The census was a landmark moment for LGBT+ people – but we’ve still got to push for full inclusion

Census day yesterday – 21 March – was a landmark moment for the representation of lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and queer (LGTBQ) lives and experiences in data. For the first time, the census in England and Wales provided an opportunity for everyone aged 16 and over to share information about their sexual orientation and gender identity.

As a gay researcher exploring issues of data and identity, there are many reasons to celebrate. However, before putting on my party hat and opening the bubbly, I need to air some concerns about LGBT+ inclusion in the census and critically reflect on who exactly is being invited into the tent of identities “that count” – and who remains left on the outside.

The designs of UK censuses are not set in stone. Changes to recent censuses present a window into public attitudes towards the acceptability of asking about certain identity characteristics, with questions added to the census about “ethnic group” in 1991 and “religion” in 2001. The addition of new questions is therefore always partial; the record is changed to include some – but not others.

The collection of data about LGBT+ people in the UK also has a problematic history. When collected at all, data has served to demonstrate the existence of a “problem” and as a means to justify further marginalisation. For example, evidence submitted to the UK government’s Committee on Homosexual Offences and Prostitution – which published the Wolfenden Report in 1957, informing the decision to decriminalise sex between men in England andWales in 1967 – suggested that an estimated 4 per cent of the adult male population in the UK were exclusively homosexual.

As no data existed on the size of the UK’s homosexual population, this assumption was based on studies conducted in the USA by sexologist Alfred Kinsey. Among the limited data that existed, it tended to relate to activities understood as criminal (such as male same-sex encounters and cross-dressing) or medical accounts that positioned individuals we might now consider LGBT+ as deviant or departing from the “norm” in some way or another.

These historical examples offer a note of caution. Many of the methods used to collect, analyse and present data remain unchanged from the 1950s – LGBT+ people are therefore reliant on the goodwill of others to use data about us in ways that improve our lives rather than cause further harm. The potential for data practices to cause harm has been apparent during the design and roll-out of the census.

Read more:

In an effort to police how trans people identify their sex in the census, campaign group Fair Play for Women took the Office for National Statistics to court to tighten the guidance that accompanies the sex question in the English and Welsh census so that it explicitly advised respondents to answer according to the sex recorded on their birth certificate or gender recognition certificate.

In Scotland, which is conducting its census in March of next year, the parliamentary committee with oversight of the census voted against the recommendation of the country’s national statistical organisation, and decided to keep a binary sex question.

As a result, all respondents to UK censuses need to describe themselves as either “male”or “female”. Furthermore, unlike other UK nations, the Northern Ireland census does not ask a question about trans/gender identity, which means that vital information about the trans population and their experiences will remain unknown.

Although more data exists about LGBT+ people in the UK than ever before, a huge amount of this data focuses on topics such as hate crimes, bullying and harassment, mental health and suicide. Data on these topics play an important role in constructing an evidence base for action; but it only paints one dimension of LGBT+ lives. The census has offered an opportunity to diversify the data that exists about LGBT+ people, and shine a light on the negative and positive dimensions of what it means to be LGBT+ in the UK in 2021.

Even with its flaws, it’s still vital LGBT+ people on the census took part to ensure they were counted. Participation not only creates an evidence base to show “we exist” in 2021, but will also ensure future generations know about our lives.

Being counted in 2021 is the start – rather than the end – of work to ensure that data about LGBT+ people is used in ways that positively impact us. While celebrating this moment in LGBT+ history, we can also adopt an ambivalent attitude to state data collection practices, and the limitations of what “being counted” in a census can achieve.

So, although this census brings some LGBT+ identities into the spotlight, and can be heralded as a step forward – we must also use this development to galvanise further future action. We’ve still got a long way to go to push for full LGBT+ inclusion.

Dr Kevin Guyan is a researcher and writer whose work explores the intersection of data and identity. He is the author of the forthcoming ‘QueerData: Using Gender, Sex and Sexuality Data for Action’ and has recently published research on the design of the sexual orientation question in Scotland’s census