Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

news.gallup.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 109 posts

Re: Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

#11

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

codingslave wrote: post #6

If you look at pride month and the level of marketing and news associated with it, one would estimate that the gay population is huge. Nearly every major corporation on linkedin has a rainbow logo, my uber the other day showed their ride path as a rainbow. The level of influence that LGBTQ currently has in the American mind share far outsizes their population, even now I am worried my account will be banned for menti…

Corporations are cashing in on the trend. I'm both equally happy and unhappy about it. It means that being LGBT has finally become mainstream enough, but it also shows a two-faced side to the corporations who will also donate to anti-LGBT politicians. It's pandering to us, is what it is. That part, I'm not so much a fan of.

Re: Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

#13

Post by prepend »

JMTQp8lwXL wrote: post #7

How can we be certain the "actual" U.S. Gay population is 4.5% of the population? We know not everyone who is LGBT is out or identifies on these surveys. Sure, there's undeniably a large cap between ~20% and 4.5%. But it's kind of meaningless to say what the absolute difference is, if we can't be certain how many remain closeted.

It’s not meaningless as it’s important to plan for populations based on size. From a health perspective, there are programs targeting helping gay populations and allocating funds accurately is important so the most people are helped.

There are many practical reasons for know demographics. There are limitations and it’s probably difficult to know the exact percentage, but we still need to know as accurately as possible.

Re: Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

#14

Post by rolltiide »

the most useful thing that article points out is that there isnt a clear way to count LGBT populations, as these are all different things.

There are also other groups of people wishing to be included in non-cisgender and non-hetero movements.

It means the cisgender and heterosexual population is greatly overestimated but simply easy to conform to.

Re: Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

#15

Post by modeless »

These people were asked to choose between 6 options. Every number in every option was higher than the true value. Is it any wonder people overestimate when primed this way? I wonder how many other poll results people rely on are this obviously biased.

Edit: I now believe this is incorrect, see below.

Re: Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

#16

Post by JMTQp8lwXL »

wool_gather wrote: post #10
m0th87 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4.5% self-report as LGBT. That's an important distinction to make, and I too would be surprised if it's accurate.

Also, the "what's your estimate" question specifies "gay or lesbian", whereas the self-identity question apparently includes the B and T. Obviously this would make the high estimate for just "gay or lesbian" even further off, but it still doesn't say anything good about the article's conclusion.

Maybe a minor point, but I think sexual fluidity remains under-addressed by these polls. Some people are, for all intents and purposes, identifying as LGBT during, say, their college years, but then go on to settle down with an opposite-sex spouse.

If the person once identified as LGBT, but doesn't today, is it based on what they "actively" are? Or if you ever once identified as LGBT, for purposes of polling, you remain in that category for life?

Re: Americans Greatly Overestimate U.S. Gay Population

#19

Post by wool_gather »

modeless wrote: post #15

These people were asked to choose between 6 options. Every number in every option was higher than the true value. Is it any wonder people overestimate when primed this way? I wonder how many other poll results people rely on are this obviously biased. Edit: I now believe this is incorrect, see below.

This is a really excellent observation, because it doesn't even have anything to do with the definitions of the terms of the survey, simply its format.
Post reply on HN