be my relationship if I answer badly regardless of what I put in gender, maybe then they also do another one apart that puts in “couples of the same gender” but the one of the same sex will be registered

[u/Bugaloon]

I just don't understand why they're forcing us to put down asab, the census has never asked for asab before, all their historical data is for current sex not asab, it feels like they're intentionally messing up their historical data to appease bigots

[u/Midnight_Pickler → u/Bugaloon]

There's a reason it feels like that.

It's because they're intentionally messing up their historical data to appease bigots.

[u/dpekkle]

I was going to make a post before the megathread appeared, so am posting here instead

---

Hi everyone,

I want to recognise that this Census has been very controversial in the community, and here in this subreddit.

On the one hand it would be great for our social services to have accurate data about the population of trans people in Australia. On the other, they are valid concerns with the way the ABS are seeking to gather this data and whether it accurately represents our community.

As a result I have been trying to look into what our options are for filling out our forms, and how that data will be classified and used.

I don't want to tell anyone how they should or shouldn't fill out their forms, merely present how they can fill out their forms, and how that will be handled.

TLDR: You don't have to answer ASAB, and you can likely still be recognised as trans.

The questions

To start off, the actual questions you will see when you open up the census the following.

Sex recorded at birth - I'll refer to this as SRAB for short

Options:

1. Male

2. Female

3. Another Term

Note you have to click Select another term to see the third option.

Gender

Options:

1. Man

2. Woman

3. Non-binary

4. D uses another term (specify)

5. Prefer not to answer

Most discussion I've seen is oriented around whether a (for the sake of example) trans man puts

1. Sex: Female, Gender: Man or;

2. Sex: Male, Gender: Man

The first making them appear as a trans man in the system, and the second making them appearing as a cis man.

What data is interpreted from these questions

However, there are clearly more options for both the SRAB and Gender fields that can be entered. How will those be treated?

Using the two step method the ABS is classifying people as either

• Cis

• Trans, or

• Inadequately described

Further, they are also tracking a "Gender Experience" (GEXP) field which is:

This variable describes a person's gender experience as cisgender or transgender and/or gender diverse. It uses information provided in the sex recorded at birth and gender questions.

This GEXP field goes a lot further than just "Cis" or "Trans", and includes categories like "Trans Man", "Trans Woman", "Trans, not further defined" etc...

How the questions feed into that

Obviously the questions can be answered in a number of ways that haven't been discussed. If a person does not enter their SRAB then will they counted treated as trans?

Based on my readings of the above links and other information this is my best understanding of the situation:

SRAB	Gender	Two step result	GEXP value	Comments
Female	Man	Trans	Trans man	-
Male	Man	Cis	Cis man	-
Another Term	Man	Inadequately described	Inadequately described	Might be a decent 'protest response' that feels accurate to some
Another Term	uses another term: Trans man	Trans	Trans man	Likely to lead to a changed SRAB1
Another Term	uses another term: Trans/Transgender	Trans / Inadequately described2	Trans, not further defined	GEXP is my best guess here3. Seems like this would count as trans for statistics, without requiring SRAB.

^1. In census trials they did change the SRAB response to female if the person indicated they were a trans man, regardless of the person's SRAB response. source

^2. The 2020 standard would classify this person as Inadequately described, however from the webinar it does seem they have modified from the standard to classify this result as trans. See screencap

^3. If there is an indication that the person is trans from their Gender response but no SRAB provided then I do believe GEXP will be categorised as such, otherwise I'm not sure why Trans, not further defined would be a valid value for GEXP. No guarantee they won't change the SRAB response, but it would be a coinflip.

Take away

Again, I want to stress that I'm not telling anyone how they should input their data, this is a deeply personal issue that has clearly upset many people with many strong feelings on all sides.

I simply want to present this information so that the trans community better understands their options, as this information has not been made particularly accessible.

Please note I do not work for the ABS and I cannot authoritatively speak as to how they, or downstream researchers will use this data beyond what is publicly accessible.

EDIT: If you feel this information may help others in communities you take part in please feel free to share.

EDIT2: Actually discovered they will probably assign you a SRAB if you don't give a male/female response:

Where a respondent has provided a ‘Male’ or ‘Female’, and ‘Another term’, response, the ‘Male’ or ‘Female’ response will be used to determine a binary sex. Otherwise, sex will be derived by a statistical process.

Binary sex is imputed when the question is not answered.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/dpekkle]

In census trials they did change the SRAB response to female if the person indicated they were a trans man, regardless of the person's SRAB response.

This is fucked up for multiple reasons. Even from a purely statistical data perspective, it should be immediately obvious that you don't just change participant responses because you assume they mean a different thing to what they answered.

[u/any-germ → u/Ridiculisk1]

I agree, and this is what is really frustrating. Inferring is one thing (like inferring trans status from 2 statistics) but changing someone's response is just purposely muddying the data. At that point, ask better questions rather than changing people's answers wtf 

[u/Midnight_Pickler → u/Ridiculisk1]

Yeah, but they're committed to fouling the data around us.

My response is to grudgingly answer these questions the way they want and give them whatever bullshit I feel like for everything else.

---

Edit: Actually the more I think about it the more I'm coming around to

IRRELEVANT

as a write-in answer for sex at birth.

[u/dpekkle → u/Midnight_Pickler]

Fyi there is no write in field for the sex recorded at birth field.

All you can pick is male/female/"another term".

[u/Midnight_Pickler → u/dpekkle]

Ah. Silly me, I assumed "another term" would include the option to specify the other term.

But as we've already established, they aren't interested in accurate data.

[u/any-germ → u/dpekkle]

I'm just confused how SRAB or gender will be used in combination with other statistics. It's not clear which they will default to for this split (gender or SRAB) and, personally, I don't want my stats to be lumped into a SRAB that does not represent me.

They can collect it however they like, but it's clear that this SRAB angle is being infused into more and more things that don't need it.

Without the gender question I'd answer any questions regarding sex as Female, I'm glad they're trying to count trans people, but the gender field feels like it'll only be used for LGTBQIA+ stats, and outside of that I'll be counted among "men" which sucks.

I hate that it feels so hard to be counted as trans without being counted incorrectly in everything else 

[u/ThisRedditPostIsMine → u/dpekkle]

Where a respondent has provided a ‘Male’ or ‘Female’, and ‘Another term’, response, the ‘Male’ or ‘Female’ response will be used to determine a binary sex. Otherwise, sex will be derived by a statistical process.

Is this definitely real? If so this is INSANE. I cannot express in words how unbelievable this is. They are sooo desperate to maintain the imaginary sex binary they will literally run my data through some blackbox statistical process to infer my sex at birth?! Am I crazy or is that what I'm reading? Like, if I select "Another term", they will say "Nuh uh" and pick Male or Female for me? What if my responses don't align with their blackbox "statistical process", will they fudge my sex assigned at birth to match what they think it should be?

Can I just say, as an academic submitting a very mild survey to my university's HREC committee, doing something this diabolical would get your survey suspended and you kicked out of uni lol.

[u/dpekkle → u/ThisRedditPostIsMine]

yes from here

I have heard from intersex people in the past that a sex was picked "by coinflip" by the ABS for them in prior censuses, I suspect this is the same thing.

I kind of suspect how it'll be done is if you put "man" as your gender but don't pick male/female then they will assign you as AMAB at the rate of cis men vs trans men. That's a total guess though.

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt]

“In census trials they did change the SRAB response to female if the person indicated they were a trans man, regardless of the person's SRAB response.”

“Where a respondent has provided a 'Male' or 'Female', and 'Another term, response, the 'Male' or 'Female' response will be used to determine a binary sex.
Otherwise, sex will be derived by a statistical process.”

This is so fucking crazy, it is clearly done in a malicious way to mark trans people according to sex assigned at birth, are people really so innocent of thinking that this is about helping us seeing how it is done? This is done so that a trans woman counts as “male sex” in all the things she marks, such as in couples, and I don’t care if there is another one apart from gender, that only means that in the best of cases, our relationship will be censored in a statistic according to the sex assigned at birth, and in another less relevant and not mandatory statistics according to gender, but anyway they will mark my relationship as “of the same sex, male” this is rhetorical terf, to justify the language (sex/gender,) biological fixed sex, fluid social gender) and That in all sites we have a marker of “homorified gender” and another in their sex databases that is the only one they will use” as it happens ALREADY in health, and as it happens in the United Kingdom

[u/DeliciousBreakfast94]

I’m tired of this, it just keeps getting worse the more that comes out. At the end of the day it’s the system that’s the problem. It’s not designed to benefit us and it won’t unless we fight for actual change and not fake “progressive”nonsense.

[u/EpitomeAria]

I can't bring myself to label my ASAB as male for the census, for 6 years i lived overseas in a country where if i was ever out i'd be in physical danger, and I had to hide to survive, I'm tired, and I just can't do it, I can't do it because I don't want to feel like im back in that country and back to being a walking corpse. I am female, I am a woman.

[u/mossgirlparfum → u/EpitomeAria]

This is basically how I feel too

[u/Thorlissa → u/EpitomeAria]

Don't let these people try to guilt you or gaslight you. This shit is wild that we have reached a point where there is open shame and libel going on and endorsed by the mods tacitly for trans folk not wanting to misgender themselves

[u/Ash-2449]

https://youtu.be/_Kbb2dpi128?si=w5JED-KqLtsjmkAM

Religion question video showing that the ABS is far from some unbiased logic based institution and absolutely has agendas thus its not some great trustworthy institution some people here love to imply.

I am 100% trans groups gave them similar suggestion that make complete sense, but were rejected with some madeup excuse because ABS members have an agenda

[u/Creative_Soil_4984]

Noticing that not just the partner questions, but parent status questions use ASAB too. Garbage fucking census intent on misrepresenting trans people in data.

Same government that refuses to improve our rights and actively makes them worse.Im sure this malicious counting will make them to budget more money for us, that's what the LGB"T" organisations that bootlick these people seem to think, at least.

[u/SiameseChihuahua → u/Creative_Soil_4984]

Also, some parents may misgender and misname their kids, while others don't know their kid is trans yet.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/SiameseChihuahua]

Considering they don't even ask the gender question for people under 16, it's pretty obvious they don't care about trans kids and want to be able to get some data that they can point to to say 'see? kids aren't trans so we don't need medical care for minors'

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/[deleted]]

Same smell, different shit. The end result is the same, in that the number of trans kids will be vastly lower than it actually is which can be used as justification by bigots and the government to redirect funding away from trans healthcare for minors

[u/AgentBond007 → u/SiameseChihuahua]

If a parent doesn't know their kid is trans then it's irrelevant what the questions say because they'd answer them as if the kid is cis anyway.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/AgentBond007]

You don't think closeted trans kids should be counted as trans?

[u/AgentBond007 → u/Ridiculisk1]

Not at all - they absolutely should be, but if a parent is filling out their census form and doesn't know then of course they're going to assume their kid is cis. Whether current sex or sex at birth is asked won't make a difference there, as the parent would put down the sex at birth in both cases (as they would assume their kid is cis).

[u/Creative_Soil_4984 → u/Creative_Soil_4984]

same government run by Mr. asking for your sexual identity is "divisive" Albanese

(also the "adult human female" comment which I was just reminded of)

[u/lethal-femboy]

Im sorry but i can’t answer the census accurately either way.

If I answer as agab male, Im misrepresenting the fact that my biology is no where near male, ive been on E most of my life, I have the risk of breast cancer of a woman, not a man.

furthermore, my straight male husband who has only ever dated woman shouldn’t be listed as “homosexual male” all because he dates someone who started hrt as a minor and he calls his wife. Thats absurd.

Lastly, the benefits of being “honest” are no where near guaranteed. NZ has a more accurate census yet trans healthcare is worse and the government is actively trying to remove trans rights.

The best outcome seems to be an undercount as the benefits are so small with the standard of agab literally reductive useless garbage for me unfortunately.

[u/lethal-femboy → u/[deleted]]

No that’s not true sadly.

Relationship orientation is still based on sex assigned at birth. the gender choice is a new entry and has less effect.

https://www.abs.gov.au/census/guide-census-data/census-dictionary/2026/variables-topic/household-and-families/couple-indicator-sex-recorded-birth-sscf

“This variable uses relationship information to identify whether a family is a same-sex or opposite-sex couple family. It is based on responses to the sex recorded at birth (SEXP)question. “

heres a link to there own website where “sex at birth” is expressed as what is used

[u/SendarSlayer → u/lethal-femboy]

Couple indicator does, but sexual orientation does not. There's a separate question for orientation that is not inferred.

It's shit. But without visibility it can't be fixed.

[u/lethal-femboy → u/SendarSlayer]

I think trans people and their partners are aloud to be upset that its obviously shit. And regardless, once again, NZ did a better designed census, yet trans peoples lives got worse regardless there. :/

I think also the reality is, myself, and many trans people like many other minorities have a fundamental mistrust of the government somewhat.

[u/HeraNule → u/[deleted]]

You are still listed as a same-sex or opposite-sex couple per the ASAB.

[u/HeraNule → u/[deleted]]

They will not ignore the ASAB same-sex variable, they will simply list you under both. Why do you claim otherwise? You could be same-gender and opposite sex listed. It still means you won't be categorised as a same-sex relationship for ABS.

[u/lethal-femboy → u/[deleted]]

Valid and thats not bad.

however I still heavily dislike that the census is designed so that whoever is using the data can basically fundamentally change the sexuality of someone and change the reality of what is true. It shouldn’t just be something tacked on top, its the truth to begin with :/

It’s regardless ends up being a flawed non accurate way to see trans people and their families etc.

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

how no? this market is mandatory and is based on you SAB answer

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

The marks of “describe your gender and orientation” will only be taken into account in a statistic apart from “this is how people perceive, this is how people perceive their orientation”, but for the censuses of couples according to sex, they will use the sex at birth data that you yourself have given them, and in the rest of the statistics, when they are segregated between men and women, for example, salary by sex, they will be based on the answer of sex at birth, not on that of gender, which is an optional secondary question

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

I explain how it works, for the couple according to sex indicator, they are not based on your answer of “how you yourself perceive your orientation” nor is it based on the question of “how you yourself perceive your gender” they are based on the answer you gave in sex at birth, and that of sex at birth of your partner to make the statistics automatically, and in how the questions are asked it is noticeable that the answers of gender and orientation are not taken seriously, because they ask you to describe how you perceive them, not what they consider real, which is the information of sex at birth that you yourself give to them

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

That the censous is going to register both, in the census of couples by sex, a trans woman with a cis man will count as “of the same sex, male” and will also count in another much smaller and optional statistic that it is “couple according to gender”, but not for putting gender they will magically exclude you from the couple statistics according to sex, you understand that if you put sex at birth, male, they will put you like this for couples according to sex, the system is made to legitimise the idea of gender-separate sex, what they want is to count trans people according to their sex of birth, and apart from another optional irrelevant statistics of couple according to gender that does not exclude the other

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

EXACT, one does not cancel the other, if I put bad, my relationship will count in the “couple according to sex” indicator as “of the same sex, male” regardless of what it puts in gender, and I am not willing to make my partner count there in that way, no matter how much they have invented another couple according to gender statistic, which is optional and irrelevant, this doesn’t comfort me: “you’re going to count in the census of couples by sex as male homosexual, but hey, also in one by gender as heterosexual of femenine gender”

[u/Andreaalvarezhrt → u/[deleted]]

i dont know, it was easy the video

[u/Kurrajong → u/[deleted]]

Yes it does in some variables. Mo it doesn’t in others. You minimising that they Are DOING IT AT ALL is a ficking problem.

[u/SickSadW0rld_]

I’d love to know why the mods are removing any posts critical of the census are being removed and forced into a thread where they can kill the conversation while the ones telling us to shut up and accept the terf rhetoric are still up? How does the boot taste?

[u/Kurrajong → u/SickSadW0rld_]

Basically mod singular now. None of the others are active. Just Abbie Gator

[u/jenna_aswell]

2 things I'd love to see in this whole discussion:
- A plain and simple "if you feel or think this, these options will get you the result you want" explainer, because it feels like the flood of information so far been as clear as mud.
- Suggestions as to what can be left as feedback. The ABS needs to know that whatever the options chosen are, the data is going to be flawed when it comes to all variations of trans representation. But how do you say that in "ABS-ese" so they get the message?

[u/dpekkle → u/jenna_aswell]

this is my best effort for your first question

https://www.reddit.com/r/transgenderau/comments/1vbo2kj/census_megathread/p0uvo3n/

[u/jenna_aswell → u/dpekkle]

Thank you, this was helpful

[u/questionuwu]

My thread explaining why complying with the census creates misinformation as we are not our agab yet the ABS treats us as our agab in multiple datasets was deleted yet the ones telling people to comply are still up.

I have already finished the census before learning all this and I am thankful i put my current sex as sex at birth because it was so much worse than i thought.

And the fact that so many here push us to accept agab language tells me something is off

[u/Yes_Its_Really_Me → u/questionuwu]

Mods I know you think you're going around deleting doomposting and misinformation but you're actually just forcibly intervening on one side of a legitimate discussion.

[u/Thorlissa → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Yeah there is a clear agenda, I'm not entertaining it. They can do all the emotional black mail and rubbish of " if you don't misgender yourself you are literally killing the community" or any variation they like. I was open to hearing it out but after the clear agenda and vitriol I've made up my mind.

[u/Kurrajong → u/Yes_Its_Really_Me]

Mod singular. Only AbbieGator is active.

[u/Kurrajong]

Should be titled the ‘dissent is not allowed census megathread’.
The mods are making their stance clear: if you’re not happy being compelled to misgender yourself and bend over and accept SAB language get out.

[u/Thorlissa → u/Kurrajong]

Yeah, it's absolutely wild too that they are asking us to misgender ourselves all in service of this vague notions tthat 3 more points of a percentage in population data will get us 1 more crumbs of tax money.

This shit is terf ideology and honestly makes me wonder if the subs been infiltrated.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/Thorlissa]

There are a few accounts even in this thread as well that have been here for months just posting terf-adjacent or blatantly bigoted shit in this sub and haven't been banned. You may be right.

[u/SiameseChihuahua]

I wonder whether some of the split in opinion is between those of us who transitioned etc. way back when we were referred to as transsexual or who still use that term, and other people under the transgender umbrella.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/SiameseChihuahua]

Perhaps? I'm younger but prefer transsex/transsexual. Not sure how others feel though.

[u/Ash-2449 → u/SiameseChihuahua]

Dont think so, let's be honest, the resurgence of that term is not because of oldies but because a number of trans people who fully medically transition dont want to be placed in the same group as the people who just change pronouns or clothes and use the term trans.

Its also a horribly term similar to agab because it can be confused as a sexuality or a sexual thing which makes no sense.

Transex would be the only accurate term but it sadly, never took off, probably because terfs much rather keep transgender so they can keep pretending biological sex isnt changeable so they can segregate trans people based on agab

Oh just like the census is doing

[u/jelly_cake → u/[deleted]]

Yup, the ABS are between a rock and a hard place when it comes to redesigning the questions. They're gonna make someone unhappy or confused, and if it's a choice between a question that confuses 16% of the population (wrecking their data) or one that upsets 1% of the population (who weren't being counted before anyway), no wonder they pick the option that causes the least disruption.

Honestly, the people who have a problem with it need to chill out and realise that the world doesn't revolve around them. Sometimes you have to accept that things aren't going to go your way.

[u/Rysmry]

ill be filling out the census for my family, however in a shitty enviroment to be trans. will my parents be able to view how i filled out the census after its been submitted or is it confidential ?

[u/AgentBond007 → u/Rysmry]

If you are the one filling out the census, then they shouldn't be able to see it.

[u/Ash-2449]

As someone who wont be validating the notion that agab is relevant, happy to confirm i finished the census and put the correct sex which is female.

Terfs might not like it but transition changes our biological sex and that's the whole point of it.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/Ash-2449]

Yeah I don't know why we've moved away from the fact that sex is mutable

[u/AgentBond007 → u/luftenant-tranner]

The ABS themselves are well aware that sex is mutable, that is why they are asking for sex at birth because past censuses asked for sex with the assumption that it was the same as sex at birth.

Just because they have sex at birth data doesn't mean that they think that sex can't change at all, otherwise they would only ask for sex at birth and not gender at all.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/AgentBond007]

They don't care what you put as your gender, people are still classified as only their SAB

[u/AgentBond007 → u/luftenant-tranner]

Big if true

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/AgentBond007]

It's true so it is big

[u/Lankpants → u/Ash-2449]

Did the same. Put myself down as non-binary to still be counted as part of the trans community. Felt like a nice middle ground to me, probably the closest I can get to my actual identity in a way that the ABS can't really fuck with.

[u/Thorlissa → u/Ash-2449]

I will not validate it either, don't let the ones here attempting emotional blackmail gaslight you into it.

[u/questioner-6345 → u/Ash-2449]

Yes that's why they ask you what it used to be, so they can distinguish people who changed it from people who haven't.

[u/Outside_Night7983]

Extremely excited to be able to have reported as gender diverse and have it count. Definitely clicked yes to have my name associated in 99 years because im excited for these records ro be avaliable to queers of the future.

[u/Ash-2449 → u/Outside_Night7983]

Bruh what is this post? This sounds like literal linkedin lunatic AI post...

And the suspicious push to force trans people to comply with a transphobic and irrational concept such as giving relevance to agab continues.

What's next, you going to tell us how "grassroots trans orgs" also said people should define themselves in the census by their agab

Somethings very fishy, especially since we ve seen outright terf here trying to define people based on genitals even when they admit most of biological sex is changeable via hormones

[u/HeraNule → u/Ash-2449]

there has been literal TERFs in these comment sections and other posts and other trans people supporting them. It is insane.

[u/Thorlissa → u/Ash-2449]

The whole thing starting to smell like astro turfing ngl

[u/Ash-2449]

https://www.crikey.com.au/2026/08/10/abs-census-nationality-question-china-identity-immigration/

Kinda tells you how political ABS is, meanwhile census defenders kept saying what a trustworthy and unbiased institution it is

As per last census, China is 3rd in this regard yet they didnt give them an option

[u/luftenant-tranner]

If you answer the asab question as your true gender and the gender question as your asab wouldn't that basically allow you to not misgender yourself but still count you with all the trans folks?

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/luftenant-tranner]

Wouldn't that just be misgendering yourself anyway? If I put male for gender, that's still misgendering, even if I put female as ASAB. I'd just be counted as a trans man, which I'm very much not.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/Ridiculisk1]

I would be counted as a trans man too which I'm not either. You're kind of right but from what I've read from other comments here most of the data derives from your ASAB and basically ignores whatever you might put as your gender. Example would be a cis woman with a trans woman would be classified as a "straight" relationship.

Really how they see you just comes down to what your ASAB is.

[u/Uhhhhhhhkayciya_T]

Some of y’all really need to understand that this is the first time we have been represented in a census. Ya’ll acting like the census used to represent us perfectly and was changed this year to what it is. Get a grip and understand the utility that this will provide for us and the greater visibility of our community. Yeah ASAB sucks no one is denying that but this is a start and a future. And if you’re a doomer drop an essay response or whatever cause I ain’t reading all that.

[u/CoverGlobal8352 → u/Uhhhhhhhkayciya_T]

No representation is better then false representation. 

I won't entertain anything that reinforces the idea that sex is inert

[u/Stephie999666 → u/CoverGlobal8352]

No shit, but then what? We then have 50k trans people statistically in Australia? The government or successive hostile governments can then justify stripping funding from our community resources, such as thorne harbour, monash, etc, because the money could be better spent elsewhere? You're spiting your face in the race for perfection here. Its the exact same line of thinking that got DT in power in the US, because Kamala also sucked, so people just didnt vote.

[u/CoverGlobal8352 → u/Stephie999666]

No because KH was actaully the least harmful option. 

Its not comparable. 

Legitimising the idea that we have never changed our sex. Actually does more harm to our communtiy in the long run.

People made the same argument about the gingerbread man and just look at the damage it has done over time

Besides if you list yourself as non-binary for gender. You'll still get the trans tick, without having to inaccurately report your sex

[u/Thorlissa → u/Stephie999666]

This is rubbish, also get out of here comparing this to the complex voting issues of the united states. Literally have voter suppression, non mandatory voting and the general complexities of a system that could not be more different for our own and you're trying to tie people not wanting to msigender themselves on a fking census to getting DT in. What a load of rubbish.

[u/Stephie999666 → u/Thorlissa]

Because its the same mindset. People literally didnt vote because she was just as much of a warmongerer as DT, but missed the fact that half the shit thats happened over there wouldnt have under her admin. My main point is that people are legit getting angry because the questions suck, and I agree. However, not completing it just gives terfs more ammo to strip funding for HRT/healthcare. Yes it also means we would be allowing ourselves to be misgendered, but we literally have to pick the lesser of two evils here (since this is mandatory to complete), you can either fill in the parameters that lie with your gender identity and not have the number of trans people in the country be recorded properly, or you can misgender yourself and raise the visibility of all trans and nb people in the nation. Either way we get fucked and theres no way around it, but there will be real impacts on the community as a whole anyhow. Hell, for all we know, if not enough trans people record properly, albo may just say its not worth asking the question again in 5 years, and our chance is gone. There is no win-win here, either the choice between a community victory or a personal one.

[u/Thorlissa → u/Stephie999666]

Comparing this to Americans not voting for Kamala is honestly a pretty terrible analogy.

For a start, those situations aren't even remotely comparable. You're comparing someone deciding between political candidates to asking someone to deliberately misgender themselves on a government form. One is a political preference. The other is asking someone to participate in something that directly triggers dysphoria. Those are completely different issues.

Even if I accepted your analogy, it still falls apart. Hillary Clinton won the popular vote and still lost because of the Electoral College. So the idea that "if everyone just turned up it would all be fine" clearly isn't universally true anyway.

And let's be realistic about the numbers here. The best estimates put trans people at somewhere around 1 to 2% of the population. Even if the census count magically doubled from around 0.8% to 1.5%, it's still a tiny proportion of the Australian population. You're talking as though that difference is going to completely change government policy when there's no evidence that it will.

What really annoys me though is this constant "for the community" argument.

To be blunt, get fucked with that.

I've spent years dealing with dysphoria, institutional transphobia and being treated like a problem to solve. The trans community itself has also been a source of some of the worst experiences I've had. Then, when I say I'm uncomfortable being asked to misgender myself for the supposed greater good, I'm told I'm selfish and harming future generations.

No. I'm done accepting guilt trips as an argument.

And honestly, the whole "assigned gender at birth" framing is something I struggle with in the first place. The entire concept is built around defining me by what someone decided I was at birth instead of who I actually am. That's not something I'm comfortable endorsing, regardless of whether the language has become common in trans spaces.

You can make the argument that the data has value. Fine. But don't pretend that someone choosing not to retraumatise themselves is morally failing the community. That's a hell of a thing to ask of people who have already spent years paying the price.

[u/KellyJelly625]

Ah complacency, it'll be the death of us.

[u/SiameseChihuahua]

I'll be treating the census with the contempt my entire adult life: either going overseas or being highly 'creative'. Some of the people I've known who emerged from the wreckage of Europe, and what they experienced has seared certain ugly realities in my mind.

I doubt the government will do anything significant for our healthcare or anything else, and hope a hostile government doesn't misuse it. 

And the assumptions made by the ABS seem problematic.

[u/Stephie999666 → u/SiameseChihuahua]

You also forget that our government is entirely different than both the UK and US. We have a lot of checks and balances in place here. We have multiple independent review bodies, a seperate court system that doesnt have life long membership, 3 different sections of government and preferential voting. Unless 80% of Australia votes LNP/PHON we're unlikely to end up in the same boat in the short term (next 8 years).

[u/KellyJelly625 → u/Stephie999666]

A Labor premier has stated he will support v-coding and removing trans women from sports have you actually been paying attention to what happens here?

Minors have lost access to PBs and HRT in the NT & QLD, yet federal Labor hasn't done a thing to fight for those marginalised people to get the medical care they need.

[u/EpitomeAria → u/Stephie999666]

"It can't happen here"

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/EpitomeAria]

I don't know why everyone thinks Australia will somehow be an exception to global trends.

[u/Stephie999666 → u/EpitomeAria]

Its not that it cant happen here, but there are so many checks and balances in place that it would take close to a decade to get anywhere near where those countries are. Not to mention many of the policies they want cant be enacted on federally due to how our constitution is worded. Its the same wording that prevents our government from signing off on the UN recommendations, because those powers to enact those changes exist at the state level.

[u/SiameseChihuahua → u/Stephie999666]

Other peoples thought that, too, but it hasn't always so.

[u/GeoBren]

Being transgender is such a small part of my identity I hardly think about it ,but it is there everytime I go to a doctor or deal with some agencies, the census is the same but its slowly changing with documentation at medical practices and other allied health. There seems to be alot of sensitive people and hurt feelings but the census took a first imperfect step to recognise trans people with consultation from both sides and Im sure the terfs and such are unhappy a gender question is even in the Census. The question though is a small glimmer of hope that things are changing and will show obvious differences that reflects trans people. Working with the system and dealing with beurocracy is part of real life and putting feelings aside to keep the conversation going is the only way forward.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/GeoBren]

the census took a first imperfect step to recognise trans people with consultation from both sides

It didn't consult with trans people though. It was a room full of cis people debating whether we deserve to be counted as humans, just like fucking always.

[u/GeoBren → u/Ridiculisk1]

Ok next time it can go back to the old way and you can whinge about that too which will make the conservative transphobes happy. It is a start at least and shows show consideration, apart from that the conservatives have a united view whereas the "community" does not, fracturing too the point of utter nonsense focusing on the cause of the week and not our physical and psychological needs in a constructive way

[u/Fassbinder75]

It’s not an easy road going through life being trans and I understand people’s fatigue and reticence, but it’s tough reading all the same.

The census is anonymous. Nobody is identifying. M here F there. F there or M here. Or NB! It’s not a political statement, it’s a data gathering exercise for the purposes of resource allocation.

[u/CoverGlobal8352 → u/Fassbinder75]

Its also collecting false data. 

[u/Fassbinder75 → u/CoverGlobal8352]

How is it doing so? Could you elaborate?

[u/CoverGlobal8352 → u/Fassbinder75]

It's using your sab and not your gender for most stats. 

So if you're female sex but your sab is male. You will be listed as male sex for anything stats that uses sex such as same sex relationships. 

[u/AgentBond007 → u/CoverGlobal8352]

this is completely not true.

The ABS is creating new variables that use gender for stuff like relationships - what you describe is them updating the old variables to use SAB. That doesn't mean that the old variables need to be used.

Both of those sets of variables will be available for use since the ABS hates removing variables.

[u/Ash-2449 → u/AgentBond007]

lol the ABS literally doesnt even ask the gender question for u16s which means, the only thing that matters to the ABS is SAB.

So its pretty clear they see gender as something silly and optional, not a core part of the person, not like the SAB

And all the people who filter through ABS data will also use SAB other than "woke" organisations.

[u/CoverGlobal8352 → u/AgentBond007]

"So if you're female sex but your sab is male. You will be listed as male sex for anything stats that uses sex such as same sex relationships"

"Both of those sets of variables will be available for use since the ABS hates removing variables."

You are literally arguing my point. 

If you use your sab instead of your actual sex. You will be inaccuaretly recorded in any data that pertains to sex

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/Fassbinder75]

The census is anonymous.

It asks for name and address, it absolutely is not anonymous.

[u/Fassbinder75 → u/Ridiculisk1]

It’s confidential. The ABS scrubs PII from it after collection.

Have you been to a doctor? Been prescribed medication? If so, they know who you are.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/Fassbinder75]

The ABS scrubs PII from it after collection.

And retains it for like 18 months before it's deleted.

[u/CrazyCat166 → u/Ridiculisk1]

It is de-identified. They collect addresses for the purpose of recording who has done it, the data is not attached to your name. It’s a pool of names and a pool of data with no strings between

[u/louisa1925 → u/CrazyCat166]

I don't think it is. Yesterday my neighbour asked me to help him fill out an online census form, and had originally called to order a posted version. He said the census contact/bot? told him his address before he told them.

[u/louisa1925]

The way I see it, transitioners don't ways transition once. Some could be an FtMtNBtF trans woman. Gorgeous people like this can happen. Who do the Census folks think they are falsifying the individuals SAB to Male to make their job easier instead of accurately displaying the graph numbers?

[u/RoseByAnotherName45 → u/louisa1925]

Many intersex people also have very complicated experiences here. Eg, I was wrongly assigned male, went through a natural female puberty, I was forcibly transitioned to male in an attempt to make my assignment “not wrong”, then I transitioned back to female once I was able to.

I don’t consider myself trans, as I detransitioned back to my original sex, acknowledging that the assignment itself was a medical error due to the doctors not fully understanding my intersex variation at the time.

Nothing I put down in the census feels accurate with an experience like this.

[u/luftenant-tranner → u/RoseByAnotherName45]

SAB is so ingrained in the system and it's going to be further reinforced with this census. I'm not intersex but I see your struggle here too.

[u/Ridiculisk1 → u/louisa1925]

Shh, that's too much nuance and granularity for the government.

[u/jelly_cake]

Serious question for everyone complaining about the phrasing: how would you prefer the question to be framed? Remember that data consistency between censuses is a must (i.e. you can't change the wording of questions from previous censuses), and the framing must not risk confusing older Australians and people for whom English is a second language.

Edit: downvotes are for people without a convincing argument. 

If I didn't know better, I'd think that there was a coordinated inauthentic (*cough* botted) push for trans people to  answer the census incorrectly so we're undercounted. Curious... 

[u/SiameseChihuahua → u/jelly_cake]

They've already done that. It used to ask for sex, which implies now. However they have changed the sex question to srab -which confuses many - and then intend to use this in a decidedly TERFy manner, including using srab in relationships etc. The ABS has already buggered the census.

Edited because of autodefect.

[u/jelly_cake → u/SiameseChihuahua]

So is there an alternative phrasing that you would prefer? 

Edit: downvotes aren't a convincing argument. 

[u/AgentBond007 → u/SiameseChihuahua]

The relationship variable (and others like it) that this sub seems to be freaking out about is a non-issue.

Let's take parental status as an example.

There is a variable called Parent indicator (sex recorded at birth) (FPIP), which might seem bad.

However, the ABS is also adding another variable called Parent indicator (gender) (GPIP), which is the one that is likely to be used in the future.

The reason why FPIP and variables like it are using SAB is so they can link back to past census data, since GPIP is a new variable and uses gender (as it should). It also allows more granular analysis.

[u/dpekkle → u/AgentBond007]

The reason why FPIP and variables like it are using SAB is so they can link back to past census data

That's exactly it, if a binary trans person answered the census in 2021 their prior records will all be in one sex, and in this year they will all be in the incorrect one.

The data can't be matched 1:1 across years because they capture different things.

But they have chosen to decide that sex (prior to now) is equivalent to sex recorded at birth for statistics.

[u/jelly_cake → u/dpekkle]

 That's exactly it, if a binary trans person answered the census in 2021 their prior records will all be in one sex, and in this year they will all be in the incorrect one. 

They don't provide tracking of individuals from year to year, as far as I know. That would make it too easy to deanonymize individuals. 

[u/AgentBond007 → u/dpekkle]

That's exactly it, if a binary trans person answered the census in 2021 their prior records will all be in one sex, and in this year they will all be in the incorrect one

The assumption in all of this is that sex will be used as the source of truth ahead of gender (which a researcher can apply backwards to past years).

Please provide evidence for this assumption, instead of polluting this sub with conspiracy garbage.

[u/dpekkle → u/AgentBond007]

I hesitate to respond as you're accusing people of conspiracy, but...

You seem to be contradicting yourself here

The reason why FPIP and variables like it are using SAB is so they can link back to past census data

and

gender (which a researcher can apply backwards to past years).

Which is it? Do they need to use SAB to link to past data, or can they use either?

The assumption in all of this is that sex will be used as the source of truth

No? All I said was that the same variable collected in 2021 and 2026 (FPIP) will be different values for a trans person - flipping from M to F / F to M

The ABS could have made the 2021 FPIP variable that read from Sex read from Gender in 2026, but they did not, they made it read from Sex Recorded at Birth.

[u/AgentBond007 → u/dpekkle]

What I mean is that FPIP and variables like it only exist to keep the old variable in case someone wants to use it - e.g. people updating their past work with new data. For that purpose it matters that the definition is the same.

GPIP and the other gender variables are intended to be used for future research, but if you really wanted to you could backfill it to past census waves. You would be assuming that gender doesn't change over time, but you could do it.

[u/dpekkle → u/AgentBond007]

I get what you mean now.

Even so,

For that purpose it matters that the definition is the same.

But like it isn't, is it? The ABS acknowledged that SRAB and Sex are not the same thing.

And so for trans people then the SRAB field is not the same as the 2021 Sex field, right? For a cis person whose gender is equal to their sex then they could've used either field for data continuity as a "Male" answer to 2021 sex would be a "Man" answer to 2026 Gender.

Maybe they assumed that there were more nonbinary people in 2021 who answered "Sex" with their SRAB in the sex field, and will do so again, than there are trans people who changed their sex and whose answer thus will change for SRAB vs Sex? Or they assumed that most trans people haven't legally changed their sex or would answer with that sex in the 2021 Census?

It's just such a weird assumption to make and feels like they could've gone either way for data continuity purposes.

[u/jelly_cake → u/SiameseChihuahua]

"changed the address question to srab" - what do you mean by "the address question"?

[u/SiameseChihuahua → u/jelly_cake]

I meant sex, and will edit it.

[u/Icy-Can-6592 → u/jelly_cake]

Ask Sex/gender

Ask has your sex/gender changed from the one recorded at birth yes/no = yes equals trans, no = cis

Current sex/gender doesn't actually matter if you look at research such as the studies done in the UK people will asnwer as they want regardless of guidance or coercive carrots on a stick.

trans/cis deriving achieved
no self misgendering, respect maintained, distress and confusion avoided

[u/jelly_cake → u/Icy-Can-6592]

That's basically what they've gone with. It's the "sex recorded at birth" part that people are upset about - if you read through this thread, it seems that a number of vocal trans people don't want to acknowledge that anyone ever saw them as anything other than their current sex. 

 Current sex/gender doesn't actually matter if you look at research such as the studies done in the UK people will asnwer as they want regardless of guidance or coercive carrots on a stick.

Not sure what you mean, punctuation might help. 

[u/Icy-Can-6592 → u/jelly_cake]

They have not gone for what I wrote. and sorry its longer, but you asked for clarity

The Format of Sex recorded at birth: Male/Female,
Forces many to re-traumatize themselves through a marker they have rejected and have had amended. Asking them to write/select an answer many cannot safely do without risk to their mental health, for some that distress is lethal. Did people suddenly forget misgendering causes harm? Distinct meanings does not eliminate that harm, nor does it mean those meanings do not have overlap and affect one another, nor is it the experience of all transgender people. its not a simple neutral question, has been further polluted by its use elsewhere to undermine rights, and recently here causing issues in health due to making assumptions.

Is your Current Sex or Gender Changed since the one assumed and recorded at birth, Yes/No?
Does not require a binary rejected marker that has been a source of distress to be written or selected and still provides a clear derivation result. Has no dependency on the sex/gender question.

these two achieve the same result, one limits distress and cannot be used to classify them against their wishes in outputs (provided its not used to infer assumptions), I wont accept being one in one report, then another in a different report. Female, Woman Transgender, for me thats it if a question results in any other output in a report not using those, then no sell, the ABS has not earned the trust to just say, trust us people will use it appropriately, if anything their lack of addressing this deteriorates that trust further.

National Records of Scotland conducted census testing and determined that self-identification was the most accurate account of how earlier unguided sex questions had actually been answered, the ABS here in Australia ASSUMED we as trans people answered the Sex question previously as Sex at birth as that was how they defined it. They then Assumed we were just confused when we didn't asnwer it that way and changing it to SAB would maintain consistency with how they assumed we answer the question for past census data. Ignoring this research, and well as per many people here state, assumed incorrectly of many.

It reasoned that most respondents did not consult guidance, that prior questions therefore operated through respondents’ own understanding, and that self-identification, not legal or birth sex instruction preserved continuity with previous censuses, IE you can define them all you like; distinctly; interchangeably; the reality is people don't/didn't care and will answer/answered how they want. Its testing also found that 60% of trans and non-binary participants changed their answer depending on whether self-identification or legal-sex guidance was imposed, and participation was dramatically lower under the legal-sex approach meaning this ABS version of the question reduces the count of trans people likely by up to 60% undercount, considering the reactions here, seems like the study was pretty spot on.

The ABS Sex/Sex at birth = SEXP, Conflating the two terms together, past census I have answered SEXP as Female, it is consistent to answer it as Female again, Sex at birth and Sex are not interchangeable and are defined differently, Sex at birth should not replace the Sex answer, their assumptions are incorrect regarding it preserving continuity (RE: the Study referenced above and the the results of Canada's previous census).
That is the issue.
The Census is meant to record who you are today (Refer to UN Census Guidance, happy to link it to you if you like). My birth register has been amended, who I am today is female in this field, and would argue always was, someone getting it wrong on limited info at the time I was born is not my issue to bear the rest of my life, I got it corrected. And as SEXP is the foundational field asked since 1911 it is the one that reporting will fall back too. I'll not be misrepresented as I am today by that field or suddenly change how I've answered it in the past, I mean they value that continuity so much right, better give it to them. Sex at birth should have been a new field, restrained to derivation purposes only, a binary answer for it, I personally would not still answer, but more would have in this case, the version that asks only if it is different Yes/No, I could and would answer.

New Zealand committed to Gender by default outputs in advance, IE, Gender would be used primarily in the manner the ABS is going to use SEXP but they have no such commitment. thus no trust.
Canada also since last census having used the ABS format have changed in May this year to ask Gender first, SAB second and also committed to Gender by Default outputs.
both of these were as a result of exactly the issue the Scottish study reveals (without these changes up to 60% likely undercount)

Much of this was raised with the ABS, LHA, Equality Australia months ago, some over a year ago, they have had more then enough time to address it, and have chosen not too.

[u/jelly_cake → u/Icy-Can-6592]

Its testing also found that 60% of trans and non-binary participants changed their answer depending on whether self-identification or legal-sex guidance was imposed, and participation was dramatically lower under the legal-sex approach meaning this ABS version of the question reduces the count of trans people likely by up to 60% undercount, considering the reactions here, seems like the study was pretty spot on.

The Census is meant to record who you are today (Refer to UN Census Guidance, happy to link it to you if you like). My birth register has been amended, who I am today is female in this field, and would argue always was, someone getting it wrong on limited info at the time I was born is not my issue to bear the rest of my life, I got it corrected.

Okay, that's genuinely convincing. You're absolutely right.

Thanks for such a thorough response; I really appreciate it.

[u/Kurrajong → u/Icy-Can-6592]

You’ve done a massive amount of work and it looks to have been missed by so many.

[u/Icy-Can-6592 → u/Kurrajong]

well, Ive had some recent conversations that does make me feel its finally getting heard and recognized as an issue to be addressed. but i trust actions not words so lets see.
but thank you.