essay

Black Same-Sex Couple Households in the 2000 U.S. Census: Implications in the Dehate Over Same-Sex Marriage

ALAIN DANG—NATIONAL GAY AND LESBIAN TASK FORCE, NEW YORK

M . SOMJEN F R A Z E R CENTER FOR COURT INNOVATION, NEW YORK

Abstract

To help inform the debate ahout the impact of same-sex marriage in the United States, paiticularly on black same-sex couples, data from the 2000 U.S. Census was analyzed. This study sheds light on the basic demographics of black same-sex couples nationwide, including residence patterns, parenting rates, educational attainment, employment status, income, and housing. Anti-same-sex marriage state and federal constitutional amendments will disproportionately affect black same-sex couples and their families because they are already economically disadvantaged compared to black married opposite-sex couples and white same-sex couples. Despite these disadvantages, data from the 2000 Census also indicate that black same-sex couples form stable families. This is demonstrated by parenting rates in black female same-sex households that are nearly equal to tfiat ofbiack married opposite-sex couples, and that fact that black individuals in same-sex couples aiso report similar rates of residing in the same residence as they did five years earlier than individuals in married opposite-sex couples.

Introduction

In the November 2004 elections, voters in 10 states passed state constitutional amendments defining mar- riage as between one man and one woman (Kershaw. Connelly & Sanders, 2004). Many of these amendments may also invalidate existing civil union and domestic partnership policies, and rescind benefits currently available to many public sector employees in same-sex relationships. How do these amendments specifically affect black same-sex couple families? What do U.S. Census data tell us about the lives of lesbian, gay, bi- sexual, and transgender black Americans? To answer these questions, research on the experiences of black Americans, gay or straight is briefly reviewed. Data on

black same-sex couple households from the 2000 U.S. Census is then summarized, with a particular focus on how these data shed light on the potential impact of anti-same-sex marriage amendments, as well as other anti-gay family policies, on black same-sex couples and their families.

To help inform the debate on the impact of same- sex marriage in the U.S., particularly on black same- sex couples, data from the 2000 Census was analyzed. This study sheds light on the basic demographics of black same-sex couples nationwide, including residence patterns, parenting rates, educational attainment, em- ployment status, income, and housing. To understand

Alain Dang it a policy analyst with the Nutumu! Guy and Lesbian To-ik Force Policv Institute. Hix research interests include race unil xe.uuii orienttilian. demography, and direct mtion organizing. He hoids a B.A. in Social Ecology from UC Irvine and an M.A. in Urban Planning from UCLA.

M. Sonyen Frazer's research interrsts include gender and aextiality. race, criminology and puhlic health. As a Rhodes Scholar at O.Mford Utiiversity., she conjpleled a pnijeci on homiiphohir hate crime in Britain. She has published artil•le.^i on diverse topics including lesbian health, binge drinking, and African-American stave rei>arati</n.t

The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29. No. 1, 2005 SIX

how recently enacted anti-gay marriage amendments will specifically affect black same-sex couples, this group was compared to white .same-sex couples as well as other black family types, including black married opposite-sex couples, black cohabiting opposite-sex couples, and black single parents.

Context

According to the National Urban League, black Americans, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression, are significantly disadvantaged in terms of education, wealth and income, health, and other measures. For example, less than half of black Ameri- cans own the home in which they live compared to 70% of white Americans. Black men and women earn less, on average, then white men and women. Black men eam 70% of the income of white men. and black women earn 83% of the income of white women (2004).

The 2000 Census documents racial inequities in educational attainment at the national level: 84% of white people over age 25 have a high school degree, compared to only 72% of black people. This disparity increases as the level of education increases, with white people having advanced degrees at nearly double the rates of black people {Bauman & Graf. 2003). The American Council on Education also found that black men lag behind black women in enrollment in colleges and universities (Harvey, 2003). In fact, according to the Justice Policy Institute, there are more African American men in prison than in college, the result of pervasive poverty in black communities and discrimi- natory law enforcement that includes differential sen- tencing based on the race of the defendant in criminal cases (Justice Policy Institute, 2002).

Black lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) Americans face additional hardship because of discrimination based on their sexual orientation (Battle & Bennett, 2000). A survey of nearly 2,700 black LGBT people conducted at Black Pride events in 2000 found that black LGBT people faced high rates of dis- crimination based on racial and ethnic identity (53%) and sexual orientation (42%) (Battle, Cohen, Warren, Ferguson, & Audam, 2002). They experienced racism at mostly white gay events and venues; and experienced homophobia in black heterosexual organizations, from their families of origin, from straight friends, and also in churches and religious organizations.

Anti-gay activists frequently claim that equal rights for gay and lesbian people are a threat to the civil rights of groups they deem "legitimate minorities," including

African-Americans. For example, one flier distributed by a coalition of anti-gay organizations claimed that Martin Luther King, Jr. "would be outraged if he knew that homosexualist extremists were abusing the civil rights movement to get special rights based on their behavior" (Ross, 2002). Such rhetoric pits one com- munity, the black civil rights community, against an- other, the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender civil rights community. It implies that there are no black les- bian or gay people experiencing discrimination because of their sexual orientation.

Despite these experiences of homophobia in their religious communities. 85% of black LGBT people surveyed indicated that they were affiliated with a reli- gion (Battle, et. al., 2002). About half said their church or religious institution influenced their daily lives, even though more than half said their religion condemned homosexuality. Although the Census does not provide data on religious membership, adherence or religious service attendance, the Black Pride data indicates that religion is very important to black LGBT people.

Methodology

Tbe U.S. Census does not ask about sexual orien- tation or gender identity. However, in 1990 and 2000 the Census allowed same-sex cohabiting couples to identify themselves as "unmarried partners." Those couples in which both partners are men or both women are considered "same-sex couple households" for pur- poses of research (U.S. Census Bureau, 2002; Simmons & O'Connell, 2003). However, it is assumed that those indicating that they are same-sex unmarried partners are in long-term relationships involving mutual sup- port and caring. It is likely that many of the individuals in these same-sex couples would identify as "gay," "les- bian," "same gender loving," or some other term for homosexual (Black, Gates, Sanders, & Taylor, 2000). Others would identify as bisexual, as would many men and women in opposite-sex coupled households.

The socioeconomic information used in the fol- lowing analysis was compiled through a custom tabu- lation of the Census Bureau's 5 percent Public Use Microdata Samples (PUMS). The research firm of Lopez & Cheung, Inc. processed the data from the PUMS database. The 5 percent PUMS data was ana- lyzed because the sample of respondents from the 2000 Census long form provides a more comprehensive pic- ture of black same-sex households, including, for ex- ample, information about military veteran status and educational attainment. These variables are not avail-

522 The Western Journal of Black Studies. Vol. 29. No. 1. 2005

able in other datasets made publicly available by the Census, such as Summary File One and Two data, which are based on 100% counts of the 2000 Census short form. PUMS data also identified any black partner liv- ing in a same-sex household, whether he or she was the householder or the householder's partner, making it possible to more comprehensively estimate numbers of black women and men living with same-sex partners.

In constructing same-sex couple households, the householder and the person residing in the same unit is defined as an "unmarried partner" of the same-sex, as well as any children residing in the same unit. The records of either householders or unmarried partners that were "black or African American alone or in any combination and not Hispanic" were selected. Only one black or African American person was needed to con- struct a black household. This made it possible to esti- mate numbers of black same-sex households. Black cohabiting opposite-sex couple households were con- structed similarly, except the partners were of the op- posite-sex. In black married opposite-sex couple house-

holds, "husband/wife" was used instead of "unmarried partner."

Results

According to the 2000 Census, there are almost 85,000 black same-sex couples in the United States, representing about fourteen percent of the 600,000 same-sex couples of all races and ethnicities (see fig- ure 1). Many black same-sex couples live in smaller, more rural cities and towns. The top ten metropolitan areas with the highest proportion of black same-sex couple households among all same-sex couple house- holds are in the South. They include Macon and Al- bany. Georgia; Sumter, South Carolina; Rocky Mount and Goldsboro, North Carolina; Montgomery, Alabama; Jackson, Mississippi; Pine Bluff, Arkansas; Danville, Virginia; and Monroe. Louisiana (see figure 2). This panern mirrors that of the nation overall, where, ac- cording to tbe 2000 Census, 54% of the black popula- tion lives in the South (McKinnon. 2001).

Black same-sex households in the United States 1 dot=5 Black same-sex households Map by Lopez & Cheung, Inc. Data: 2000 U.S. Census, Sununary File 4

Figure 1.

The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1. 2005 523

Top 10 metropolitan areas by proportion of Black same-sex households over all same-sex households

Montgomery, AL: 50%

Jackson, MS: 44.9%

Monroe. LA: 40.6% Pine Bluff, AR: 66.4%

Danville, VA: 41.2%

Rocky Mount. NC: 43.5%

Goldsboro. NC: 48.4%

Sumter, SC: 54.2%

Macon, GA: 51:6%

Albany, GA: 63.3%

Key: City Name: Percent of Black same- sex households over all same-sex households in that metropolitan area Map by Lopez & Cheung, inc. Data: 2000 U.S. Census, Summary File 4

Figured

Black same-sex couple households report lower median annual Black same-sex couple households report lower median annual household income than black married opposite-sex couple households (see figure 3).

Median annual household income of Black family types

$60.000

$50k $50k

10,000

Black Black female m:ile

Black Black Black Black married cohabiting women men

Figure 3. Same-sex couples* Opposite-sex couples Single parents

•Includes households in which both partners are Black, as well as Black interracial couples (Black-other).

524 The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2005

Black female same-sex couple households report a median annual household income of $9,000 less than black married opposite-sex couple households, while black male same-sex couple households report a median annual household income of $2,000 less than black married opposite-sex couple households. Black same-sex couple households also report lower median annual household income than white same-sex couple households (see figure 4).

Median annual household income of same-sex couples

$80,000 ^

70,000

60,000

$67k

$64k

Female same-sex couples

Male same-sex couples

White Black (households in which both partners are Black)

Interracial

(Black-other)

Figure 4.

Black female same-sex couple households report a median annual household income of fully $18,000 less than their white counterparts, while black male same-sex couple households report a median income of $20,000 less than do white male same-sex couple households. Black same-sex couple households are also less likely to report home ownership than black married opposite-sex couple households (see figure 5).

The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1. 2005 525

Home ownership

71% 68%

Black White

Same-sex couples

Figure 5.

Black Black married cohabiting

Opposite-sex couples

Black single parents

Sixty-eight percent of black married opposite-sex couple households report home ownership compared to only 54% of black male same-sex couple households and 50% of black female same-sex couple households.

According to 2000 Census data, black same-sex partners are presumably more likely than white same-sex partners to rely on public sector domestic partner health insurance, which is threatened by the anti-gay marriage amendments. Black men and women in same-sex couples are about 25% more likely than white men and women in same-sex couples to hold public sector jobs (16% of black same-sex partners hold public sector jobs, versus 13% of white same-sex partners) (see figure 6).

Puhlic sector employment

25%

20 - 20% 19%

Black White Figure 6.

Same-sex partners

Black married

Black cohabiting

Opposite-sex partners

Black single parents

526 The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29. No. J, 2005

These data suggest that anti-gay family policies may disproportionately affect black same-sex couple families in the U.S. because they are more likely to be raising children than white same-sex couples (see figure 7).

Children present in same-sex households

60%

52%

Figure 7. Black White Black White

Male same-sex couples Female same-sex couples

Black female same-sex couples are raising children at nearly twice the rate reported by white female same-sex couples- 61% versus 38%. respectively. Black male same-sex couples in the U.S. are raising children at almost twice the rate reported by white male same-sex couples, 46% versus 24%.

The families created by black same-sex couples are in many respects similar to other black families. Black female same-sex couples are raising non-biological (foster, adopted, or other related) children at the same rate as black married opposite-sex couples (14%), while black male same-sex couples are raising non-biological children at a slightly lower rate than black married opposite-sex couples (ten percent versus 13%) (see figure 8).

Figure 8.

Types of children present in Black households*

30

20

10 1

0 1

1 Biological

B iNonoioiogicai

45%

1 32% 1

1 1U 8% mm i i mm• • • • Black Black male female

Same-sex couples

51?'̂ 47%

1 •• • 4-U1 1

| j j ^ % 1

1 1 1 4 %_ - • • Wi Black Black manied cohabiting

Opposite-sex couples

67%

1 1I1•

Black single

Many households include both biological and nonbiological children; there is significant overlap between the two types of parenting.

The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2005 527

Black female same-sex couples are raising children at almost the same rate as black married opposite-sex couples (61% versus 69%). while black male same-sex couples parent at about two-thirds the rate of manied opposite-sex couples (46% versus 69%).

Individuals in black same-sex couples are almost as likely as individuals in black married opposite-sex couples (47% versus 58%) - and more likely than individuals in black cohabiting opposite-sex couples (at 19%) - to report living in the same residence as they did five years earlier, an indicator of relationship stability (see figure 9).

Black families reporting same residence five years ago

58% 60%

Black female

Black male

Same-sex couples

Black maniiid

Black cohabiting

Opposite-sex couples

Figure 9.

Conclusion

Anti-same-sex marriage state and federal consti- tutional amendments will disproportionately affect black same-sex couples and their families because they are already economically disadvantaged compared to black married opposite-sex couples - even more so when compared to white same-sex couples. Because black same-sex couples eam less and are less likely to own their home than whites, they are more likely to feel the effects of being barred from the economic and legal benefits and protections that marriage provides. Lack of access to these benefits and protections, in tum. diminishes their earning power and thus their ability to save money, to provide for their children, to buy a house, and so on. Not being able to take advantage of a

partner's health care plan, for example, adds to the bur- den on a couple that is struggling financially. And even if a same-sex couple is so fortunate as to receive do- mestic partner health insurance through an employer, unlike a married couple they must pay state and federal taxes on it as income (Dougherty, 2004).

Same-sex partners are not eligible for 1,138 fed- eral protections and benefits available to married couples, including Social Security survivor benefits. Medicaid spend-down protections, and worker's com- pensation (General Accounting Office, 2004). Over a lifetime, ineligibiiity for these benefits means thai black same-sex couples often pay more in taxes but receive less in public benefits than other Americans. They are also ineligible for non-tinancial protections that affect job security, such as the right to take unpaid leave from

528 The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2005

work to care for one's partner under the Family and Medical Leave Act {1993).

Many municipalities and state governments (as well as corporations) now offer domestic partner health insurance to employees in same-sex relationships (along with spousal health insurance to married employees) {Willetts, 2003). Because many of the anti-same-sex- marriage amendments that were approved in the 2004 election go beyond banning same-sex marriage and ei- ther ban or threaten domestic partner health insurance, such initiatives are a particular threat to black men and women in same-sex couples.

Anti-gay leaders and organizations have long sought to divide the black and gay communities. They speak as if there are no black LGBT people experienc- ing the double-edged sword of discrimination and ho- mophobia, and even portray nondiscrimination laws covering sexual orientation as a threat to other people of color. However, data from the 2000 Census clearly

identify a large population of black same-sex couples in the U.S., more than half of whom are raising chil- dren. These black same-sex partners would benefit from nondiscrimination policies as well as the protections offered by family recognition.

Anti-gay policies, including recently passed state anti-same-sex marriage amendments, will dispropor- tionately harm black same-sex couples and their chil- dren because they further penalize those who are al- ready disadvantaged in terms of income and home ownership. Because black people in same-sex relation- ships are more likely to be raising children and work- ing in the public sector than whites, they have more at stake when anti-gay family amendments are on the bal- lot. Removing discriminatory legislation and allowing biack same-sex couples to access the benefits and pro- tections available to married people will enable a group of Americans to do more to support and protect their families.

References

Battle, J., & Bennett, M. {2000). "Research on lesbian and gay population within the African American community: What have we learned?" African American Research Perspectives, 6 (2):35-47.

Battle, J.. Cohen, C . Warren, D., Ferguson, G.. & Audam, S. {2002). Say it loud: I'm Black and I'm proud; Black pride survey 2000. New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute.

Bauman, K., & Graf, N. (200."̂ ). Educational attainment: 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Black, D., Gates, G.J., Sanders. S.G. & Taylor, L. (2000). "Demographics of the gay and lesbian population in the United

States: Evidence from available systematic data sources." Demography, 37, 139-154. Dougherty. T. {2004). Economic benefits of marriage under federal and Massachusetts law. New York: National Gay and

Lesbian Task Force Policy Institute. E)ougherty, T. (2004). Economic benefits of marriage under federal and Oregon law. New York: National Gay and Lesbian Task

Force Policy Institute. General Accounting Office. (2004, January 23). Defense of Marriage Act: Update to prior report. GAO-04-353R. Harvey, W. (2003). Minorities in higher education status report. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Justice Policy Institute. (2002). Cellblocks or classrooms? Washington, DC: Author. Kershaw, S., Connelly, M., & Sanders, E. {2004, November 3). "Constitutional bans on same-sex marriage gain widespread

support in 10 states." New York Times. McKinnon, J. (2001). The Black population: Census 2000 brief Washington. DC: U.S. Census Bureau. National Urban League. (2004). The .state of Black America. New York: Author. Ross, K. (2002, August 2). "Center appalled by MLK use in flier." The Miami Herald. Retrieved August 30, 2004, from http:/

/www. mi ami.com/mld/niiamiherald/2002/08/02/news/Iocal/37 8273 7.htm Simmons, T , & O'Connell, M. (2003). Married-couple and unmanied-partner households: 2000. Census 2000 special reports.

Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau. Retrieved August 26, 2005, from http://www.census.gov/prod/2003pubs/ censr-5.pdf

Terman, S. {2004). The practical and conceptual problems with regulating harassment in a discriminatory institution. Santa Barbara: The Center for the Study of Sexual Minorities in the Military.

The Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993. {1993). Retrieved April 27, 2005, from Department of Labor Web site: http:// www.dol.gov/esa/regs/statutes/whd/fmla.htm

The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29, No. 1, 2005 529

U.S. Census Bureau. Population Division. Fertility and Family Statistics Branch. (2002). Technical note on same-sex unmarried partner data from the 1990 and 2000 Censuses. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 26. 2005. from http:// www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/saniesex.html

530 The Western Journal of Black Studies, Vol. 29. No. 1, 2005