Every day, millions of people provide data about their gender or sexual orientation. They supply data about themselves or their families, even if they are not fully aware of it, by using their cell phones or shopping online, for example; or they may answer questions in a formal survey. And with so much (and increasing) technological power at our disposal, researchers, analysts, and social scientists have started to think more carefully about how we collect, analyze, communicate, and respond to data around demographic characteristics and identities. These data, when disaggregated by demographics or identities, can offer insight into and understanding about disparities across health, income, housing, and other areas - and ultimately inform policy and funding decisions. For example, we know from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC’s) Youth Risk Behavior Survey that LGBTQIA+ youth (students in grades 9–12) are at a higher risk of suicide relative to their non-LGBTQIA+ peers. Federal, state, and local governments can use these data to better allocate budget resources and select hospital locations. But these data also have a significant capacity to cause harm if misused. The long arc of the fight to recognize and respect the dignity and rights of LGBTQIA+ people has raised the visibility of multiple dimensions of gender and sexual orientation, expanding our conception of these identities beyond the binary definitions of man or woman, straight or gay. But recently, we have seen an increasing and targeted backlash against LGBTQIA+ people, particularly transgender and gender-nonconforming people. As of September 2023, more than 560 anti-LGBTQIA+ bills were introduced across the country. These bills - more than 80 of which have already passed - seek to prohibit a number of identity- or gender-affirming practices, including the use of a person’s correct pronoun in schools, access to evidence-based and medically necessary care, treatment of gender dysphoria in minors, and the provision of accurate identification documents. Each of these pieces of legislation demonstrates that data regarding gender and sexual orientation can be used for harm - to restrict rights, health care, and freedoms and to further disparage vulnerable, marginalized persons as “other.” In this fifth guide of the Urban Institute’s Do No Harm project, we explore the current state of data around gender, gender identity, and sexual orientation. The collection of demographic (or identity-based) data is often complicated by the evolution and nuance of language; words or phrases that we used yesterday may not be the words or phrases that we use today or will use tomorrow. By understanding these changes and employing data best practices, researchers, analysts, and other stakeholders can help ensure that such data are used for good - to help address disparities and inequities faced by LGBTQIA+ people and to assess the effects of policies, interventions, and societal attitudes on their lives. Making purposeful and thoughtful decisions about these kinds of data in inclusive and equitable ways can result in recommendations to policymakers that are more likely to be embraced and implemented without risking the safety and privacy of the people whose data are collected.
Copyright:
Reproduced with permission of the copyright holder. Further use of the material is subject to CC BY-NC-DC license. (More information)