After beg oted om the U.S. ary for beg gay, she beme an early fighter for gay rights and a proment figure the nascent L.G.B.T.Q. rights movement.
Contents:
- GAY AND LBIAN PARTNERSHIP: EVINCE OM CALIFORNIA
- GAY AND LBIAN PARTNERSHIP: EVINCE OM CALIFORNIA
- GAY AND LBIAN PARTNERSHIP: EVINCE OM CALIFORNIA
- HI, GAY! - CANNED VODKA SODA BRAND CREATED BY AND FOR THE LGBTQ+ MUNY AIMS TO DTIGMATIZE THE WORD 'GAY', LNCH WH FOUR INIC FLAVORS
- UNRSTANDG GAY & LBIAN INTI
GAY AND LBIAN PARTNERSHIP: EVINCE OM CALIFORNIA
Much recent rearch on sexual mori has ed upl-based sampl, which--by nstctn--provi no rmatn on nonpartnered dividuals. We prent the first systematic empiril analysis of partnership and habatn among self-intified gay men and lbians g two pennt, l … * gay and lesbian partnership *
Unlike prev rearch, we fd that whe and highly ted gay men and lbians are more likely to be partnered, and we nfirm that same-sex habg partners our data have mographic characteristics that are siar to California same-sex upl om Cens 2000. We nclu wh implitns of our fdgs for upl-based rearch on gay men and lbians, as well as remendatns for survey data availabily of new social science data that allow credible intifitn of sexual mori has noticeably creased social science rearch focg on gay men and lbians over the last . (2000), for example, ed sampl of same-sex unmarried partner upl om the 1990 cens to provi a broad mographic picture of gay and lbian upl the Uned Stat, and more recently Black, Sanrs, and Taylor (2007) ed the analogo upl om Cens 2000 to scribe this unique nstct, however, the cennial cens nnot provi evince on (1) nonpartnered gay men and lbians and (2) upled gay men and lbians who eher do not live wh each other or who do not choose to scribe their relatnship as an “unmarried partnership.
”2 As such, the cens and other data which sexual mori are intified only through hoehold relatnships (such as the Amerin Communy Surveys or the Current Populatn Surveys) nnot provi evince on the prevalence of partnership and habatn among gay men and lbians.
Moreover, a nsistent limatn of upl-based rearch has been s abily to terme how generalizable any rults are to the overall gay and lbian populatn, sce this qutn turns explicly on the gree to which partnered sexual mori differ om nonpartnered sexual mori. (2007) provid some timat of gay and lbian partnership prevalence g the General Social Survey (GSS) and the Natnal Health and Social Life Surveys (NHSLS), but the data are limed by small sample siz and very limed rmatn about the nature of the partnership.
GAY AND LBIAN PARTNERSHIP: EVINCE OM CALIFORNIA
Author(s): Carpenter, Christopher S; Gat, Gary J. | Abstract: A large social science lerature documents partnership rat and rrelat of partnership among heterosexual dividuals. This paper prents the first systematic empiril analysis of partnership, habatn, and official “domtic partner” registratns among self-intified gay men and lbians g four pennt, large, populatn based data sourc, mostly California. The data dite that 30-45 percent of gay men are a habg partnership, while about 50-60 percent of lbians are partnered. Across the four sampl, whe and highly ted gay men and lbians are more likely to be partnered. We also fd that almost half of partnered lbians report beg registered officially wh the ernment, while fewer than a quarter of partnered gay men are registered. Of partnered gay men and lbians, those who officially registered report longer relatnship duratns and are more likely to have ever been legally married. Overall, our rults advance the lerature on the termants of hoehold formatn and provi the first timat of factors associated wh beg officially registered a same-sex domtic partnership. * gay and lesbian partnership *
3 Importantly, the brief evince on partnership prev work was limed to tablishg the feasibily of g upl-based data to scribe gay men and study, ntrast, foc exclively on the prevalence of gay and lbian partnership and habatn. Although there is a large and extensive lerature on partnership and habatn among heterosexual dividuals, there is paratively ltle rearch on partnership among gay men and lbians (see Seltzer 2000 and Smock 2000 for reviews of partnership among heterosexuals). We e data om the State of California’s 2003 Lbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgenr (LGBT) Tobac Survey (henceforth, the “ Tobac Survey”) and the 2001, 2003, and 2005 wav of the California Health Interview Survey (CHIS).
This is bee the gay men and lbians who would avail themselv of domtic partner benefs om the ernment or an employer are probably those who would self-intify as gay or, we observe much more direct rmatn on partnership than prev rearch.
The Tobac Survey data also provi tailed rmatn on the nature of the partnership: we n, for example, separately distguish the prence of a romantic partner om habatn wh that partner, and we also prent the first evince on relatnship duratn and habatn length among partnered gay men and, we prent the first timat of the actn of gay and lbian partnerships that are officially registered wh the lol or state ernment, as well as the rrelat of beg officially registered. The prevalence of official registratns our data is highly relevant for current policy bat: ernments n e our timat—together wh the mographic characteristics of gay and lbian upl their cy or state—to anticipate lol mand for official domtic partnership registratns. Fally, we are able to addrs data qualy ncerns by parg the mographic characteristics of gay men and lbians partnerships om the CHIS and Tobac Survey data to the characteristics of same-sex upl California om Cens 2000.
GAY AND LBIAN PARTNERSHIP: EVINCE OM CALIFORNIA
* gay and lesbian partnership *
” We intify partnered gay men and lbians as dividuals who reported beg gay or lbian and who ncurrently reported livg wh a approach for intifyg partnership among the sample of gay men and lbians CHIS has a few drawbacks. In the Tobac Survey, we fd only a sgle observatn of a self-intified lbian or gay man who reports livg wh a partner of a different note that the measure impli habatn wh one’s partner and therefore exclus other typ of “datg” relatnships which the dividuals do not live together. 7 For the CHIS and all subsequent sampl, we nsir adults aged 18–59 (clive): this yields 1, 306 self-intified gay men and 809 lbians pooled across the three CHIS plement the CHIS wh the 2003 California LGBT Tobac Survey.
The telephone-based Tobac Survey ed a disproportnate stratified RDD sign and a weightg scheme that explicly ma e of “high-nsy” gay and lbian zip s; importantly, the high-nsy zip s were termed by g rmatn on the geographic distributn of same-sex unmarried partners om the 2000 cennial cens.
This ponent of the samplg strategy mt be kept md the ntext of our partnership timat bee is possible that the geographic distributn of sexual mori vari acrdg to partnership stat, and the cens intifi only partnered gay men and lbians.
HI, GAY! - CANNED VODKA SODA BRAND CREATED BY AND FOR THE LGBTQ+ MUNY AIMS TO DTIGMATIZE THE WORD 'GAY', LNCH WH FOUR INIC FLAVORS
If this is the se, then the data may overstate the proportn of lbians and gay men who are partnered bee the samplg strategy might be biased toward geographic areas where there are more same-sex hoeholds were first screened g a qutn that asked whether the rponnt was gay, lbian, or bisexual or had a same-sex sexual experience sce age 14.
”RESULTSPrevalence and Correlat of PartnershipTable 1 prents our ma rults on the actns of gay and lbian dividuals who are partnered (aga, g our fn that requir habatn), as well as mographic characteristics related to partnership. Fractn of Gay and Lbian Rponnts Aged 18–59 Who Are Partnered, and Demographic Correlat of Partnership: 2001, 2003, and 2005 CHIS and 2003 California LGBT Tobac SurveyCHIS, All (1)CHIS, Not Partnered (2)CHIS, Partnered (3)Tobac Survey, All (4)Tobac Survey, Not Cohabg (5)Tobac Survey, Cohabg (6)Mal Partnered.
UNRSTANDG GAY & LBIAN INTI
Overall, this suggts that surveys bg partnership wh maral stat a sgle qutn n substantially unrstate te rpect to mographic characteristics Table 1, both of the gay male sampl are largely whe, and at least half of the self-intified gay men both data sourc reported havg at least a llege gree.
Gay men and lbians partnerships om our dividual-level data are those that would likely be intified the sample of same-sex unmarried partner upl om Cens 2000; given this, their mographic characteristics should largely acrd bee the surveys were field around the same general time perd.
For tn, the distributns across the California male sampl are also very siar—only 15 to 18% of partnered gay men the California data have ls than a high school diploma—though we fd some differenc at the higher end of the tn distributn.