College freshmen continued their decade-old upward trend of support for gay marriage in fall 2007, according to a mammoth annual survey of more than 270,000 freshmen at 356 colleges and universities and just released by the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) at the University of California, Los Angeles.
One year earlier, in fall 2006, 61.2 percent of college freshmen supported "legal marital status" for gay and lesbian couples. By fall 2007 that percentage had risen by 2.3 percentage points to 63.5 percent.
When the question was first asked in 1997, just 50.9 percent of freshmen supported "legal marital status" for gays. Except for a downward blip in 2004 prompted in part by President George W. Bush's advocacy of a constitutional amendment barring gay marriage, the percentage of support has risen at an average rate of slightly over 1 percentage point per year.
The language "legal marital status" was chosen to refer only to civil unions or civil marriage and avoid the issue of whether churches should offer religious marriage ceremonies.
The survey also asked whether "it is important to have laws prohibiting homosexual relationships." Support for such laws fell from 25.6 percent in fall 2006 to 24.3 percent in fall 2007, a drop of 1.3 percentage points.
When that question was first asked in 1976, freshman support for such laws stood at 43.6 percent, so anti-gay attitudes have fallen nearly 20 points in 30 years. Support for anti-gay laws rose briefly during the peak years of the AIDS crisis in 1986 and 1987, but as public anxiety subsided support resumed a steady decline.
The term "homosexual relationships" is ambiguous, however. In 1976 it clearly referred to sodomy laws since legal gay marriage was not a public issue. But now that gay marriage is an issue, some students may take the term to refer to "defense of marriage" laws limiting marriage to a man and a woman. If so, the continued decline in support for such laws is especially welcome news.
As in past years, women were far more gay-supportive than men. More than seven out of ten freshman women (70.3 percent) thought that gays should have the right to legal marital status. Among freshman men a smaller 55.3 percent thought gays should have that right.
Similarly, only 18.1 percent of freshman women-fewer than one out of five-approved of laws prohibiting homosexual behavior, while 31.8 percent of freshman men approved of such laws. Still, this was the first year that support among men fell below one-third.
People have speculated about the reason for male/female differences in attitudes. But two possibilities stand out. When the term homosexual is used, most people probably think of male homosexuals. Most heterosexual men are offended by femininity in other men, so to the extent that gay men are still conceived to be feminine, they tend to be anti-gay. By contrast, most heterosexual women do not seem to be bother by male femininity.
The other possibility is that attitudes toward gay men are influenced by focusing on their sexual behavior, so what has been called the "yuck factor" that affects many male heterosexuals when they think of gay sex comes into play and contaminates their public policy views.
The only obvious way to counter both is for more heterosexuals to get to know gays as individuals, which would reduce their tendency to think of gays' behavior in the abstract.
The freshman survey is designed primarily to elicit information about the freshmen's family and academic background and their college and career plans. But it does contain a small unit asking freshmen whether they agree or disagree with statements about more than a dozen public issues, of which the questions about gay marriage and sodomy laws are a part.
On other issues of potential interest, 56.9 percent support legal abortion; 35.1 percent oppose capital punishment; decriminalized marijuana drew 38.2 percent approval; 25.8 percent supported raising taxes to reduce the federal deficit; only 31.4 percent think military spending should be increased; and 66.2 percent think that the U.S. military should remain all-volunteer.
Thirty-two percent of the freshmen described themselves as "liberal" or "far left," an increase over last year of 1 point, while the percentage describing themselves as "conservative" or "far right" fell by a similar 1 point to 24.6 percent. The rest described themselves as "middle of the road." There was no option offered for "libertarian" (socially liberal, free-market advocate).
And finally, exactly 25 percent described themselves as "Born-Again Christian" and 9.8 percent as "Evangelical." But more than one-fifth (21.4 percent) described themselves as having "no religious preference," an all-time high for that category. There was no option offered for "atheist" or "agnostic."
19 Comments for “Winning with the Young”
posted by Bobby on
[expletive deleted] The young don’t matter, they’re all a bunch of slackers, stoners, trend following assholes. Everyone who took Politics 101 knows that it’s the old that vote. That’s why AARP has so much power, that’s why we’re still paying stupid social security taxes. If the youth did vote, the legal drinking age would be 18, drugs would be legal, and a college education would be financed by the state. The fact that those things aren’t legal means that most young people don’t bother to vote. And that’s fine by me, we don’t need stupid people voting. Young by definition, means you haven’t been long enough on this stupid planet, so you’re more likely to be idealistic, and believe in things that don’t really work, like national health insurance and saving the planet by raising gas prices. Remember Vietnam? Back then all those stupid hippies were mobilized and they never even managed to elect a president that would end the war. So enough with the youth fetish, they don’t matter, every candidate knows that, but it’s not a politically correct thing to say.
posted by Karen on
I don’t think the point is their (our? I’m 26, so I don’t know, even though I have a career, a mortgage, a family, and don’t do drugs, I might count as a “slacker, stoner, trend-following asshole” in your world-view) current voting power.
Young people do have a habit of eventually becoming old people… and old people have a habit of dying, which, in most precincts, means they won’t be voting anymore.
As rosy a picture as this survey paints of the nearish future, the fact that these are matriculating college students raises a few questions about the education level/class self-selection of the survey sample.
What percentage of ~18 year olds enroll in college these days, and is it higher or lower than years past? Was the survey only given at traditional, 4-year degree-granting instutions, or were community and junior colleges included? How well do the racial and economic demographics match up with the general population? Also, I have a hard time imagining these surveys being allowed at marginal, religion-based colleges like Bob Jones, Liberty, and the various BYUs. Were they? And how are enrollments at those colleges trending?
I’d like to be encouraged, I really would. But I don’t think “average college freshmen” are actually representative of average 18-year-olds.
posted by Karen on
As an aside, I think one of the major problems with young people and voting are parents and administrators that won’t cut the apron strings and treat college like another four years of high school at an expensive boarding school.
Totally speculating here, but I’d wager that a college student who “goes home” every summer and every break, and whose parents pay the bills and take care of all the administrative details of his life, is not all that likely to have a voter’s registration in his “temporary location” or feel like he’s an adult with a civic responsibility, and so will be unlikely to vote.
Contrast the college student who pays her own bills, takes care of her own life, has a job, considers herself an actual RESIDENT of her college location, and goes to visit her parents sometimes rather than imagining herself to still “live” there – she probably votes.
Outdated dorm systems that force students to be transients are part of the problem – the one year that I lived on campus, I recall being actually locked out of my own housing during winter break. Good thing I was in a small town with cheap rent where students living off-campus was the norm. I went and stayed with my girlfriend.
But the main responsibility is on parents. Raise your children with the expectation that they will be functioning, self-reliant citizens by the age of 18, and they will be, even if their college administration doesn’t believe that to be so. Raise them to be great big children until they’re 30, and they will be.
posted by Bobby on
Karen, I don’t deny that there are people under 30 who are responsible, civic minded individuals. I’m just saying they’re the minority. As for old people dying, so what? Everyone dies, sometimes young, sometimes old, but retirees are a lot more likely to vote, part of it is tradition, the other part is that they like having something to do.
Parents do bear part of the blame, but not completely, after you turn 18, you’re responsible for your own choices. I do admit that parents that let their kids get tattoos, body piercings, that allow them to drive BMW’s and give them credit cards with no spending limits, are screwing up their kids. But that’s their freedom, we don’t have a parent police yet, thank God.
The fact is this, society is never ran by the youth. I think you have to be 30 or 35 to even run for president, it’s in the constitution I think. And most people are uncomfortable voting for someone really young for that position. That’s why most presidential candidates are in their 40s, 50s, and older. Nobody wants a young whippersnapper running the country. And since only 50% of the people even bother to vote, It doesn’t matter how most young people feel about anything.
You’re also right about mentioning the born again christian kids in bible colleges. Those kids do vote, their schools take them to the polling places, sometimes they do canvassing. So this notion from Varnell that young people are gay friendly humanitarians is seriously flawed.
posted by Harke Ploegstra on
In the Netherlands we have the phenomenon that the young are inclined to vote more liberally than when they get older.
It’s not impossible that by the time these young people are getting their first house they will vote more conservatively.
posted by Bobby on
What is defined as “conservative” in the Netherlands? Closing the border? Limiting immigration? Telling the truth about radical islam?
posted by Matthew Almeda on
How about winning the approval of “gay marriage” in the gay community? As a gay man I find the drive for same-sex marriage a sign of the pathetic state of gay politics and the gay community in general. I agree that equal protections under the law must be granted to us under same-sex civil unions. However, marriage, as an institution, is representative of the worst the straight community has to offer. It is the history of an institution created to control and own women; it’s about property rights, not love, all perpertrated under the lie of divine sanction. We need to be who we’ve always been, demand equality under civil unions, and then create a more eternal, egalitarian, and beautiful partnership that is specifically gay.
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Matthew, that certainly WAS the history of marriage, but it is no more about property rights and controlling women. Women are equal partners in marriage and now adays its about love, not property rights. Times have changed Matthew, get with it.
posted by Karen on
“Karen, I don’t deny that there are people under 30 who are responsible, civic minded individuals.”
It sure sounded like it… 🙂
“As for old people dying, so what? Everyone dies, sometimes young, sometimes old, but retirees are a lot more likely to vote, part of it is tradition, the other part is that they like having something to do.”
Eventually, the young people will BE the retirees who always vote. Time passes. If you believe in my marriage now, you’ll probably believe in it at our golden anniversary…
“after you turn 18, you’re responsible for your own choices.”
Yes, but many parents do not teach their children that this is the case. I’m not talking about tattoos and piercings – I have both, and I’m fine thanks. You’re more on track with “giving them credit cards and BMWs”, although it is not really related to having gobs of money. I’m talking about parents and administrators and willing “kids” who don’t realize that once you get to college, you’re GROWN and you need to take care of your own life. It’s one thing to have a safety net or someone to go to when you need help, but it’s another thing entirely to still “live at home” after you’ve moved out, to have your parents receive and pay your phone bill and your dorm bill and send you food money every month and renew your car registration and file your taxes.
I’m not saying it ruins them, I’m just saying it makes them less likely to feel a duty to vote, since they are treated like children – or at least not “real adults” – by their parents and administrators.
Matthew,
Wow. Who pissed in your grits? I’m sure glad I didn’t invite YOU to my wedding.
posted by hallie on
To the 26 year-old: Point well taken, you irony-free young thing. Your “pissed” comment just screams maturity!
posted by Karen on
Hilarious, hallie. I’m rolling on the floor over here.
I’ll keep my folksy, southern sayings to myself next time. Happy?
posted by Randi Schimnosky on
Karen, I on the other hand, thought your point was well made and apropriate.
posted by Bobby on
“I’m not talking about tattoos and piercings – I have both, and I’m fine thanks.”
—Well, I mentioned them because some parents don’t know how to say “no” to their kids. Tattoos are permanent and even after they’re removed, they leave a mark, I don’t think any minor should be allowed to get them without parental consent.
“to have your parents receive and pay your phone bill and your dorm bill and send you food money every month and renew your car registration and file your taxes.”
—That is an extreme indeed. Latinos on the other hand often live with their families until they get married, even if they’re 30. But they have to contribute, have a job, do stuff around the house, etc.
However, I think what drives a person to vote is passion. If you’re passionate for or against abortion, you’re going to vote. If you don’t care about that or any other issue, you might not vote. I just read today that more Americans care about the Superbowl than Super Tuesday. That might explain why so many Americans don’t vote.
posted by Brian Miller on
Occasionally I meet a gay man who insists that the push for marriage equality makes him “sick” and “angry” about the state of gay politics.
Inevitably, when I ask him what he’s doing about it to change things, he’ll go off on a rant about how gay life is all about the party scene, the gay ghettoes, and sleeping around.
Well, the party scene is shrinking, the ghetto is dying, and promiscuity has been reduced through the simple realities of STDs.
It seems to me that the LGBTQ community has grown up, a bit like the baby boomer generation was forced to. The summer of love ended, and now the new generation of gay people is pushing everyone to take a shower, shave, get a job, get an apartment, and settle down. Some of the holdouts are still trying to stay on the commune, and are upset with this interlude of reality, but their numbers are dwindling every year. 😉
posted by David on
Here we go again… Another rant about the “youth vote.” You can take all the polls you want about what “youth” think and feel about anything, but one fact remains–young peole DON’T VOTE. There is NO youth vote. It’s nonexistent. While old ladies with walkers and grannies in wheelchairs are packing the polling places, “youth” is out partying, skateboarding, or hanging out somewhere. they are not voting.
posted by Karen on
“‘Youth’ is out partying, skateboarding, or hanging out somewhere…”
I don’t deny that the 18-25 demographic doesn’t vote in the same numbers as retirees. Nor was that the implication of this article, which was simply speaking about the ATTITUDES of college freshmen, not their voting patterns.
But this generalization is just as ridiculous as those who say “Gay people are radical-left, anti-family hedonists with impeccably designed interiors.”
I’m close enough to my college years to be insulted by the accusation. Sure, I went to some parties, but I also earned a degree in computer engineering, almost earned a degree in music, volunteered, worked a sometimes half-time, sometimes full-time IT job, played a sport, and learned three new instruments. What have you done lately? 🙂
posted by Karen on
And seriously… skatingboarding? I think I knew like one guy who had a skateboard in college. He used it to get to class. I think you’re thinking of 13-year-olds. In 1995. 🙂
posted by David on
I’m from Las Vegas, 35 year olds skateboard for fun in Vegas. And Nevada is a perfect example of what I was talking about. In 2004, Nevada polls showed over and over that 75% of people were for legalizing marijuana. But come voting day, 75% voted against it. What happened? Those who were polled did not vote—they were skateboarding, dirt biking or whatever out in the desert.
posted by Richard on
Q) Does Nevada have same-day voter registration?
Q) How easy is it for a student living in Nevada to vote?