************************************************************************
INCOME INFLATION:
The Myth of Affluence Among Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Americans
Released Winter '98
************************************************************************
A Joint Publication of the
Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
and the Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies
By: M.V. Lee Badgett, Ph. D.
Dept. of Economics,
University of Massachusetts at Amherst
With An Introduction By
Suzanne Goldberg, Attorney
Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund
************************************************************************
Policy Institute reports can be downloaded from the publications section of
the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force website at http://www.ngltf.org
REPORT SUMMARY:
Do gay, lesbian, and bisexual (GLB) Americans earn more money than their
heterosexual counterparts? Is there an economic dividing line in this
country based on sexual orientation? Not at all. In an important new
report released today, Dr. M.V. Lee Badgett establishes that GLB persons
are not, as a class, richer than heterosexuals. In detailed studies, in
fact, gay men earn less. (The transgender population is among the least
examined by social scientists; because of this lack of data, the inclusive
term GLBT is used only when it is accurate to represent the community as a
whole.)
Income Inflation: The Myth of Affluence Among Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual
Americans, a joint publication of the Policy Institute of the National Gay
and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) and the Institute for Gay and Lesbian
Strategic Studies (IGLSS), is a startling study of the economic status of a
frequently stereotyped population of Americans. Badgett explores the
pervasive and inaccurate notion that GLB people form an economic elite,
insulated from discrimination by their wealth and disconnected from society
at large by a special, privileged status. Her conclusions are not only
surprising, but they are certain to ignite a new era of debate about and
understanding of the true economic status of the GLB populace.
Badgett, a professor of economics at the University of Massachusetts,
outlines how the distorted image of high income and wealth among GLB people
has remained in force through the reliance on a limited number of marketing
studies, conducted on behalf of gay publishing concerns about their
readers. The debate has, till now, ignored the few random sample studies
that allow us to more thoroughly identify a real outline of GLB life. By
examining data sets from seven national studies such as the U.S. Census to
the Voter News Service's exit polls, Badgett begins to fill in the gaps and
establish an empirical rather than a mythological frame of reference.
HIGHLIGHTS
Badgett's report sweeps aside a host of long-standing distortions and
inaccuracies. Income Inflation shows that comparisons of the economic
status of lesbian, gay, and bisexual people with that of heterosexual
people in the United States offer the following very consistent findings:
… Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people do not earn more than heterosexual
people.
… Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people do not live in more affluent
households
than heterosexual people.
… Two studies suggest that gay men earn less than similarly qualified
heterosexual men.
… Gay, lesbian, and bisexual people are found throughout the spectrum
of
income distribution: some are poor, a few are rich, and most are somewhere
in the middle, along with most heterosexual people.
ANALYSIS
Badgett mounts a critique of the handful of marketing surveys frequently
used to characterize GLB economic status, surveys conducted by
organizations such as the Simmons Market Research Bureau and Overlooked
Opinions. She concludes that, while useful for some purposes, these surveys
continue to be used inaccurately to represent the economic status of wide
range of very diverse GLBT populations. Through her provocative report,
Badgett proves that any picture of the GLBT community must rely on the
results from more accurate general studies.
Badgett shows how the misuse of these statistics is not only pervasive,
but that it has, ironically, allowed organized political forces of the
extreme Right, who have frequently cited these marketing figures when
arguing that GLBT people do not experience discrimination, to increase
their power base. The recent Supreme Court battle over Colorado's anti-gay
Amendment 2 was a particularly noteworthy example of the distortion caused
by such marketing numbers. In a dissent which argued that the amendment
should be upheld, Justice Scalia opined that "high disposable income" gave
gay and lesbian people "disproportionate political power."
By uncovering and explaining a number of existing data sets that survey a
broader cross-section of the GLB population, both individual and household
income numbers are put under the microscope. Using this information,
Badgett arrives at a number of compelling statistical snapshots, all of
which strongly undermine the myth of GLB affluence. Surprisingly, Badgett
reveals that two surveys suggest that gay men may, in fact, earn less than
their heterosexual peers.
CONCLUSIONS
Through her excellent report, Badgett puts marketing surveys back in their
proper place -- as important information for advertisers seeking to reach a
certain subgroup of gay people -- and opens the door to a broader, more
accurate economic view of GLBT Americans as a whole. Using seven national
studies, she concludes that GLB Americans do not earn more than their
heterosexual peers; they frequently even earn less.
Income Inflation also explains how social scientists are beginning to
develop these new methods for collecting data about gay, lesbian, and
bisexual Americans. These statistics are gathered from random samples and
are therefore less susceptible to economic bias than data gathered from
readership studies. These more scientific data sources have received little
public attention, but provide a wealth of information. Badgett's review of
these data suggests that the true picture of GLB individual and household
income has yet to be understood in the debate raging today.
******************************************************************************
The Policy Institute of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force is a think
tank dedicated to research, policy analysis, and strategic projects to
advance the greater understanding and equality of lesbian, gay, bisexual
and transgender people. <http://www.ngltf.org>
The Institute for Gay and Lesbian Strategic Studies is a non-profit think
tank. Its mission is to inform public debates through research, analysis,
and education in order to create an equal and integrated society for people
of all sexual orientations and gender identifications.
<http://www.iglss.org>
******************************************************************************
Media calls should be directed to NGLTF Media Director, Tracey Conaty at
202-332-6483.
This message was issued by Jason Riggs at the Policy Institute of the
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. If you would like to be taken off the
Policy Institute email distribution list please respond to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you wish to SUBSCRIBE to NGLTF's activist email listserve, please send
an email with
"SUBSCRIBE ACTIVIST" in the subject and body of your email message to
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. You may also subscribe by visiting
http://www.ngltf.org.
Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List
http://www.alexia.net.au/~www/mhutton/
