This article replies to the responses to my article on "Sex and the Census: Why surveys should not conflate sex and gender identity". Fugard conflates sex itself with the characteristics associated with sex, such as finger length ratios, leading to the erroneous implication that binary sex is not a useful explanatory variable. Hines fundamentally misrepresents my article, claiming that I have argued against asking respondents to the 2021 Census about their gender identity. In fact I make clear that information on gender identity is useful, but cannot replace data on sex. Muddling gender identity and sex will lead to the collection of inaccurate data on both. Hines resorts to a series of ad hominem attacks rather than engaging with the substance of the argument. Neither Fugard nor Hines is able to give a reason why we should not seek to collect accurate data on sex in the census or elsewhere. [For "Sex and the Census: Why surveys should not conflate sex and gender identity," see EJ1259536.]