Professional Documents
Culture Documents
3-1-2012
Recommended Citation
Gary J. Gates, LGBT Identity: A Demographer's Perspective, 45 Loy. L.A. L. Rev. 693 (2012).
Available at: http://digitalcommons.lmu.edu/llr/vol45/iss3/2
This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Reviews at Digital Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law
School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons at Loyola
Marymount University and Loyola Law School. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@lmu.edu.
LGBT IDENTITY:
A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE
Gary J. Gates*
In a recent study, the Author of this Article estimated that the self-
identified lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community
makes up 3.8 percent of the American population. The Authors
estimate was far lower than many scholars and activists had contended,
and it included a relatively high proportion of persons self-identifying
as bisexuals. This Article responds to two of the central criticisms that
arose in the controversy that followed. First, in response to claims that
his estimate did not account for people who are in the closet, the Author
describes how demographers might measure the size of the closet.
Second, in response to those who either ignored the reported large
incidence of bisexuality or misconstrued the meaning of that incidence,
the Author considers how varying frameworks for conceptualizing
sexual orientation might alter the ratio of lesbian or gay individuals to
bisexuals. This Article goes on to offer observations about the
challenges and implications that are associated with the varying
estimates of the size of the LGBT population. And it concludes by
arguing that, today, the size of the LGBT community is less important
than understanding the struggles of its members and informing crucial
policy debates with facts rather than stereotype and anecdote.
* Williams Distinguished Scholar, Williams Institute, UCLA School of Law; Ph.D., Public
Policy and Management, Heinz College, Carnegie Mellon University; B.S., Computer Science,
University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown; M.Div., Saint Vincent Seminary. This Article is adapted
from the Authors keynote address at the Loyola of Los Angeles Law Reviews LGBT Identity and
the Law Symposium on October 21, 2011. Dr. Gary J. Gates, Williams Distinguished Scholar,
Williams Inst., UCLA Sch. of Law, Keynote Address at Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review
Symposium: LGBT Identity and the Law (Oct. 21, 2011). The keynote address was based in part
on the Authors recent study of LGBT demographics. GARY J. GATES, THE WILLIAMS INST.,
HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LESBIAN, GAY, BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENDER? (2011), available at
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-
2011.pdf.
693
694 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
8. GARY J. GATES, THE WILLIAMS INST., HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE LESBIAN, GAY,
BISEXUAL, AND TRANSGENDER? (2011), available at http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-
content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf.
9. Id. at 2, 8.
10. Id. at 2.
11. FIELD RESEARCH CORP., CAL. DEPT OF HEATH SERVS., CALIFORNIA LESBIANS, GAYS,
BISEXUALS, AND TRANSGENDER TOBACCO USE SURVEY 7 (2004); Kerith J. Conron et al.,
Transgender Health in Massachusetts: Results from a Household Probability Sample of Adults,
102 AM. J. PUB. HEALTH 118, 118 (2012).
12. E.g., UCLA CTR. FOR HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH, CHIS 2009: ADULT
QUESTIONNAIRE VERSION 3.4, at 44 (2011), available at http://www.chis.ucla.edu/pdf/CHIS2009
adultquestionnaire.pdf.
13. GATES, supra note 8, at 2.
14. E.g., UCLA CTR. FOR HEALTH POLICY RESEARCH, supra note 12.
698 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
15. CAL. DEPT OF HEALTH SERVS., supra note 11; Conron et al., supra note 11.
16. GATES, supra note 8, at 5.
17. Id.
18. Id. at 3.
19. Id.
20. Id. at 5.
21. For example, a pencil-and-paper survey taken in the presence of a survey taker may bias
estimates downward if an LGB person thinks that the survey taker might see responses to
questions about sexual orientation. An Internet survey may bias results a bit high if the LGB
population constitutes a larger portion of Internet users or if they are more comfortable using a
web-based interface than the population in general.
22. GATES, supra note 8, at 5.
Spring 2012] A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE 699
23. Id. at 6.
24. Id. at 7.
25. David Crary & Terry Tang, U.S. Has 4 Million Gay Adults, 1.7 Percent of Populace,
Study Says, HONOLULU STAR-ADVERTISER (Apr. 7, 2011, 4:02 PM), http://www.star
advertiser.com/news/breaking/119403244.html.
26. Id.
700 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
27. See, e.g., GATES, supra note 8, at 34 figs.1, 2 & 3 (breaking down the results of the
nine surveys used in the Authors own study into Gay/Lesbian and Bisexual categories).
28. Id. at 1.
29. E-mail from Larry Kramer to Richard Socarides (Sept. 4, 2011, 20:39:00 PST) (on file
with author).
30. Alex Blaze, The LGBT Population Is Not 9 Million, THE BILERICO PROJECT (Apr. 7,
2011, 7:00 PM), http://www.bilerico.com/2011/04/the_lgbt_population_is_not_9_million.php.
31. See Brian McNaught Presented with Selisse Berry Leadership Award, OUT & EQUAL
WORKPLACE ADVOCS. (Oct. 17, 2011), http://outandequal.org/node/423 (Brian McNaught has
been working to help people to better understand the unique challenges and opportunities faced
by LGBT people in the workplace since 1974. . . . His work has reached hundreds of professional
and university audiences, and has been pivotal to changing how the corporate world views the
LGBT community.).
Spring 2012] A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE 701
32. How Many Gay People Are There?, BRIAN MCNAUGHTS GAY & TRANSGENDER
ISSUES IN THE WORKPLACE BLOG (Apr. 11, 2011, 1:18 PM), http://diversityguides.com/gay_
workplace/?p=509.
33. See Larry Kramer, Comment to The Most Important LGBT Group Youve Never Heard
Of, THE ADVOC. (Aug. 15, 2011, 12:23 PM), http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/
08/15/The_Williams_Institute_Is_the_Most_Important_LGBT_Group_You/.
34. Blaze, supra note 30.
702 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
Findings from the GSS analyses suggest that, under this definition,
the discordance between same-sex sexual behavior and sexual
orientation identity is substantially smaller. Only about 1 percent of
adults say they have had same-sex sexual behavior in the last five
years but do not identify as LGB.43 If we define the LGB population
as those who either self-identify as LGB or who have had relatively
recent same-sex sexual behavior, and we define the closet as
including those who are discordant with regard to recent behavior
and identity along with those who indicate that they intentionally
hide their LGB identity, the closet will be much smaller. If we only
consider sexual behavior over the last five years, then the GSS data
imply that about 1.3 percent of adults are in the closet, representing
about 37 percent of the LGB population.44 If we consider only sexual
behavior in the last year, then about 1 percent of adults are closeted,
representing just 30 percent of the LGB population.45 As a
proportion of the LGB community, the closet under the latter two
definitions is half of what it would be when compared to an LGB
definition that includes lifetime same-sex sexual behaviors.
These findings differ between men and women. Even though the
overall percentage of men and women who report any same-sex
sexual behavior since age eighteen or self-identify as LGB is roughly
the same (7.5 percent and 8 percent, respectively), women are much
more likely to self-identify as LGB.46 Using sexual behavior since
age eighteen along with LGB self-identification as our definition of
LGB, the findings suggest that nearly six in ten women are
closeted.47 But for men, the figure is more than eight in ten.48 These
differences narrow if we consider more recent same-sex sexual
behaviors in our definition of LGB, but it remains true that women
are more likely to be LGB than men under this definition. Roughly
5 percent of women either self-identify as LGB or report same-sex
sexual behaviors in the last year or the last five years compared to
just 2 percent of men.49 But the proportions of LGB men and women
43. Id.
44. Id.
45. Id.
46. Id.
47. Id.
48. Id.
49. Id.
Spring 2012] A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE 705
50. Id.
51. Id.
52. Id.
53. Id.
54. Id.
55. Id.
56. Id.
706 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
57. Id.
58. Id.
59. Id.
60. Id.
61. Id.
Spring 2012] A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE 707
62. Id.
63. Id.
64. Id.
65. Id.
66. Id.
67. Id.
708 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
68. Id.
69. Id.
Spring 2012] A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE 709
general appearance? These are all areas that could benefit from more
critical assessment by both academics and policy makers.
Such assessments would have clear implications for policy and
politics. Narrowly defining the LGBT population within the
framework of identity yields much smaller population estimates.
Does it matter if we say that 4 percent of adults are LGBT versus
10 percent? Given the reactions to my work, some clearly believe it
matters quite a bit. A recent Gallup poll found that the average
American thinks that about 25 percent of the population is LGBT.74
Convincing the population that LGBT people exist was an important
factor in the decision of early LGBT advocates to promote the idea
that 10 percent of the population was gay. That figure was large
enough to matter and convince an American public skeptical about
the very existence of LGBT people that, in a gathering of ten friends,
at least one might be LGBT. But the Gallup poll findings suggest
that Americans no longer need to be convinced of the existence of
LGBT people. This does not mean that the population estimates do
not matter. The utility and accuracy of LGBT population estimates is
now more salient in assessing and understanding the needs of the
LGBT community and evaluating the programs designed to meet
those needs.
That said, it remains problematic when we limit our definition to
identity measures, as this inherently minimizes the salience of the
closet. The closet can be an important aspect in how we document
discrimination and how we assess stigma. However, some stigma
could actually be more pronounced when we focus exclusively on
identity. For example, hate crimes are more common in gay areas
where more people self-identify as such.75 A Williams Institute-
commissioned study using 2008 GSS data showed that LGB-
identified individuals were twice as likely to report workplace
harassment when compared to those who were heterosexual but had
had same-sex behaviors.76 Broader definitions that consider behavior
74. Lymari Morales, U.S. Adults Estimate That 25% of Americans Are Gay or Lesbian,
GALLUP (May 27, 2011), http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/adults-estimate-americans-gay-
lesbian.aspx.
75. See APA, SEXUAL ORIENTATION & HOMOSEXUALITY, supra note 2.
76. BRAD SEARS & CHRISTY MALLORY, THE WILLIAMS INST., DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE OF
EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION & ITS EFFECTS ON LGBT PEOPLE 2 (2011), available at
Spring 2012] A DEMOGRAPHERS PERSPECTIVE 713
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Sears-Mallory-Discrimination-July-
2011.pdf.
77. Campbell Gibson & Kay Jung, Historical Census Statistics on Population Totals by
Race, 1790 to 1990, and by Hispanic Origin, 1970 to 1990, for the United States, Regions,
Divisions, and States 1 (U.S. Census Bureau, Population Div., Working Paper No. 56, 2002),
available at http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0056/twps0056.pdf.
78. Race, U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, http://www.census.gov/population/race (last visited Feb. 5,
2012).
79. See Gibson & Jung, supra note 77, at 2.
714 LOYOLA OF LOS ANGELES LAW REVIEW [Vol. 45:693
80. Edna L. Paisano, Population Profile of the United States: The American Indian, Eskimo,
and Aleut Population, U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, http://www.census.gov/population/www/pop-
profile/amerind.html (last visited Feb. 5, 2012).
81. Id.
82. Id.
83. STELLA U. OGUNWOLE, U.S. CENSUS BUREAU, WE THE PEOPLE: AMERICAN INDIANS
AND ALASKA NATIVES IN THE UNITED STATES 1 (2006), available at http://www.CENSUS.gov/
prod/2006pubs/censr-28.pdf.