Groups opposed to gay rights rake lns as stat bate anti-LGBTQ bills

Contents:

• NEW PATTERNS OF POVERTY THE LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL COMMUNY
• GROUPS OPPOSED TO GAY RIGHTS RAKE LNS AS STAT BATE ANTI-LGBTQ BILLS
• THE TTH ABOUT GAYS AND MONEY
• LEFT OUT? LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL POVERTY THE U.S.
• POVERTY LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR, QUEER, TWO-SPIR, AND OTHER SEXUAL AND GENR MORY (LGBTQ2S+) COMMUNI CANADA: IMPLITNS FOR SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE
• LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR PERSONS AND SOCENOMIC STAT
• THE MYTH OF GAY AFFLUENCE

NEW PATTERNS OF POVERTY THE LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL COMMUNY

Cisgenr gay men, ntrast, are ls likely to be livg poverty than straight and cisgenr adults, wh 12% of cisgenr gay men, pared wh 13% of cisgenr straight men, and 18% of cisgenr straight women, livg poverty.

People who intify as lbian, gay, bisexual, or transgenr (LGBT) have higher rat of poverty pared to cisgenr (cis) heterosexual people, about 22% to 16% rpectively.

GROUPS OPPOSED TO GAY RIGHTS RAKE LNS AS STAT BATE ANTI-LGBTQ BILLS

This survey ed a module of SOGI qutns 35 stat om 2014 to 2017 and provis sights to the lived experienc of people who are cisgenr straight men and women, cisgenr gay men and lbian women, cisgenr bisexual men and women, and transgenr people. But wh a eper dive to SOGI subgroups, the variety of experienc be clear, cludg that overall, cis gay men tend to fare better fancially than members of other SOGI groups. As noted above, except for cis gay men, people who intify as part of an SOGI group other than cisgenr and straight are more likely to experience poverty.

THE TTH ABOUT GAYS AND MONEY

While there is some variance wh SOGI groups that differs om typil poverty rat when age is not nsired, some factors rema te—cis gay men are closer to cis straight men than they are to other SOGI groups, cis women are siar regardls of whether they are lbian or straight, and transgenr people have the hight likelihood of livg poverty any age range. It is important to note that young people who intify as gay, lbian, bisexual or transgenr n be particularly vulnerable to poverty due to risks of fay rejectn and s nsequenc.

An earlier Williams Instute study and other rearch showed that lbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people were also more vulnerable to beg poor, and this study updat and extends that earlier report.

The "myth of gay affluence" has predomated popular and scientific thought, rultg a lack of attentn to the tersectn of sexual orientatn and socenomic stat (SES).

LEFT OUT? LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL POVERTY THE U.S.

McGarry (2014) (PDF, 210KB) examed this tersectn and the queri a recent lerature review entled "Socenomic Stat as Context for Mory Strs and Health Dispari Among Lbian, Gay, and Bisexual Individuals, " published Psychology of Sexual Orientatn and Genr Diversy.

E., unrstandg the existg lerature on sexual orientatn as predomantly a reflectn of whe, middle class, gay male experienc), hypothizg about predictors that have tradnally gone unexamed (e.

The multiln-dollar war cht has bolstered a movement that jt a few years ago appeared to be losg ground Ameri’s slong culture war around lbian, gay, bisexual, transgenr and queer rights. “Many of those, while not specifilly tied to a church, are rooted the nservative Christian, biblil sense of human sexualy, ” said Stt McCoy, the terim puty legal director for LGBTQ rights and special ligatn for the SPLC and the SPLC Actn Fund, the group’s polil actn simply holdg a relig belief that views homosexualy or transgenr inty as sful do not tomatilly land a church or an anizatn on the SPLC’s list of hate groups. 'The hard re of the anti-gay movement' When the SPLC began trackg anti-LGBTQ hate the early 2010s, the anizatn noted that “a small terie of groups now prise the hard re of the anti-gay movement.

POVERTY LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, TRANSGENR, QUEER, TWO-SPIR, AND OTHER SEXUAL AND GENR MORY (LGBTQ2S+) COMMUNI CANADA: IMPLITNS FOR SOCIAL WORK PRACTICE

C., that, acrdg to s webse, believ “homosexual nduct is harmful to the persons who engage ” and “is also harmful to society at large” — jumped om over $12 ln to more than $23 ln. “The groups that are opposed to LGBTQ equaly did their msage ttg and found that attackg gay people is no longer the broadly popular culture war totem that they ed the ’90s, ” Gberg said. " So ’s no wonr that the nventnal wisdom is that gay people Ameri have tons of money and fewer enomic stggl than the rt of the the tth is signifintly different.

Every survey has qutns about race, about maral stat, about disabily, about ethnicy, about whether people have kids – all the thgs that matter people’s liv and fluence people’s vulnerabily to poverty – but they don’t ask whether you’re lbian, gay, bisexual or transgenr most surveys.

That’s created a big statistil revolutn terms of LGBT rearch but there still are a lot of people who are left to some of the nclns: You fd a “gay poverty gap” Ameri, pecially for certa subgroups of gay There are lots of people same-sex upl who are poor, and that is an important takeaway.

LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR PERSONS AND SOCENOMIC STAT

Wh a poverty rate of roughly 20 percent among children livg wh gay parents, they are almost twice as likely to be poor as married oppose-sex uple hoeholds. That means that if the spoe wh lower e or lower assets appli, they don’t have to [nsir] the other person’s e and assets, so they’re more likely to be eligible for those your fdgs suggt that policymakers need to adjt their approach to preventg poverty, or to helpg people gays and lbians get out of poverty?

Comparison of health and health risk factors between lbian, gay, and bisexual adults and heterosexual adults the Uned Stat: Rults om the Natnal Health Interview Survey. Monorg Edor: Donna Ba and Daniel LaiAbstractIn this article, we draw on a recent review of the Canadian lerature on poverty lbian, gay, bisexual, transgenr, queer, two-spir, and other sexual and genr mory (LGBTQ2S+) muni to nceptualize social work terventns that may be ed to addrs material equi among the groups.

Keywords: LGBTQ2S+ populatns, poverty, tersectnaly, relatnal poverty analysis, social work practiceThe promence of poverty lbian, gay, bisexual, transgenr, queer, two-spir, and other sexual and genr mory (LGBTQ2S+) populatns is creasgly substantiated a growg body of lerature (Albelda et al., 2009; Kia et al., 2020; Mulé et al., 2009). This gap quiry, both wh social work and across the social scienc, may be attributable to the myth of “gay affluence, ” or the unsubstantiated notn that gay men are affluent by virtue of havg accs to disposable e, which ntu to prevail among scholars and is equently generalized to other LGBTQ2S+ populatns (Albelda et al., 2009; Badgett, 2003; Mulé et al., 2009).

THE MYTH OF GAY AFFLUENCE

OntarPeer-reviewed/poverty olr LGBTQ2S+ adultsNRn = 1, 103 olr adults (ag >49) livg wh HIV, cludg 726 gay men and 76 bisexual men)QUANGay and bisexual inty among men, e, tnal attament. Wtern Canadian cy (not otherwise specified)Peer-reviewed/poverty at the tersectn of LGBTQ2S+ inty and IndigeneyNRn = 78, wh 26 intifyg as First Natns (17) or Métis (9)QUALLbian/gay inti, First Natns/Métis inti, experienc wh social excln and rilience. Wtern CanadaPeer-reviewed/LGBTQ2S+ life urse factors and povertyNRn = 286 unrgraduate stuntsMIXEDNegative attus and behavrs of unrgraduate stunts toward lbians and gay men a mid-sized mp environment.

Of racialized LGBTQ+ newers2009–2012n = 14 gay and bisexual men, along wh one trans woman, and other participants wh inti reprentg sexual/genr diversyQUALImmigratn and settlement among adults reprentg tersectns of sexual and genr diversy. VanuverPeer-reviewed/poverty, race, and newer stat studi of LGBTQ+ health2012–2014n = 719 gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex wh men (GBM)QUANGBM stat, mental health, race, immigratn stat, e.

OttawaPeer-reviewed/LGBTQ2S+ life urse factors and poverty2010–2011n = 48 self-intified gay men, wh 24 loted Ottawa and another 24 Washgton, DCQUALThe fluence of tersectnal subjectivi (e. Socenomic penalti appear to be curred among bisexuals who nceal their inti, whereas lbians/gay men may stead experience such penalti upon g out, particularly early adulthood (Ross et al., 2016; Wae, 2015).