Search results for sexual orientation

There is no one answer to the question, “How many people are lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender?” But demographer Gary Gates, who works for the Williams Institute at UCLA’s School of Law, has compiled the results from nine surveys that attempt to measure sexual orientation — five of them from the U.S. He estimates that 3.5% of the U.S. population identify as lesbian, gay or bisexual, while 0.3% are transgender. Here is the breakdown for the different surveys:

He also points out that bisexual identification is generally more common among women than among men. Among women, more than half of the lesbian/bisexual population identifies as bisexual; among men more than half identify as gay.

As is the case with race, we may rely on self-identification when it comes to sexual orientation. But criteria external to individuals’ identities may matter as well. These include the perceptions or actions of others (such as cross-burning or job discrimination), as well as qualities measurable by impersonal means (such as phenotypical traits or genes). In the case of sexual orientation more than race, these externally-measurable qualities include behavior (such as the gender of those one has sex with). The interpretation of these qualities, and their measurement, necessarily are highly contingent on social constructions.

In the case of sexual orientation, the questions are not usually asked, so the answers are not bureaucratically normalized. If the government and other data collectors were to start asking the question regularly, the results would probably settle down, as they have with race. In Michel Foucault’s terms, you might say the population is not disciplined with regard to sexual orientation as well as it is with race. (Of course, the public is unruly when it comes to measuring race as well, especially outside those outside the Black/White dichotomy, as “Asians” and “Hispanics” often offer national-origin identities when asked to describe their race.) Settling down doesn’t mean there would be no more changes, just that variability between surveys would probably decline.

Because of this complexity, it is interesting to compare results when people are asked about their sexual behavior, and their sexual attraction. Here surveys find much higher rates of gayness. As Gates shows, for example, 11% of Americans ages 18-44 report any same-sex sexual attraction, while 8.8% report any same-sex sexual behavior.

Whether demographers, or the public, or anyone else, considers these experiences and feelings to define people as gay/lesbian or bisexual is not resolved. For example, as Gates notes in a much longer law review article that describes the methods behind his report – and the reactions to it – some media simply ignored the self-identified bisexual population, and those with same-sex attraction or behavior, declaring that the gay and lesbian population was less than 2% of Americans. Others concluded that the commonness of bisexuality implies most gays and lesbians in fact have a “choice” about their sexual orientation.

I recommend the law review article for Gates’s in-depth discussion of “the closet” issue with regard to surveys, and the problem of measuring concealed identities — which vary according to social context and sometimes change over the course of people’s lives.

I’m grateful that Gates has pursued these questions, and taken a lot of grief in the process. He concludes:

These are challenging questions with no explicitly correct answers. The good news is that strong evidence suggests that, politically at least, the stakes in this discussion are no longer rooted in an urgent need to prove the very existence of LGBT people. This progress hopefully provides the space to more critically and thoughtfully assess these issues in an environment where a sense of urgency is not paramount. Today, the size of the LGBT community is less important than understanding the daily lives and struggles of this still-stigmatized population and informing crucial policy debates with facts rather than stereotype and anecdote.

As with race, measurement of sexual orientation may be essential to legal and political responses to inequality and discrimination — even as the process helps solidify fixed identity categories we might rather do without.

Philip N. Cohen is a professor of sociology at the University of Maryland, College Park, and writes the blog Family Inequality. You can follow him on Twitter or Facebook.

Cross-posted at Montclair SocioBlog.

It can take a while to find the right word.  But a mot juste may be crucial for framing a political issue. If you like the idea of men being able to marry men, and women women, what should you call the new laws that would allow that?

The trouble with “gay marriage” and even “same-sex marriage” is that these terms suggest – especially to conservatives – some kind of special treatment for the minority.  It’s as though gays are getting a marriage law just for them.

At last, the gay marriage forces seem to have come up with a term that invokes not special treatment but a widely-held American value that’s for everyone – equality.  A bill in  New Jersey has been in the news this week, mostly because Gov. Christie says he will veto it.  The bill is a “marriage equality” law.

The governor is in a bit of a squeeze.  As a Republican with ambitions beyond New Jersey’s borders, he can’t very well be for gay marriage.  But if his opponents can frame the matter their way, he now has to come out against equality.  Which is why the governor continues to refer to the issue as “same-sex marriage.”*

It’s like “abortion rights” or even “women’s rights.” A phrase like that might rally women to your cause, but if you want broader support, you need a flag that every American can salute.  I’m not familiar with the history of abortion rights so I don’t know how it happened, but those who want to keep abortion legal have managed to frame the issue as one of freedom to choose.   They have been so successful that the media routinely refer to their side as “pro-choice.”   To oppose them is to oppose both freedom and individual choice, principles which occupy a high place in the pantheon of American values.

It’s not clear that the “marriage equality” movement has been similarly successful, at least not yet.  I did a quick Lexis-Nexis search sampling the last week of the months January and July going back to 2007.  I looked for three terms: “same-sex marriage,” “gay marriage,” and “marriage equality.”

The general trend for all three is upwards as more legislatures consider bills, with big jumps when a vote becomes big news – that blip in July 2011 is the New York State vote.  But the graph can’t quite show how “marriage equality” has risen from obscurity.  That first data point, July 2007, is a 4.  Four mentions of “marriage equality” while the other terms had 25 and 50 times that many.  As of last week, “gay” and “same sex” still outnumber “equality,” but the score is not nearly so lopsided.

Here is a graph of the ratio of “equality” to each of the other two terms.  From nearly 1 : 20 (one “marriage equality” for every 20 “gay marriages”) the ratio has increased to 1 : 3 and even higher when the discussion gets active.

If the movement is successful, that upward trend should continue.  When you hear Fox News referring to “marriage equality laws,” you’ll know it’s game over.

———————————

* Christie is usually politically adept, but he’s stumbling on this one.  He referred to a gay legislator as “numb nuts” (literally, that might not necessarily be a liability for a politician caught in a squeeze).   Christie also said that he’s vetoing the bill so that the matter can be put on the ballot as a referendum – you know, like what should have happened with civil rights in the South.  

I think people would have been happy to have a referendum on civil rights rather than fighting and dying in the streets in the South.

Several critics, including Numb Nuts, responded that, yes, Southern whites would have been happy to have civil rights left up to the majority.  African Americans not so much.  (If you’re looking for an illustration of Tocqueville’s “tyranny of the majority,” the post-Reconstruction South might be a good place to start.)  The analogy is obvious – race : 1962 :: sexual orientation : 2012 – even if it was not the message the governor intended.

HAPPY November! Here are some highlights from last month…


Advertising Fails, Sociology Wins:

A guest post by Larkin Callaghan about a Skinny Water advertisement telling women to lose weight was re-posted on Jezebel.  Jezebel reports that the ad was pulled by the company thanks to complaints.

Apparently the moronic anti-woman, man-mocking Dr. Pepper campaign was a bust. The Wall Street Journal reports that favorability fell by one-fourth among men and one-half among women after the ad campaign was released.  Hello advertisers! Treat your customers as if they have half a brain!

Miss Representation Documentary:

A documentary featuring SocImages Contributor Caroline Heldman, Miss Representation, premiered this month to great acclaim.  It’s about the relationship between representations of women in the media and political participation.  Watch the trailer or catch this interview on Ellen with Rachel Maddow, who was also in the documentary, along with Lisa Ling, Jane Fonda, Condoleezza Rice, Margaret Cho, Rosario Dawson, Katie Couric, and more.

New Course Guide:

We just added a new Course Guide organizing SocImages material in a way that is helpful to instructors.  This one is on Research Methods. That makes three!

We’d like to offer as many Course Guides as we can, even different takes on the same course.  So, if you’re interested in writing one, please see our Instructors Page. There’s other good stuff for instructors there too.

Best of October:

Our hard-working intern, Norma Morella, collected the stuff ya’ll liked best from last month. Here’s what she found:

Talks:

I had a fantastic time last week visiting Pacific Lutheran University. Tacoma was gorgeous, the students were brilliant, and the faculty were engaging and fun. Tomorrow I’ll be giving a quick talk about Occupy Wall Street on my own campus, Occidental College.  And I’m looking forward to visiting Harvard and the University of Massachusetts, Amherst in the last week of March. I’ll try to have a meet up if anyone would like to get together for drinks in Cambridge!

Links:

Our posts on consumer spendingracist college partiesgender and toilets, and homosexuality in our collective consciousness were linked from or featured at BoingBoing,Bitch, the San Francisco Chronicle, and Andrew Sullivan’s Daily Beast, respectively.  Always great fun when our ideas get out there!

Social Media ‘n’ Stuff:

Finally, this is your monthly reminder that SocImages is on Twitter and Facebook.  Gwen and I and most of the team are also on twitter:

Course Guide for
SOCIOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODS
(last updated 10/2011)

Developed by Lisa Wade
Occidental College

Disclaimer: This course guide is far from comprehensive, but it does collect what we have in an organized way. If you’re a methods instructor, and would like to write a guest post, please do!

 

Research Design

On Objectivity

Sampling

Delimiting Variables

Operationalization

Research Ethics

 

Methodological Approaches

Surveys

 

Data Analysis and Interpretation

Data Requires Interpretation

Correlation vs. Causation

Spurious Relationships

Mean vs. Categorical Difference

Paying Attention to Variance

Statistical Significance

 

Communicating Results

Types of Graphs

The X and Y Axis

(Mis)Representing Data

Lying with Statistics

Publishing

People seem to love to draw distinctions between social categories. Gender, race, age, class, sexual orientation, religion… you name it; difference is something that we all tend to be a bit obsessed with. But even when there is difference, there is overlap. Often, lots and lots of overlap.

Case in point, sent in by Christie W. and Jordan G.: reactions to the super scary bit at Nightmares Fear Factory in Niagara Falls. These photos suggest that no matter who you are, scary is scary! There are lots and they are just as awesome.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.

As of today, Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, the U.S. policy that allowed gays and lesbians to serve in the military only as long as they kept their sexual orientation a secret, is officially over. In honor of this milestone, here’s the official letter from top Army commanders to soldiers announcing the end of the policy:

Via Joe. My. God.

NPR posted interviews with two men who worked hard for repeal, and it’s worth a read.

Ways to Follow

In addition to the home page and traditional blog form, you can follow the site on FacebookTwitter, Tumblr, and Pinterest.

Pinterest Account

For quick and easy overview of SocImages material, visit our Pinterest Account. There are more than 25 boards featuring the fundamentals of sociology as well as those with content related to media and marketingrace and ethnicitysexual orientationgenderviolenceeconomics, and other fun stuff.

Course Guides and Collections

Course Guides collect strong SocImages posts organized in a way that follows standard syllabi for frequently-taught sociology courses or cover particular books, articles, or theorists. Collections are topical and usually inspired by current events. If you’re a sociology professor or graduate student and would like to volunteer – browse our archives, pull out the most compelling posts, and arrange them in ways other instructors would find familiar and convenient — SocImages would love to feature your collection!

Course guides:

Collections:

 

Advice for Students

Guest Blogging

I accept guest post ideas. Please see the Guidelines for Guest Bloggers.

Sample Assignments

We’ve been collecting sample assignments from instructors who’ve tried them out. You can peruse them here.

I recently argued that the blog, Born This Way, falsely suggested may give the impression that dressing or acting in ways consistent with the other sex when you are a child is a True Sign that you are gay.  This is obviously not the case, as almost all of us can find a photo from our childhood in which we’re breaking gender norms; it also conflates gender performance and sexual orientation (leaving out “lipstick lesbians” and “butch” gay men) and it locks the GLBTQ movement into a biological argument for acceptance, an argument I believe is short-sighted.

The idea that wearing a dress or seeming girly is a sign that one is gay is also completely ahistorical. If wearing a dress as a child means boys are gay, then there should have been essentially no straight men for much of American history.  Until the 1920s, infants and small children, whether male or female, were dressed and looked alike, often in long hair and dresses (source: Jo Paoletti).  Behold, American President Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882–1945):

Roosevelt may or may not have been gay then, but this outfit and hairdo certainly cannot be read to suggest that he was, at least not anymore than it can for young people and adults today.

Idea and photo borrowed from Family Inequality.

Lisa Wade, PhD is an Associate Professor at Tulane University. She is the author of American Hookup, a book about college sexual culture; a textbook about gender; and a forthcoming introductory text: Terrible Magnificent Sociology. You can follow her on Twitter and Instagram.