The U.S. Census is gearing up a monumental effort to make sure minorities are counted in 2010.
But that effort will not apply to homosexuals. As I argued in The Pretenders, the Census folks, far from seeking us out, are doing all they can to make sure we are not counted -- at least not our married couples.
And that is a very clear public policy choice. The government wants, very much, to know how many racial and ethnic minority members we have, so it can make sure their concerns are being addressed. But the government does not want to know how many same-sex couples there are, which frustrates the ability to have our concerns addressed.
The Census is a very good way of discerning what the government wants to know, and what the government wants to keep hidden. And it is up to us to keep asking why they have an interest in keeping the number of our publicly acknowledged relationships invisible.
17 Comments for “Come out, come out. . . except the homosexuals — you guys stay in”
posted by Bobby on
I see, so the immaculate Obama, the savior, our Halfrican-American, St. Negro of the Ghetto, Lord of the Abs is not going to count us gays in the census.
Good thing we didn’t vote for those homophobic repukeblicans, right?
Yes, under Obama’s America, if you’re not white, you don’t count!
Unless they need your taxes, because when it comes to the IRS, our money counts! And for what do we pay taxes? For Obama to make $400,000 a year and send Malia and Moesha to a PRIVATE SCHOOL. And never mind those beautiful dresses our White House Barbie wears, Queer Taxes for the Straight girl, courtesy of us hardworking crackers.
What a country! Home of the red, brown and blue. Allah bless America!
posted by gene on
Whatever Bobby. Drama and exaggeration wont help. Gary Locke, the new Commerce Sec. was the governor here and he is pro-gay rights. We need to bombard his office with letters saying to count us in.
posted by Jorge on
I am not interested in whether or not the Census will count same sex couples, unless you point out to me that the Census is going to be explicitly counting cohabiting straight couples.
I would be interested to know whether the Census will be asking people’s sexual orientation.
posted by Bobby on
“Whatever Bobby. Drama and exaggeration wont help.”
—Oh, I disagree. Drama and exaggeration got Obama elected, I figure it can work for republicans as well.
“I would be interested to know whether the Census will be asking people’s sexual orientation.”
—They should, why is race, religion, gender, income and many other categories more important than sexual orientation? Explain that to me.
posted by David Link on
Jorge, the census doesn’t need to ask people’s sexual orientation if it asks for their marital status — as long as the only recognized marriage is between a man and a woman. Every person who answers that question yes is proudly if unintentionally fessing up to being heterosexual.
I think I’d be a lot more concerned about a question asking individuals about their sexual orientation, per se, than I am about asking about their lawful relationships, with matching data points for gender (which exist, I believe, independent of the marital status box). Relationships that people enter into publicly expose their sexual orientation in the most natural and voluntary way — the relationship is with only one other person (a legal requirement I am committed to maintaining) and that one other person can only be one of two genders.
Outside of a publicly registered relationship, though, a person’s sexual orientation, like their sexual activity, may be as private as they choose, and that, it seems to me, isn’t really the government’s business. While I can see how the data would be useful to us, I think that, on balance, the intrusiveness of the question outweighs the value the answers might have.
But not asking that question seems to me to be very different from refusing to acknowledge that some states have lawfully married or partnered same-sex couples. This results in one-sided data that has a political consequence too many people still find acceptable: ignoring the existence of these couples as couples under the law.
posted by Jorge on
With all due respect, I think that is bullshit. According to the federal government, there are no such things as gay marriages, so why should they ask about them? Even if there state laws recognizing gay marriages, at this time the federal government has not endorsed them in any way, so there is no entitlement to a back-door endorsement–which I believe asking about gay married couples in states that allow gay marriage would be. If you want the census to count gay marriages, make them legally recognized first, or at least count all cohabiting relationships. And now you’re saying you don’t want gays counted per se? Well make up your mind. If you’re going to accuse institutions of hypocrisy you probably should try to avoid it yourself.
It occurs to me that if any federal entity recognizes gay marriages as anything more than straight cohabiting relationships or straight polygamous relationships, this could have repurcussions in any US Supreme Court case. This is a good reason for the federal government to follow the law exactly.
posted by Bobby on
The census DOES count people who live together and are not married, but for government purposes, they should be asking if the couples are gay, straight or just roommates.
Sexual orientation is not more private than religion, and the census does ask about religion.
When it comes to gays, Obama has made no changes! If all gays had voted for McCain, maybe he would have won, Wall Street would be happy, the economy would be better, the housing market would be recuperating and the size of government would have a noticeable reduction. But nooooo, 75% had to vote for “change.”
Well, I hope you can spare some change, because Mr. Historical President is costing our country trillions of dollars with his socialist experiments.
posted by Jorge on
Nonsense. The moment of doom was when Obama beat Clinton.
posted by Bobby on
“Nonsense. The moment of doom was when Obama beat Clinton.”
—I agree, a centrist democrat beats a leftwing democracy any day.
Have you heard the latest outrage? Obama doesn’t want to call the war on terror by that name anymore! B. Hussein wants to call it “Overseas Contingency Operation”
He’s so Orwellian! But why stop there? Why not call the IRS the Ministry of Plenty?
Why fix problems? Let’s just call it something else!
Ironically, the socialist europeans aren’t buying it:
E.U. President Blasts U.S. Spending
Czech Premier Calls Obama Administration’s Economic Policies ‘a Road to Hell’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/25/AR2009032502074.html
For once I love Europe! Will Obama now tell republicans not to listen to Europe? This is gonna be fun!
posted by Rob on
Heya Bobby:
—I agree, a centrist democrat beats a leftwing democracy any day.
Your current system of government sucks ever since honest Abe and useless Grant gave more power to the US federal government even more. Either it returns back to pre-civil war decentralization, or it scraps the electoral college.
Honestly, a parliamentary system would have been better. It would have been hilarious to listen to Bush defending himself during question periods.
Have you heard the latest outrage? Obama doesn’t want to call the war on terror by that name anymore! B. Hussein wants to call it “Overseas Contingency Operation”
Who cares what he calls it? So long as it gets the job done of killing Taliban and Islamic misfits that the US spawined in the 1980s.
Ironically, the socialist europeans aren’t buying it:
Socialists? Do you have any idea how many EU states rely more on a consumption tax rather than an income tax? Come to think of it, most Eastern European countries have a flat tax.
posted by BobN on
Uh… how many of Europe’s leaders have to be right-wing before you drop the silly “socialist” tag?
Germany, France, Italy, soon England. Spain is the only left-leaning major country.
As for Topolanek, he’s center-right. No Socialist, I assure you.
posted by Jorge on
I’ve pretty much given up all hope on Obama on the War on Terror. I just hope I’m not one of the next 3K+ people who dies next.
posted by Bobby on
All of Europe is socialist because all of it has high taxes, powerful governments, limited free speech (holocaust denying is a crime, etc) and strong social welfare systems.
“Either it returns back to pre-civil war decentralization, or it scraps the electoral college.”
—Maybe return to the pre-civil war decentralization. As for the electoral college, the purpose of that body is giving fair representation to all American states instead of letting millions of New Yorkers and Californians overrule the wishes of people in Kansas, Idaho, Montana and other low population states. Besides, the electoral college usually votes with the majority anyway.
“Honestly, a parliamentary system would have been better. It would have been hilarious to listen to Bush defending himself during question periods.”
—Bush would have done great because his ideas work. Capitalism is a simple idea, you cut taxes and regulation and it works. Socialism involves complex maneuvers, Chavez is a perfect example, every company he confiscates ends up producing less goods! He already killed the beef industry by telling cattlemen to sell meat at a price that does’nt allow them to make a profit. No profit means less people make meat, thus more meat has to be imported from Colombia. Socialism KILLS business!
“Who cares what he calls it? So long as it gets the job done of killing Taliban and Islamic misfits that the US spawined in the 1980s.”
—It matters because wars depend a lot on public opinion. If you can’t remember the name, you can’t sell it! If the Korean War had been called “East Asia Operation” the war would have not lasted as long as it did. It also shows what little regard Obama has for tradition. It’s like referring to Kwanzaa as “black Christmas,” people get offended when you mess with what’s dear to them.
“Socialists? Do you have any idea how many EU states rely more on a consumption tax rather than an income tax? Come to think of it, most Eastern European countries have a flat tax.”
—Socialists HATE consumption, in France they banned farmers from producing their own biodiesel for personal use since the government can’t tax it! In Serbia the price of a bicycle is so expensive that you make more money buying a cheap bike in Miami and shipping it there.
Europeans don’t have a flat tax, they have consumption AND income taxes.
“I just hope I’m not one of the next 3K+ people who dies next.”
—Not everyone is afraid of dying for their country, not everyone is satisfied with a cubicle lifestyle, as long as Obama doesn’t bring back the draft, he can send our troops to war. I met them myself, they actually look forward to it. Only 1% of soldiers defect, those traitors should be shot if you ask me. It’s like becoming a cop and not wanting to shoot criminals, or a fireman who’s afraid of fire or an exterminator that fears roaches. Give me a break, people in the military have benefits the rest of us can only dream off. You want socialism? Join the military and you’ll get free health insurance, a free college education and pension after retirement. The least they can do is fight and perhaps die for their country when the need arises.
posted by tony on
is it good to buy products from http://www.gooloh.com to my john!!!!
posted by Jorge on
Let me be a little more clear.
I hope I am not one of the next people to die as a result of an act of terrorism due to the Obama administration’s scaling back on offense and defense against the terrorists.
posted by Allan Beatty on
I went to the Census Bureau web site to get definitive information.
* The Census does not ask about religion: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/religion.htm.
* The Census does count cohabiting straight couples as “unmarried partners”: http://ask.census.gov/cgi-bin/askcensus.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=41. Likewise they count cohabiting same-sex couples the same way.
* They can’t count same-sex couples as married because of DOMA: http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/samesex/index.html
posted by BobN on
The idea the the Census CANNOT ask about same-sex couples because we’re illegal doesn’t make a lot of sense. The Census asks about other things which are not legal, homes without plumbing, for example.