This is a preliminary cut of the data gathered on 16th Aug 2006
The data shows the response to the survey after the first three weeks, and the numbers who had responded went from 63-64 during the analysis. This represents a snapshot of the data, rather than definitive analysis. The information gathered is intended as feedback , to get an idea of people's views on the new terminology of disorder, as quickly as possible.
The results help to quantify both the views on the new terminology, as well as the backgrounds of those participating. The results are surprising simply because of the lack of positive support for the new terminology.
I have chosen to focus in the brief analysis primarily on the views on DSD, but have broken this data down in specific ways:
I have also included textual responses where appropriate (i.e., comments other than 'not applicable', or commenting on typo's that were amended, etc.)
I have also drilled down into the data more extensively in the following ways:
I chose the latter, because the numbers were small, and did not drill down in that way to those who were not in favour of the new terminology because they corresponded much more closely with those who identified as intersex and/or had experienced intervention. To do so would have entailed being repititious. However, for those who were in favour of DSD, it was not straighforward to get an idea of where they were situated in relation to Q1 & Q2 other than by looking at who reponded 'yes' to Q16.
This is only a quickly gathered view of the data, and until the survey is closed it will not be possible to gain a more stable presentation of the responses. This is being done here in a similar iterative way to the survey, so that people can feed back responses as to how they would like to see the data cut or drilled down in the final analysis. Some of the textual aspects have been amended, and this is because I have sought to accommodate feedback where possible. It has not been possible to alter the structure of the questions after the first few responses (when the VSD option was inserted). I have decided to maintain the number of questions at 20, to avoid making the survey over-complicated.
One thing that I have had some feedback is about language, options available, etc. Particularly in relation to identity, gender, sex-changing and sexuality. Terminology is a problem that besets this community, and one I am unable to resolve. What is an appropriate term for one person will inevitably be anathema for another, and all I can do is use the terms I feel most comfortable with, trying to accommodate people as best I can. Because I am aware of this, I have included plenty of opportunity for people to insert textual responses in places where appropriate, and a range of inclusive choices in places where possible. I do not feel that this is critical here, because the survey is aimed at finding out about views on the use of DSD terminology, and the rest is more for background.
I am very grateful to those who have participated, because sometimes it feels like one is working in a vacuum and could be missing the target completely. I have lots of anecdotal evidence to suggest that people are not happy with the new terminology, but until now I have had little substantive data to bear this out. I only received one response to suggest that this survey was biased, and it was not altogether clear from the person's responses that they would be affected by the term, nor had been affected by the issues about which it touches on. Because I feel that most people will have come to their view before responding to the survey, any use of language that might indicate bias is irrelevant anyway. I see this as no more biased than an approach which seeks foist something on a community without proper consultation in the first place. If people are concerned with bias, they could quite easily have undertaken such a survey themselves before they did that.
The initial cut of data straight from the survey hostsite when the brief analysis-cut started is presented on the following pages. By the time I had completed the presentation of the data above, two more responses had appeared, so the data is not entirely consistent between what is below and the data presented above. But, this gives a less digested view of the data, including the range of comments made in the survey:
