Table 1: Experiences of employment
discrimination.
| %Experiencing
discrim |
| Survey |
Ever |
In
Last Year |
Number
Respond |
| Philadelphia (1993)6
|
|
|
3759 |
|
Men
|
30 |
14 |
|
|
Women
|
27 |
13 |
|
| Sacamento (1994-5)7
|
|
16 |
2300 |
| Louisville(1992)8
|
30 |
|
616 |
| Legal Profession in Los Angeles (a) (1993)9
|
|
|
400+ |
|
Gay Men
|
68 |
|
|
|
Lesbian
|
58 |
|
|
| Medical Profession (1994)10
|
16 |
|
711 |
| Anthropology (1994)11
|
|
|
136 |
|
Gay Men
|
44 |
|
|
|
Lesbian
|
430 |
|
|
|
Bisexuals
|
4 |
|
|
| History(1993)12
|
37 |
|
130 |
| Sociology (1992)13
|
55 |
|
53 |
| Political Science (b) (1993)14
|
32 |
|
116 |
Notes:
(a) The Los Angles survey reported the percentage
experiencing or witnessing discrimination.
(b) This is the percentage reporting that
they had certainly or probably experienced
discrimination. |
Overall, between 27 and 68% of self-identified
lesbians and gay men surveyed reported employment
discrimination at some point in their lives. Approximately
one in seven gay people in Philadelphia and Sacramento
experienced discrimination in the year preceding
the survey.
Using the percentage of people in Table 1 who
report discrimination to determine overall discrimination
would be difficult. On the one hand, these percentages
could overestimate the actual amount of discrimination
if those experiencing it were more likely to receive
and return a survey. (Most of these surveys were
not randomly distributed.) These subjective measures
of discrimination may have led respondents to
misinterpret a particular situation.
On the other hand, the survey reports might underestimate
the amount of discrimination if respondents wrongly
concluded that a discriminating employer's action
were not really discriminatory. They may also
have been unsure as to the underlying reasons
for some employer actions. Also, gay people's
ability to hide their sexual orientation may reduce
the amount of discrimination that would occur
if employers realized that those employees were
gay.
Identifying a precise level of discrimination
is impossible given this particular survey method,
but such consistent findings across time and region
reflect gay employees' beliefs that their workplaces
are unfair or hostile.
Heterosexual colleagues as witnesses:
Heterosexual witnesses strengthen claims of
discrimination, especially since they may have
better access to evidence of the underlying discriminatory
motivations of employers. Two surveys asked heterosexuals
whether they had experienced or witnessed anti-gay
discrimination. Among heterosexual lawyers in
Los Angeles, 24% of women and 17% of men reported
such incidents. Among 343 heterosexual political
scientists, 11 to 14% had witnessed anti-gay discrimination
in hiring, reappointment, or tenure decisions.
Concealment as defense against discrimination:
Over 3/4 of the respondents in Philadelphia
believed they could suffer discrimination, and
almost equal numbers said they sometimes or always
conceal their sexual orientation to avoid discrimination.
Most of the Louisville respondents feared that
knowledge of their sexual orientation would endanger
their career or workplace position. Lawyers in
Los Angeles also reported hiding their sexual
orientation to avoid unfair treatment.
More "tolerant" workplaces still include
discrimination: People with higher levels of education
tend to have more favorable attitudes towards
lesbians and gay men.15
As a result, gay people in jobs requiring
high levels of education, such as attorneys, physicians,
and professors, are likely to have relatively
tolerant colleagues and to encounter less discrimination.
That lawyers, doctors, and academics also report
high levels of discrimination is all the more
alarming.
Evidence of clearly discriminatory motives:
In some cases, employers are quite clear about
their motives, as these comments from the legal
profession survey show: "We do not seek out
[gay] applicants and have no interest in hiring
them." "We will not hire [gay attorneys].
We have discussed the issue and how to prevent
having them as lawyers." "I would not
knowingly hire any [gay] attorney."16
Next Page | 1,
2, 3, 4
Notes:
6. The Philadelphia Lesbian and
Gay Task Force distributed over 20,000 copies of
the survey. Of the 3,759 respondents, 43% were women.
The figures for those living in the suburbs and
in the rest of Pennsylvania were similar to the
Philadelphia residents featured in Table 1. See
Larry Gross and Steven K. Aurand, "Discrimination
and Violence against Lesbian Women and Gay Men in
Philadelphia and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania:
A Study by the Philadelphia Lesbian and Gay Task
Force," June 1996. [ Go
Back ]
7. The survey was conducted by
University of California, Davis, researchers Dr.
Gregory Herek, Dr. J. Roy Gillis, and Dr. Jeanine
Cogan. [ Go Back
]
8. L. Gail Bonnell, Ph.D., and
Randall J. Davis, Ph.D., "A Survey of Anti-Gay
Discrimination in the Greater Louisville (KY) Area
1992," Fairness Campaign, Louisville, Kentucky,
1992. The researchers sent out roughly 2,000 surveys
through organizations, events, and personal networks
in the Louisville lesbian and gay community.
[ Go Back ]
9. Report, Los Angeles County Bar
Association Committee on Sexual Orientation Bias;
adopted by the Los Angeles County Bar Association
Board of Trustees on June 22, 1994. Detailed survey
questions on specific forms of discrimination revealed
bias in recruitment and hiring, in the general work
environment, in anti-gay statements and jokes, in
work assignments, in evaluation and promotion, and
in pay. [ Go Back ]
10. Benjamin Schatz and Katherine
O'Hanlan, "Anti-Gay Discrimination in Medicine:Results
of a National Survey of Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual
Physicians,"American Association of Physicians
for Human Rights, May 1994. [ Go
Back ]
11. William Leap, "The Survey
of AAA Membership Regarding Lesbian/Gay Issues in
Anthropology: A Preliminary Report," presented
at 1995 American Anthropological Assn. Meetings
in Washington D.C. Among the 528 people returning
the survey were 52 lesbians, 33 gay men, and 51
bisexuals. [ Go Back
]
12. Anna Clark, "Report on
the Survey of Lesbian and Gay Historians by the
Committee on Women Historians," January 31,
1993. [ Go Back ]
13. Verta Taylor and Nicole C.
Raeburn, "Identity Politics as High-Risk Activism:
Career Consequences for Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual
Sociologists," Social Problems, Vol. 42, No.
2, May 1995. [ Go Back
]
14. "Report on the Status
of Lesbians and Gays in the Political Science Profession,"
Prepared by the Committee on the Status of Lesbians
and Gays in the Profession of the American Political
Science Association, PS: Political Science and Politics,
Vol. 28, No. 3, September 1995. [ Go
Back ]
15. Gregory M. Herek, "Stigma,
Prejudice, and Violence Against Lesbians and Gay
Men," Homosexuality: Research Implications
for Public Policy, ed. by John C. Gonsiorek and
James D. Weinrich, Sage Publications, Newbury Park,
CA, 1991, p. 65. [ Go Back ]
16. Los Angeles County Bar Association
Committee on Sexual Orientation Bias Report, p.
6. [ Go Back ] |
