UK government asked to reject ‘biased & harmful’ Sullivan Review

Two LGBTQ+ organizations rejected the Sullivan Review conclusions, explaining how data and statistics record gender identity and “biological gender” as biased by the fact that the academic behind the review is a member of the Gender Critical Group Advisory Board.

An independent review of how the UK public body was published on Wednesday (March 19), led by sociology professor Alice Sullivan.

The report commissioned by the former Conservative government said the way gender is recorded in the data set could lead to what Sullivan called “a widespread loss of data on sex.”

Instead, researchers focused on collecting “biological sex” data by default, saying that all research studies should aim for a “50-50 sex ratio,” and that it would be categorized as either male or female.

Sullivan continued: “Gender as a biological category remains constant across time and jurisdictions, but the concept of “legal sex” is [gender recognition certificate] This may change in the future. Using Natal sex to collect future prevention data against such changes. ”

However, LGBTQ+ advocacy group Transactual and the feminist Gender Equality Network (FGEN) argued that the report is rooted in “effectively false claims about gender and gender binary nature.”

Keyne Walker, Strategy Director at Transactual, urged Peter Kyle, secretary of science, innovation and technology, to reject review recommendations, saying the report “does nothing” to support government equality and diversity goals.

“It represents a departure from the government’s position and if it was implemented it would be a U-turn,” Walker argued. “What’s worse, the experience of people working in this field is far from improving the quality of data, suggesting that the measures promoted in this report will make the data collected about gender and gender a much less reliable.”

Concerns raised by Sullivan’s relationship with anti-trans groups

Beyond reporting recommendations, Sullivan’s historical connections to anti-trans groups include sexual issues. Its mission is to “promote clarity of laws, policies and language to protect the rights of all,” and it is holding the red flag of LGBTQ+ groups.

A Transactual spokesman argued that the report’s “call for evidence” investigation questions were “major.” When asked to explain by Pinknews, they explained that they were referring to a section entitled “Investigation.” “Look for two proof barriers to research on sex and gender.” “The loss of robust data on sex in the UK has sparked concerns.”

They then ask respondents to explain the “blocks to research you faced,” including options that include “forced speech (forced to agree to a particular opinion, statement, or signal)” and “self-censorship and cooling effects (e.g., feeling unable to express a particular opinion).

Additionally, this survey will only provide respondents with two options to fill out under the “Sex” section. Male or female and does not offer non-binary, intersex, or gender non-conforming options.

Founded by Rebecca Bull, Naomi Cunningham, Emma Hilton and Maya Forstator, the Sex Master argues that “people should not be afraid to say this” in the list of principles that “there are two genders, women and men.”

Alice Sullivan has been acting for several years within the Sex Matters advisory group and has written guest posts on the organization’s website, including in 2021, where she claimed there was a “political project that denies the material reality of sexuality.”

Transactual and FGen argue that the relationship between Sullivan and gender-critical groups could undermine their status as independent reviewers, and was a “clear sign of bias.”

Group urges the government to reject Sullivan Review findings

Transactual and FGEN warned that implementing review recommendations could cause “severe harm” to all people and could undermine the government’s purpose of providing a “functional cross-agency data system.”

A group spokesperson said: “To be functional, the data used by governments and organizations must reflect the living reality of people. This is to assign gender and trance status at birth, in some contexts, such as gender and medicine.”

The organization urged the government to reject the “culture war approach” to data collection in the previous Conservative government, and instead engage “people with living experiences.”

Dr. Kevin Guian, Prime Minister’s Officer at the University of Edinburgh Business School and director of the Gender + Sexuality Data Lab, said “hangovers from the mission of former Tory governments to address the ‘basic principles’ in science” opposed the “basic principles” that the methodology would “change based on the specific questions being investigated.”

He went on to say: [The Department of Science, Technology and Innovation]UK government, researchers, funders and public institutions need to be aware of this Trump intervention as to what it is. An attempt to erase trans and non-binary people from the data that exists. ”

In a post on Thursday (March 20) on X/Twitter, Health Secretary Wes Streeting gave support to the review, saying “it emphasizes the importance of recording biological sex,” adding, “doing that will not prevent people from recording, recognizing, and respecting gender identities when these are different.”

When approached for comment, a spokesman for science, technology and innovation responded.

“The government has made it clear that collection of accurate and relevant data is essential for research and the operation of effective public services, especially when it comes to sex.

“We are grateful for Professor Sullivan’s work being shared with relevant government departments and public institutions, including the ONS.”

Pinknews also reached out to Alice Sullivan for comments.