Date: Wed, 12 Jan 94 16:57:36 EST From: Mark Hertzog REPORT FOR PARTICIPANTS SURVEY ON POLITICAL PARTICIPATION AMONG LESBIANS, GAY MEN AND BISEXUALS IN THE UNITED STATES Conducted by Mark Wm. Hertzog, Ph.D. Lecturer in Government and Foreign Affairs University of Virginia This is a synopsis of the simple distribution of responses to the questions in the survey. The actual findings with respect to what I'm studying--the factors that influence political participation--are being written up now for submission to a scholarly journal. However, since most of you who asked for a copy of the responses are mainly interested in seeing how your answers matched up with those of the other respondents, I'm sending this along. More than 300 persons asked to take part in the survey in an eight-day period. Of those, 213 respondents returned their surveys on or before the 30 September 1993. (I actually let in about four or five that were up to 48 hours past deadline, but cut it off there.) It is important to remember that *THIS WAS A SELF-SELECTED SAMPLE AND CANNOT BE USED TO MAKE ANY INFERENCES ABOUT THE GAY, LESBIAN AND BISEXUAL POPULATION AS A WHOLE*. Since for my purposes only intra-sample comparisons were needed, a random-sample survey was not needed. But bear in mind that these numbers are NOT REPRESENTATIVE! WHERE RESPONDENTS FOUND OUT ABOUT THE SURVEY (more than one response allowed per person) It's interesting that nearly a quarter of the respondents were not gathered from the eight public and private lists to which I posted the announcement; they saw the announcement reposted to a variety of lists and individual accounts. 32.9% GayNet 23.9 Some source not on list 12.7 NOGLSTP 12.7 Stonewall 25 12.2 E-Directory of Lesbigay Scholars (Louie Crew) 10.8 QN (Queer Nation) 7.5 Ken's List [private list] 7.5 Sappho [private list] 6.6% ACT-UP 6.6 Queer Studies DEMOGRAPHICS The sample, as may be expected of one derived from electronic mail, was disproportionately male, white, urban, young, and composed of students. SEX: 157 men (73.7%), 55 women (25.8%), 1 transgender (0.5%) RACE: 195 white (91.5%), 5 East Asian (2.3%), 4 North African-South Asian (1.9%), 3 black (1.4%), 3 Hispanic/Latino (1.4%), no Native Americans, 2 of mixed racial heritages (0.9%) and 1 "other" (0.5%). LOCALITY: Nearly half (48.8%) of respondents reported living in a central city, compared with 27.2% suburban and 23.9% small town or rural. 42.7% said they lived in a locality (city or suburb) with a population of 500,000 or more. AGE: The mean respondent was born in 1960, with more than two- thirds of the sample born between 1950 and 1970. Respondents ranged from 18 to 66 years of age. Pre-baby boom (1927 to 1945): 9.0%; Baby-boomers (1946-1964): 51.4%; Baby-busters (1965 to 1975): 39.6%. People currently of college age (1971 to 1975) comprised 11.8% EDUCATION: All respondents had at least some college education and 71.4% had education beyond a bachelor's degree: 31.0% had earned their master's, and 17.8% had earned an academic or professional doctorate. STUDENTS: Full-time: 35.8%; part-time or "just taking classes": 10.9%; non-students: 53.3%. OCCUPATION: 64.9% of respondents were emplyed full-time, 23.7% employed part-time (mostly students). Of those employed, 62.9% worked for a college or university, 13.8% for a business with 50 or more employees, and 4.8% for a government agency other than a college or university. RELATIONSHIP STATUS: 56.0% of respondents were in a committed relationship, the mean length of which was between one and five years. Not in a relationship: 42.5%; Less than six months: 8.0%; Six months or more, but < one year: 6.1%; One year or more, but < five years: 25.9%; Five years or more, but < 10 years: 8.0%; 10 years or more, 8.5%; missing data, 1.0%. HIV-POSITIVE PEOPLE KNOWN: The average respondent knew 8.4 living persons who were HIV-positive, as well as 8.4 persons who had died who had been HIV-positive. A relatively small number, mostly in the youngest age categories, reported knowing no one who was HIV-positive, whereas a small number also reported knowing more than 100 such persons. RELIGION: Although 83.5% of respondents were raised as Christians, only 27.8% still call themselves Christians; a majority hold no religious affiliation at all today. The breakdown is as follows: Raised Today ------ ----- Protestant 44.6 15.0 Catholic 33.3 8.5 Other Christian 5.2 4.2 Jewish 7.5 5.6 Other religion 0.5 15.0 No religion 8.5 51.2 Missing data 0.5 0.5 51.2% say they never attend religious services; 26.3% say they attend less than once a month; 8.0% say they attend at least monthly, but not weekly; 13.6% say they attend at least once a week. (0.9% did not respond.) SELF-DESCRIBED SEXUAL ORIENTATION: 0.5% Exclusively heterosexual 1.4% Mostly heterosexual 12.2% Bisexual 18.3% Mostly homosexual 67.6% Exclusively homosexual TERM USED MOST OFTEN TO DESCRIBE SELF BY SEXUAL ORIENTATION: 9.4% Bisexual 13.1% Lesbian 53.1% Gay 2.8% Homosexual (none) Heterosexual or straight 3.8% Queer 2.3% Some other term 11.7% More than one term 3.8% Missing or invalid response Of those who used more than one term, most reported using "queer" equally with "lesbian," "gay," or some other common term, and a few respondents reported using "fag" or "dyke" in combination with "lesbian," "gay," etc. In all, however, only one out of six respondents reported using one of the "in-your-face" terms to describe her- or himself. PARTICIPATION IN POLITICS These are the percentages of people who answered that they did do the following things. (These are the "dependent variables" in the study.) VOTING PARTICIPATION: Voted in 1992 presidential election 93.4% Were registered to vote in 1992 95.3% Voted in 1992 presidential primary or caucus 63.8% "PERSUASIVE" PARTICIPATION during the 1992 campaign: Tried to persuade someone else how to vote 78.9% Displayed campaign button, sticker or sign 44.6% Went to campaign meetings, rallies, etc. 42.3% Worked for a political candidate 22.1% FINANCIAL PARTICIPATION during the 1992 campaign: Used $1 check-off on income tax [in 1992 or 1993] 39.9% Gave money to a candidate for office 31.5% Gave money to a political party 15.0% Gave money to group supporting/opposing a candidate 46.9% "ISSUE" PARTICIPATION since the beginning of 1992: Contaced an elected official to express opinion 81.2% (Mean number of times: 3) Worked with a group to change a law or policy 46.9% Belong to les\bi\gay group seeking such change 64.3% Belong to feminist group seeking such change 24.4% PROTEST PARTICIPATION during lifetime: Attended 1993 March on Washington 48.4% Took part in legal protest demonstration 78.9% Took part in illegal protest (e.g. civil disobedience) 25.8% Used violence in a political protest 6.1% POLITICAL PREFERENCES PARTY IDENTIFICATION: 0.9% Strong Republican 2.3 Weak Republican 2.3 Independent, but leaning Republican 4.7 Independent, no leaning to either major party 25.4 Independent, but leaning Democratic 7.5 Weak Democrat 47.9 Strong Democrat 5.6 Some other party 2.3 Non-political 0.9 No response PRESIDENTIAL VOTE GENERAL ELECTION (200 of 213 respondents report voting): 94.0% (188 respondents) report voting for Clinton; 2.0% (four respondents) each reported voting for Bush, Perot, and other candidates. Of the 188 respondents who voted for Clinton, 166 would still have voted for him even had they known before the election that Clinton was not going to lift the military ban. Of the 22 who said they would not, 4 would have voted for Ross Perot, 8 would have voted for a minor candidate, and 9 would not have voted for president at all (1 response was missing). Interestingly, one of the four Bush voters said he would have voted for Clinton if he had known Clinton would not lift the ban! The Perot and "other candidate" voters remained firm in their choices. PRIMARIES/CAUCUSES (137 of 213 respondents report voting): DEMOCRATIC (122 respondents): REPUBLICAN (14 respondents): 40.0% Bill Clinton 61.5% George Bush 29.2% Paul Tsongas (none) Pat Buchanan 25.8% Jerry Brown 38.5% Others 3.3% Tom Harkin (none) Bob Kerrey 1.7% Others One respondent reported voting in a minor-party primary. FEELINGS TOWARD PEOPLE AND GROUPS In the first series of questions you were asked to check off all the groups listed that you felt close to; then, looking back through that list, you were asked to pick the one group to which you felt *closest*. Here are how the responses stack up. I've put them in dexcending order of percentage feeling "close": Feel Feel Close Closest ----- ------- 86.8 20.7 The gay-rights movement 83.5 26.3 Gay men 75.5 8.5 Liberals 69.3 14.6 Lesbians 69.3 7.5 Feminists 65.1 0.9 Environmentalists 50.5 3.8 Women 46.7 2.3 Middle-class people 44.3 4.2 Bisexuals 40.6 3.8 Young people 35.4 0.5 Whites 30.7 0.5 Working-class people 29.2 1.4 Blacks 22.6 none Native Americans (American Indians) 22.6 none Poor people 17.5 none Labor unions 15.1 0.5 Hispanic-Americans 12.7 none The elderly 11.3 0.9 Asian-Americans 9.0 0.5 Business people 8.0 none Southerners 3.8 1.4 Conservatives 0.9 none Christian fundamentalists 1.8 Invalid or missing responses Then you rated some individuals using what's called a "feeling thermometer." It's a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 meaning you have the "warmest" possible feelings for the person and 0 meaning you have the "coldest" possible feelings. A rating between 1 and 49 is "cool," a rating between 51 and 99 is "warm." If you feel neither warm nor cool toward the person, you would rate them at 50. Using this scale, the mean ratings were as follows (listed in descending order of warmth): 75.3 Martina Navratilova 75.1 Urvashi Vaid 71.4 Hillary Clinton 69.4 Barney Frank 64.2 Bill Clinton 64.1 Jesse Jackson 18.4 Ross Perot 15.8 George Bush 11.9 Sam Nunn 2.8 Pat Robertson 2.7 Jesse Helms 2.6 Pat Buchanan (Many respondents either left "Urvashi Vaid" blank or rated her "50" becuase they did not know who she was. For those in that situation, Ms. Vaid was head of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force from 1989 to 1993 and as such was the nation's most visible lesbigay activist. She is now lecturing and writing a book on the movement. She also is the life partner of comedian Kate Clinton.) Then you used the "feeling thermometer" to rate some groups. The mean responses (again, scaled 0 to 100) are as follows: 83.8 The gay-rights movement 83.6 Lesbians 83.1 Gay men 77.0 Feminists 72.8 Environmentalists 72.2 Native Americans (American Indians) 71.4 Liberals 71.3 Bisexuals 67.5 Blacks 66.7 Hispanic-Americans 66.1 Asian-Americans 66.0 Poor people 60.8 Whites 38.5 The Congress 26.8 Big business 21.0 The military 19.5 Conservatives 12.4 Christian fundamentalists SOME OTHER POSSIBLE FACTORS IN POLITICAL PARTICIPATION SOCIETAL VS. INDIVIDUAL/GROUP BLAME These questions were designed to see the extent to which you held heterosexual society responsible for our situation in America, as opposed to holding individual lesbigay people and the movement responsible. The 1-to-5 answer scale was recoded as follows: 2 Strongest stand that society's to blame 0 Neutral or ambivalent -2 Strongest stand that les/bi/gays are to blame A. "The government in Washington actively oppresses people because of their sexual orientation." MEAN: 1.17 (+/- 0.92) B. "If homosexuals and bisexuals were more discreet and low-key and tried more to fit into society, there would be less social hostility and discrimination against them." MEAN: 1.30 (+/- 1.12) C. "It will be very hard for lesbians, gay men and bisexuals to make any real progress toward acceptance in this country until the laws are changed to give them protection against discrimination." MEAN: 1.12 (+/- 1.12) D. "Militants and extremists within the gay-rights movement are making it harder for bisexuals, lesbians and gay men to gain equal rights in this country." MEAN: 0.74 (+/- 1.28) F. "Flamboyant drag queens, 'dykes on bikes,' leather people and the like give all lesbian, bisexual and gay people a bad name." MEAN: 0.93 (+/- 1.14) G. "Pressure from society to stay in the closet and keep silent about their sexuality is a major impediment to ending discrimination and hostility against gay men, bisexuals and lesbians in America." MEAN: 1.70 (+/- 0.81) I. "The hostility toward gay men, bisexuals and lesbians in the U.S. is the fault of the heterosexual majority and not of gay men, bisexuals and lesbians themselves." MEAN: 1.13 (+/- 1.10) J. "The gay, lesbian and bisexual movement concentrates too much on sexual freedom and not enough on bringing the community into mainstream acceptability." MEAN: 0.65 (+/- 1.17) OVERALL MEAN SOCIAL FAULT RATING: 1.10 (+/- 0.57) PERCEPTIONS OF POWER: Two questions in the same format sought to determine how you perceived the comparative political power of les/bi/gays and of their leading opponents, Christian fundamentalists. These were recoded as follows: 2 Strongest stand that fundamentalists powerful, les/bi/gays not 0 Neutral or ambivalent -2 Strongest stand that les/bi/gays powerful, fundamentalists not E. "Christian fundamentalists have a great deal of power and influence in America today." MEAN: 1.33 (+/- 0.78) H. "Lesbians, gay men and bisexuals have a great deal of power and influence in America today." MEAN: 0.42 (+/- 1.19) OVERALL MEAN PERCEPTION OF POWER: 0.88 (+/- 0.74) FROM GAY RIGHTS TO HUMAN RIGHTS: Two questions in the same format sought to determine how you felt about the movement's involvement in other, related issues and movements. Answers were recoded as: 2 Strongest stand that movement should go beyond gay rights 0 Neutral or ambivalent -2 Strongest stand that movement should stick to gay rights K. "The lesbian, bisexual and gay movement should concentrate on gay-rights issues and not get involved in other issues such as abortion, affirmative action and foreign policy." MEAN: 0.65 (+/- 1.38) L. "The bisexual, gay and lesbian movement should be an integral part of a broad-based progressive movement to change society fundamentally, taking an active part in the struggles of feminists, people of color, peace activists, working people and environmentalists." MEAN: 1.14 (+/- 1.17) OVERALL MEAN STAND ON GOING BEYOND GAY ISSUES: 0.90 That's the end of the descriptive report. Again, I'm writing up the results of my own studies using these data and will be submitting them for publication shortly. The data set itself is saved as a system file on SPSS for Windows Version 6.0. If you would like a copy of the data set--and can use it in Windows or convert it from the Windows format--please send a 3.5" or 5.25" floppy disk, a disk mailer and a stamped, self-addressed envelope to: Mark Hertzog 113 W. Main St., #102 Charlottesville, VA 22902 THANKS AGAIN FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION! ************************************************************************** MARK HERTZOG IS MOVING! MARK HERTZOG IS MOVING! MARK HERTZOG IS MOVING! Watch for MarkEMark's new e-mail address, coming on or about 17 January 1994. Do NOT reply to this address! Do NOT reply to this address!