Lbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgenr Persons and Socenomic Stat

THE MYTH OF GAY AFFLUENCE
LEFT OUT? LBIAN, GAY, AND BISEXUAL POVERTY THE U.S.
GROUPS OPPOSED TO GAY RIGHTS RAKE LNS AS STAT BATE ANTI-LGBTQ BILLS
A GAY UPLE RAN A RAL RTRANT PEACE. THEN NEW NEIGHBORS ARRIVED.
MANY BRONS HAVE CHANGED THEIR MDS ON GAY MARRIAGE
DIPLOMATIC TENSN REPORTEDLY RISG BETWEEN UNED STAT AND JAMAI OVER GAY AMERIN DIPLOMAT
LBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENR PERSONS AND SOCENOMIC STAT

THE MYTH OF GAY AFFLUENCE

Downloadable! Drawg on the official poverty thrholds and g the poverty rate, prev lerature has shown that fai head by gay upl have lower unndnal levels of poverty than those head by married different-sex upl. The latter have lower levels than those head by lbian upl, who turn have lower levels than those of habg different-sex upl. Our analysis tak a step forward by checkg whether this rankg persists when: a) employg poverty ditors that allow movg beyond the poverty cince, b) measurg not only absolute poverty but also relative poverty, and c) distguishg between married and habg same-sex upl to terme if they have the same marriage premium as different-sex upl do. We terme the poverty levels the actual e distributn and a unterfactual which the groups are equal regardg basic characteristics that are associated wh poverty. We do not fd a marriage premium for same-sex upl. Married same-sex upl tend to have more ndnal poverty than their habg peers do when we move beyond the poverty cince, wh differenc among the two groups the very low tail of their e distributns. * gay couples poverty *

A gay pri flag fli D. (Ted Eytan/Flickr)Who are Ameri’s gays? To hear as Supreme Court Jtice Anton Slia would have , gays are a privileged set, livg up ci across the untry.

Evans—a landmark 1996 se that overturned a Colorado state nstutnal amendment prohibg legal protectns for gays and lbians—“Those who engage homosexual nduct tend to ri disproportnate numbers certa muni.

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

This paper analyz the risk of poverty for self-intified lbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) people om mid-2013 through 2016 the Natnal Health Inter * gay couples poverty *

” Even more omoly, to Slia, they have "high disposable e, " which giv them "disproportnate polil power… to [achieve] not merely a gdgg social toleratn, but full social acceptance, of homosexualy. ”The pernic suatn—that gays and lbians are one the wealthit mographics the untry—isn’t a new cliché.

Some of the most graed public imag of LGBT people are their smopolan, highfalut liftyle; gays, so the story go, live gentrified urban neighborhoods like The Castro San Francis or Chelsea New York, eat artisanal chee, and drk $12 like most stereotyp, the myth of gay affluence is greatly realy, gay Amerins face disproportnately greater enomic challeng than their straight unterparts. One 5 gays and lbians aged 18-44 received food stamps the last year, pared wh jt over 1 4 same sex upl raisg children.

”And Alabama, like many other plac where gays of another generatn might have stayed the closet or left town altogether but today are g out, is poorer than Seattle.

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

As a rult, the number of self-reported gays and lbians livg poverty is risg. Progrs isn’t makg gays and lbians poor though, but is allowg more poor people to acknowledge their sexualy.

As the numbers bee more readily available, remds of why the myth of gay affluence ever existed the first place. * * *Up through the 1970s and ‘80s, gays and lbians played a seedier role the public nscns. The “gay liftyle” was the bastn of society’s most praved dividuals; sleazy bathho, leather bars, and so on.

The image of gays and lbians began to change, however, once Wall Street and Madison Avenue realized that there was a vast, untapped market of potential nsumers.

A GAY UPLE RAN A RAL RTRANT PEACE. THEN NEW NEIGHBORS ARRIVED.

”Marketg firms nducted surveys to try to show not jt affluence, but disproportnate levels of brand loyalty were a hallmark of gays and lbians.

In the media, gay men beme well-to-do, smopolan, and voracly nsumeristic.

In 2012, Experian, a natnal marketg firm, released a bs report claimg that the average hoehold e of a married or partnered gay man is nearly 20 percent more than a straight married or partnered man ($116, 000 pared to $94, 500). Further rptg the data, not all partnered gay people feel fortable clarg their sexualy surveys, and, a high-earng gay uple is more likely to report their sexual orientatn to a cens-taker than a low-earng uple, makg wealthier gay people overreprented natnal surveys.

MANY BRONS HAVE CHANGED THEIR MDS ON GAY MARRIAGE

Only when asked anonymoly, are more gays and lbians more willg to disclose their sexualy.

DIPLOMATIC TENSN REPORTEDLY RISG BETWEEN UNED STAT AND JAMAI OVER GAY AMERIN DIPLOMAT

In such surveys, the poverty and food-secury rat for LGBT people one 2010 anonymo survey of Amerins ag 18-44, gay men were found to have a poverty rate of 20. The more accurate data don’t clarify, though, what is the e of the gay/straight enomic gap. * * *Social scientist have tablished that gay men are more likely to work as teachers, nurs, secretari, and other jobs that are tradnally female domated and which don’t pay very well.

Addnally, nearly 40 percent of all homels youth are LGBT (often havg been kicked out of their hom by homophobic parents), puttg them at a great enomic disadvantage as they grow olr.

Beyond the factors, are there other factors ntributg to gay people’s enomic hardship? A study nducted for the Amerin Journal of Soclogy sent two fict, but realistic, rum to more than 1, 700 entry-level, whe-llar job opengs, the only difference between the two beg that one rume listed membership a gay anizatn durg llege, while the other claimed experience a "Progrsive and Socialist Alliance" (sce both groups are nsired left-leang, the purpose was to separate any “gay penalty” om polil discrimatn). 5 percent ll-back rate for an terview; the gay applitn had only 7.