What do Statistics NZ and Sall Grover - Aussie femina suprema & creator of the Giggle app - have in common?

In answer to the question above, not a lot – thank goodness! Although New Zealand’s Deputy Government Statistician and Deputy Chief Executive for Insights & Statistics, Rachael Milicich, and Sall Grover are women, any commonality after that ends. Rachael believes a women can have a penis, whereas Sall most definitely doesn’t.

Sall Grover is an Australian woman who created an app for women called Giggle. Along came a bloke in a dress who got onto the app, was removed from it because he’s a bloke, and proceeded to kick up a storm about discrimination on the grounds of gender identity. He took Sall to court in April, and the judgement is pending.

Rachael Milicich decided that NZ’s 2023 census should ask people what their ‘gender’ was in place of asking what their ‘sex’ was, like it always had. The fact that ‘gender’ is a nebulous concept was of no importance to Rachael, who claims "Our Rainbow communities are a key part of our identity as a country”. Do not expect to get a sensible answer from Stats NZ to any questions pertaining to ‘gender’.

I’d love to put Rachael and Sall in a room together, and hear them debate this thing called ‘gender’. I doubt if Rachael would be up for it, as she/her would only have the nonsense neo-rainbow narrative to parrot, which Sall would shred with one sentence and one hand tied behind her back. Luckily, the rest of us get to be in a room with Sall in early July, though, when she comes to NZ. She will be speaking in these places and on these dates –

Auckland:  Thursday, 4 July.

New Plymouth:  Sunday, 7 July.

Wellington: Tuesday, 9 July.

Christchurch:  Wednesday, 10 July.

Registration is required for the Sall Grover events, and is $20. The link to ticketing will be on the Women’s Rights Party NZ website and Facebook page, when that link is set up, as will all other information. Any questions can be asked via the Women’s Rights Party contact page.

Getting back to Stats NZ, they now want to know if we would mind them sourcing some of our data from other organisations, instead of getting that data from questions asked in the census, and invited public submissions about this. On the surface, there’s no connection between this and the dog’s breakfast of the 2023 census, but it didn’t take me long to see one. I’m no Sall, and can’t match her exquisitely executed evisceration of gender ideology bollox, but I nevertheless gave Stats NZ some of my thoughts on the matter. Here are five of the questions from the submission form, and my answers -

Stats NZ question 1:

My answer:

I want to know exactly what information Stats NZ is collecting about me. I won't be able to see this with my own eyes if they collect certain information about me from other agencies and organisations. We don't always remember precisely what information we've given to other agencies, which we may prefer not to be shared in a data haul, or which may have changed. If the census stops asking reality-based questions about us, what questions will then be asked instead? Will it be questions about feelings, as included in the 2023 census when it was decided to ask people what ‘gender’ they felt themselves to be? It’s unclear how resources can be allocated based on a mutable feeling such as gender, unless it’s a strategy to produce ‘data’ for the NZ Government to show that more money needs to be put into ‘rainbow’ lobby groups, as well as more medication and surgery funding for those who want to radically change their bodies to fit their feelings. Will other groups be allowed questions based on their feelings to be asked in the census, in lieu of reality-based questions?

Stats NZ question 2:

My answer:

Some organisations now obscure a person's sex by using gender-identity options as the identifier in place of biological sex. This means that a man can now refer to himself as a woman, or vice versa, and it will be recorded as such. Any data collected from these organisations will be automatically flawed as a result, as no one can change their sex in the real world no matter what is written to the contrary. Data that women and girls - i.e. human females - can use to establish needs, planning, and positive action specific to women and girls, will therefore be less reliable as a consequence if men are included in it, even if those men say they're women. As a woman - i.e. an adult human female - I want data about women not to be corrupted by collecting data which may include biological males, but which no one knows if it does or not. It’s already getting hard to source information specifically about women and girls, due to the trend to be unspecific about sex. I don’t want Stats NZ to collate this kind of unreliable data.

Stats NZ question 3:

My answer:

I would like Stats NZ to never again exclude the gender-critical community from a panel of Topic Experts on anything to do with gender-identity questions. This was done in 2020 in the census consultation process, when every single person on the panel of Topic Experts chosen by Stats NZ had an investment of some sort in transgender ideology. There was not one person on the panel who didn’t. A nod was given to this observation in the summary of the public submissions on page 33 - “Some submitters thought the consultation process was biased towards certain groups, particularly those representing the trans community. Many of these submissions were from individuals or groups who were opposed to the ‘gender by default’ principle.” The process was clearly biased as demonstrated by the chosen panel of Topic Experts. The driver of this consultation process was Deputy Government Statistician and Deputy Chief Executive for Insights & Statistics, Rachael Milicich, who publicises in some places that she uses she/her pronouns. There is no way that the only topic experts on gender-identity are limited to those invested in transgender ideology. The bias on this panel meant that the gender-critical community were not represented in matters of serious and genuine concern to us and society. We are a part of this world, and the knee-jerk reaction of dismissing us all with parroted unthinking slurs, because we don’t adhere to a populist, often unscrutinised, narrative is not acceptable. So, going forward, please never again exclude gender-critical woman and men from a panel about gender-identity, as that subject affects us, too, in myriad ways. If you don’t know who those people might be, because you have routinely shut them out, an invitation to apply for that panel can be made on the Stats NZ website (just as one suggestion).

Stats NZ question 4:

My answer:

If Stats NZ are going to substitute collecting reality-based facts for subjective feelings in the census, I would like them to collect data on how women and girls feel about policies which allow free and unfettered access to female spaces for any man whomsoever says he’s a woman, even if he only identifies as such intermittently. And how do women and girls feel about the control of their spaces now being in the hands of men? Also, please ask people how they feel about Councils who would prefer to implement policies which allow an adult male into the same changing room or bathroom as young girls, rather than tell the adult male he’s not a woman.

Stats NZ question 5:

My answer:

It’s disturbing that Stats NZ’s executive team appears to have an adherent of gender-identity ideology embedded within it, in the form of Deputy Government Statistician and Deputy Chief Executive for Insights & Statistics, Rachael Milicich. The inclusion of she/her pronouns in her bio in some instances is a clear indication of this, as well as her being the driver of the 2020 consultation process on collecting sex and (nebulous) gender-identity information in the census. I don’t see any other group getting this kind of attention from Stats NZ about their feelings. It’s important that the Stats NZ executive team is unbiased, and not seen to be adherents to a contentious ideology, no matter how well it has been packaged and sold to them.

Do I think Stats NZ will take a blind bit of notice of my submission? No, I don’t. Like all our Public Service they have taken the oath of allegiance to TQ+ ideology. Even so, I expect it won’t be the last they hear from me 😊