If you need evidence of how much of a burden homosexuals have in the political environment, I'd recommend this video of Robert Gibbs. He takes a genuine political risk on our behalf, and comes out foursquare in favor of arithmetic. As you can see, the White House is ". . . committed to a fair and accurate count of all Americans," and is currently ". . . in the midst of determining the best way to ensure that gay and lesbian couples are accurately counted."
I don't want to sound too snarky here. It is real progress that the government we pay our tax dollars to support is actually willing to count same-sex couples accurately. That certainly has not been the government's policy in the past -- which should tell you something.
The fact that they have to struggle with this -- the fact it is a problem for them -- brings them face to face, once again, with the unreasonable, irrational and mean-spirited provisions of DOMA. Someday, I hope, they will see that it's easier for all of us to get rid of it, and save us all valuable time and effort we could be devoting to real problems.
I'd also like to join Dale in extending a warm bloggy welcome to Brian Chase.
6 Comments for “Counting”
posted by jpeckjr on
I guess I don’t understand why the federal government needs an “accurate count of same-sex couples.” And I interpret the “determining the best way” point to be about the statistical aspects of the census.
For example, do you ask the status of a same sex couple only in the places same sex marriage is legal? A same sex couple in a state where such marriage is not legal may consider themselves “married” but under the law they are not. Even if DOMA was repealed or had never existed, a couple is not married or civilly united under the law unless they are. The only legal recognitions of “couple” are marriage and civil unions / domestic partnerships. Social recognitions of “couple” should not matter to the government.
Or do you ask something like: If your household is comprised of two persons of the same sex, are you having sex with one another? Is that the definition of a “couple?” How about this: If your household is comprised of two persons of the opposite sex but you aren’t legally married, are you having sex with one another? Why shouldn’t we want to know this about heterosexuals, too?
Of course, that assumes having sex is the very definition of being a “couple.” Should we then also asked, “If you are married, are you having sex with one another?” Then we can exclude all the no’s from the count of “couples.”
Not every household with two people of the same sex living there is a same sex couple. I know two sisters who share an apartment. Technically, they are a same sex household, but not a “couple.”
If we want a truly accurate count of how many same sex couples have gotten married, the states where it is legal can provide that information. In places where same-sex marriage is not legal, why should the census care if two members of the same sex sharing living quarters are a “couple” or just trying to save money on the rent?
Maybe the census should ask every American adult their sexual orientation. But then all the people still in the closet would lie and we still wouldn’t have an accurate count, would we? Or perhaps this question could be on the “long form,” the sampling data form that goes to some but not all households, a form many Americans find intrusive.
Finally, is there a public policy need to know this information? In addition to apportionment, the basic reason for the census, socio-economic data from the census is used for any number of federal aid formulas. Can anyone think of any federal aid program that is based on the number of same sex couples in a given geographic area?
I’m not actually sure it would be helpful to glbt equality to have an “accurate” count of how many of us there are. What if the census says there aren’t as many of us as we thought? Well, we’d just claim the census had undercounted us just like every other minority group does.
Oh great, another thing to be pissed off about.
I want DOMA repealed, but I do not think getting an accurate count of same sex couples through the census will help, even if it is possible to get such a count.
posted by Pat on
I’m not actually sure it would be helpful to glbt equality to have an “accurate” count of how many of us there are. What if the census says there aren’t as many of us as we thought? Well, we’d just claim the census had undercounted us just like every other minority group does.
Jpeckjr, we have to start somewhere. Sure, we will obviously be undercounted. But I suspect the undercount will decrease in future censuses.
My understanding is a lot of different household types are counted, such as single parents, children raised by grandparents, etc. Why not have a count for same sex couples? Sure, there are people in relationships that are still in the closet and/or ashamed as being recognized as a couple worthy of the same status of opposite sex couples. So be it. Let people be recognized and counted as they wish. Again, the closet and shame will decrease in time.
posted by jpeckjr on
Pat, we started well over 50 years ago seeking equality in all areas of American life.
My major points are that it will be difficult (not impossible) to frame a census question that will result in an accurate count. And, I can find no public policy reason to count same-sex couples. Again, we can find out the number of same sex marriages simply by gathering that information from the states where it is (or was) legal.
The political fight for equality — marriage, workplace, military service, or any other category — is not reliant on an accurate count by the census of how many same sex couples there are. It is reliant on persuasion, persistence, and activism on several levels. The case is being made without a census count. We have made great strides in the last 50 years without a census count.
While census data is most certainly used for social research purposes, plenty of social research has been done on glbt life without it.
Since the plan is to ask only about couples, I suppose uncoupled gay men like me just don’t count, no matter how much equality may matter to me.
posted by Pat on
Pat, we started well over 50 years ago seeking equality in all areas of American life.
Jpeckjr, yes that’s true. But we haven’t started counting 50 years ago.
And, I can find no public policy reason to count same-sex couples. Again, we can find out the number of same sex marriages simply by gathering that information from the states where it is (or was) legal.
The same can be said for other categories, such as opposite-sex marriage. Perhaps, since the census is national, they’ll only start formally counting same sex couples when there are federally recognized civil unions.
I suppose uncoupled gay men like me just don’t count, no matter how much equality may matter to me.
I guess that’s true for single people in general.
posted by jpeckjr on
Pat, with regard to counting single people, the census does count single people, uncoupled people. My point is if you are trying to count same sex couples you will not get a count of glbt people unless you ask every person to self-select a sexual orientation. Same sex couples are a subset of the glbt universe. Which one do we want counted? Which number would benefit us the most in our work towards equality?
As far as never counting, you’re right that the census has never asked a question regarding sexual orientation. But there have certainly been demographic and social science research projects that have tried to estimate the number or percentage of people who are homosexual. In 1948, Sexual Behavior in the Human Male, commonly known as the Kinsey Report, reported between 4 to 10% of the male population was exclusively or almost exclusively homosexual in their behavior (p. 651). These numbers have appeared from time to time in social science literature and certainly been used in the movement to estimae our numbers. In a country of 300 million, that’s 12 – 30 million people. I recall reading about other projects that came up with similar percentages, although cannot cite them right now.
I’m done now. Look forward to your next reply. Nice to have a good debating partner! Sincerely thankful.
posted by Pat on
Pat, with regard to counting single people, the census does count single people, uncoupled people. My point is if you are trying to count same sex couples you will not get a count of glbt people unless you ask every person to self-select a sexual orientation. Same sex couples are a subset of the glbt universe. Which one do we want counted? Which number would benefit us the most in our work towards equality?
Jpeckjr, you’re right about counting single people. I guess what I meant is that a straight single person is not counted as straight just as a gay single person is not counted as gay. We never had a question involving sexual orientation. Even though we’ve counted married persons for the last five censuses, if not more or all of them (I have no idea when they started counted married persons), all we know is the number of persons who are married to someone of the opposite sex, not whether they are straight or not, whether the marriage is a sham or not. We can only assume that a high percentage of these married persons are straight. Similarly, if we count the number of persons who live with a partner of the same sex and differentiate it from a blood relative or roommate situation, we get a similar count. Technically, we wouldn’t know the sexual orientation of the person, although I’m sure it would be a rare case one or both persons were really straight.
It would be nice to get an accurate count of the number of homosexual persons, especially since the 4 to 10% is rather a wide range. But I just don’t see with the current census procedures how the census can ask the question and expect data that even accurately reflects the number of people who consider themselves to be gay and want to be counted as such. For example, you may have a household with a 21-year-old son who is fairly open, but not ready to say, “Dad, be sure to check the homosexual box next to my name.” Perhaps one way to solve this problem is to have all adult persons in each household fill out a census form, instead of having one form per household. At least we would get a count of those who self-identify as gay.
Nice to have a good debating partner! Sincerely thankful.
Same here. Thanks.