To preference cis people at the expense of trans people in this way is cissexism. It demonstrates just how entrenched this bigotry is within academia and medical professional spheres even within trans people in those fields and I think they should be ashamed of themselves for pushing this on us.

While the ABS guidance suggests caution when inferring sex from sex-at-birth because it can change over one's lifetime, I have never seen a single academic or clinician apply this caution in practice (because the categories are usually interchangeable for them, their subjects, and their patients).

The reason for doing so per the Australian Bureau of Statistics guidance is that split sex/gender categories confuse cis people and they treat the categories as interchangeable (because the categories usually are interchangeable for them).

We aren't terribly happy that a lot of reporting on this has reproduced the wording used by the Trump administration and its courtier journalists verbatim, because that normalises their worldview. Here is our description of UPenn's collaboration agreement, which we believe is more factually correct