babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » international news and politics   » So just how many gay people ARE there?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: So just how many gay people ARE there?
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 11 December 2005 08:33 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The UK government says it knows...

quote:
How many gays are there? It's a question that has roiled gays, homophobes and statisticians but now the British government says it has the answer.

It isn't ten percent as most gay activists have maintained for decades.  It isn't the one percent that most anti-gay groups claim.  It's six percent according to number crunchers in the British Treasury. And that's official.  At least as far as the government is concerned.

The Treasury wanted to find out what the impact of Britain's new civil partnership law might be. After all the Treasury wanted to know what the impact would be on the economy since the new law gives domestic partners rights in areas such as tax, pensions and inheritance - all impacting on tax revenues.

Using actuarial tables and estimates supplied by the Department of Trade and Industry the civil service set out to "scientifically guestimate" the number gays in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Trade and Industry said its own surveys showed 1.5 million to two million gay men, lesbians and bisexuals in the 30 million-strong workforce.  The numbers were then applied to actuarial tables to figure how many gays were not in the workforce - either because they were school, retired, or unemployed. 

The result: 3.6 million gay and lesbian Britons out of a total population of just under 60 million people.



From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 11 December 2005 08:42 PM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Isn't 6% the number that Masters & Johnson came up with, like 40 years ago? I've been using that number for a long time.
From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Nanuq
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8229

posted 11 December 2005 08:48 PM      Profile for Nanuq   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Some researchers put it higher, others put it lower. The number seems to fluctuate depending on your definition and methodology.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 11 December 2005 08:51 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
My question is, who gives a damn? I mean, I guess it's nice to know for interest's sake, but when it comes to the impact of gay civil unions (ick) on the treasury, who cares? That should play no part in the government's reasoning for gay marriage one way or the other.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 11 December 2005 08:56 PM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
My question is, who gives a damn? I mean, I guess it's nice to know for interest's sake, but when it comes to the impact of gay civil unions (ick) on the treasury, who cares? That should play no part in the government's reasoning for gay marriage one way or the other.

It shouldn't, no. But IMO it is legitimate for them to want to estimate it for budgetary purposes.


From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 11 December 2005 08:59 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
But if we are to give them the (admittedly very large) benefit of the doubt and say they will implement it, then knowing the numbers could ease planning. I agree the impact on the Treasury shouldn't influence the decision, but the impact should be known anyway, so that the change can be implemented relatively smoothly.

The *actual* potential red flag I see here is the use of actuarial tables, etc. I'm really not convinced of that methodology for the study of demographics, but I also admit that I haven't yet had the opportunity to know enough to totally discredit it either so.....

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 11 December 2005 09:16 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by kurichina:
But if he are to give them the (admittedly very large) benefit of the doubt and say they will implement it, then knowing the numbers could ease planning.

The law was passed some time ago and goes into effect in less than two weeks. There's no benefit of the doubt to give them.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
kuri
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4202

posted 11 December 2005 09:21 PM      Profile for kuri   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Oh! Then why the suspicion from some posters about the research?

[ 11 December 2005: Message edited by: kurichina ]


From: an employer more progressive than rabble.ca | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Boarsbreath
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9831

posted 11 December 2005 10:44 PM      Profile for Boarsbreath   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'd be dubious, because the subject is itself not so crystal clear (bisexuals are to be counted too, remember), because the information being used was gathered for other purposes, and because it comes from something Tony Blair might have, so to speak, sexed up. No, really just the nature of things. No conspiracy.

How many homosexuals are out there? An even number, let's hope! That would be the intelligent design, anyway


From: South Seas, ex Montreal | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Crippled_Newsie
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7024

posted 12 December 2005 12:38 PM      Profile for Crippled_Newsie     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Michelle:
My question is, who gives a damn? I mean, I guess it's nice to know for interest's sake, but when it comes to the impact of gay civil unions (ick) on the treasury, who cares?

An agreement on general principle from The Scotsman:

quote:

Who cares if police walk the pink beat?

IT may be that there are millions of the general public who have a burning desire to know what proportion of the police force is gay.

But I can't recall anyone being that interested. Regardless, the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland are to ask all 15,000 officers and civilian staff if they are homosexual and if they have suffered any discrimination.
...
The question is, why do they want to hire more homosexuals in the first place and what difference will it make?
...
I can understand the desire to make the police force appear representative of the community.
...
But you can't "see" if a police officer is gay... well, not unless he's done a Rocky Horror remodelling job on his uniform and he pulls his notebook out of a pink sequined handbag.
...
On duty, whether they are the palest Caucasian Scottish white or from some other ethnic group, we expect them to conduct themselves like police officers and, yes, that often does require some macho posturing and a commanding presence. Mincing doesn't usually cut it with the boys from the 'hood.
...
With the exception of rent boys soliciting, it's difficult to even think of any criminal area where insider gay knowledge would be an asset in fighting crime. Most gay people I know are exceptionally law-abiding.

If the idea is to make the gay community feel included, a simple poster campaign saying the force welcomes gay recruits would have done the trick.



From: It's all about the thumpa thumpa. | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Mush
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3934

posted 12 December 2005 01:06 PM      Profile for Mush     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Research on estimating gay and lesbian populations was reviewed in Vol 37, No. 2 of Demography (May, 2000) by Black, Gates, Sanders, and Taylor.

Sorry- just to try to answer the original question.


From: Mrs. Fabro's Tiny Town | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
No Yards
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4169

posted 12 December 2005 01:38 PM      Profile for No Yards   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
What's the definition of "gay"? Does it mean you are exclusively homosexual, 50/50, is 25/75 not enough?

Is everyone else heterosexual?

What if you never had sex, or haven't had sex in a many years? Are you considered straight?

Are Priests counted as straight?

If your last sexual experience was gay, and you haven't had sexual activity for the last 5 years, are you still gay?

If you had one gay experience and 200 straight experiences, are you gay? If you had 200 gay experiences and one straight experience are you straight?

As long as these figures are just being used for actuarial information to plan for government social programs, then I suppose it's something that can be useful, but as a measure used to determine anything else, I think it's pretty well a "besides the point" kind of thing.

[ 12 December 2005: Message edited by: No Yards ]


From: Defending traditional marriage since June 28, 2005 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
MartinArendt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9723

posted 12 December 2005 03:43 PM      Profile for MartinArendt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Good questions, No Yards.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
gopi
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6163

posted 12 December 2005 04:11 PM      Profile for gopi     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And what about Tom Cruise?
From: transient | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Ghost of the Navigator
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11029

posted 12 December 2005 04:55 PM      Profile for Ghost of the Navigator        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't see anything wrong with having this information: While money should not be an issue when it comes to equality, it is fiscally prudent that a government acquire all the necessary information to determine how much its programs cost.
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca