Gays in Boston?

[lexicon506]

I thought I'd try to give a boost to the new and empty "general" section with a controversial topic....

How does Boston rank in terms of gay population? You'd think that since it is the only big city in the only state that allows gay marriage, gays would be flocking to the area. But still, whenever one thinks of gay friendly cities, places like San Francisco and New Orleans come to mind, not Boston. Is it simply that the gay community is not as visible here? Or have gays stayed away from Boston for some other reason, despite the perk of legal marriage?

 

[ezcheese]

they're around. they just don't go blatantly running around yelling "i'm gay! i'm gay! look at me!"

i remember a huge gay event that took place in the common last summer and it was truly a thing to behold for someone like me, having moved from north carolina. i felt like i was living in a progressive city; it was neat.

 

[BostonSkyGuy]

I love you Johnny Cakes!

 

[Patrick]

another forumer was describing a section of the city where all the 'gay' gays go. i forget the section he mentioned, but i recall the post because he is gay and said he made sure to stay away from that section because of his dislike for the stmosphere. i want to say it was the south end, but i dont know wnough about boston to know if that is a ridiculous or plausible thing to say. statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant. the perk of legal marriage i would assume would drive the numbers up, but i could be wrong.

 

[Matt]

oh man...this one could go in any direction. I've stated many times that i'm gay...so here we go...i'll bite

Yeah, pat, you're right....for the past 20 or so years, the south end (for those not familiar....if you're driving south from 93 into the city, it's a large swath of land behind the prudential and the hancock -- versus the back bay, which is in front of it)...or if you're driving north into the city on the southeast xpressway, it's is on your left before you enter the city/mass pike/chinatown (not to be confused with south boston, which in this case would be on your right)

anyway....the south end was in complete disrepair and very shady for almost a century, until the late 60s/early 70s when people started renovating...primarily artists, young urban pioneers and the gay community started moving in...leaving areas of the back bay and bay village to the north. I'm sure ron and garbribre, for two, have stories about the old south end.

Economics have continued to change this neighborhood....as it became a very 'trendy' place to hang out (a miniture 'greenwich village'? i heard that a lot when I lived there) -- tens of fantastic restaurants and art galleries...and young hetereo yuppies followed in the 90s....leading to ridiculously expensive condos...which are now bringing in the older, affluent empty nesters.....driving out the pioneers who rented there, who helped turn it around (the artists, gays, etc.). Just the way things go.

The gay population has dispersed since....many feel dorchester is the 'new south end'...but nothing is concentrated....they're scattered throughout many neighborhoods...as you all know...dorchester is freakin' enormous.

Sign of the times? maybe....one could argue progress -- integration/tolerance/acceptance -- is showing there isn't really a need for a gay ghetto....what's the point? I'm in this camp...there are many in the gay community who fiercely disagree...feel the need for continued community, grouping geographically, 'pride' parades, waving the flag, etc. Their choice (I would call these the 'gay' gays that pat was referring to)...and, of course, many of that group would call me 'homophobic' for disagreeing with this mantra (???)....now THAT issue is controversial!! So, yeah....many people who are gay don't feel the need to make it a point of every conversation....no more than any of you do about being straight or whatever

(We live in cambridge and no one gives a rat's ass....no more than I care that our neighbors are straight, white, black, jewish, catholic, protestant, or latino....different than my experience when I did live in the south end (and hated it)...labeling was a big thing...got the same pressure to wear the fraternity letters all the time again.....)

 

[Matt]

... statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city...

sure...the ones who actually admit who they are. Make no mistake....there are many, many 'gay' people in the world who wear a wedding ring and have children.....never would they check the 'gay' box on a survey (for that's where these stats ultimately come from)....i'd check it because I don't give a shit

actually.....VITO.....that is a classic example (sopranos for those of you who don't get the johnny cakes reference)

 

[DudeUrSistersHot]

statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant.

10%? uhh... no.

 

[Patrick]

statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant.

10%? uhh... no.

Don't as me how in the world they come up with the numbers, or what the degree of accuracy is that characterizes the estimates, but to the best of my knowledge (from sociology courses etc.) most people put a number of one out of every ten people as being gay by nature (dont want to debate the nurture v. nature thing, please). this number varies, of course, depending on whose opinion you seek, but 10% is the figure I have heard most consistently reported. that doesn't make it right. but assuming it is correct uuntil someone gives me reason to believe otherwise, that would place boston's gay population at roughly 10%, or rounding, at 60,000.

the 10% mark would be especially true for a large city because the more people you have the less prone you are to have a bad batch of random sampling over which the bell curve of sexual orientations can fall.

sorry if you touched on any of these topics already, matt, i responded to dude before reading your post.

 

[Patrick]

... statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city...

sure...the ones who actually admit who they are. Make no mistake....there are many, many 'gay' people in the world who wear a wedding ring and have children.....never would they check the 'gay' box on a survey (for that's where these stats ultimately come from)....i'd check it because I don't give a shit

actually.....VITO.....that is a classic example (sopranos for those of you who don't get the johnny cakes reference)

yeah I realized there were plenty of hising homosexuals who might appear to be totally happy as married individuals, but I thought the 10% figure accounted for these in a "best possible estimate." is that wrong? in other words, are you saying that the 10% number is strictly from survey check boxes? if so, then we must have a drastically understsated idea of who is, and who is not, gay. although the definition of 'gay' is a tricky one, too, because im sure it is more of a spectrum than a cut and dry break between straight and gay, as im pretty sure you would agree with. so that begs the question, how many people are what i would consider 'gay' and would consider themself bi or some variation of straight? this is probably the trickiest thing to ever estimate since no one wants to be stigmatized by admitting it when they arent ready to and since everyones definitions must differ tremendoously.

i was taking a totally random and pretty much useless but interesting nonetheless course in the sociology of deviance. and being homosexual was a topic we discussed. dont confuse deviant with bad, that was the disclaimer i remember...but anyway...

there was this case study of men who would stop on highay rest stops and have sex (of any sort, not sure about the details) with other men. they were mostly traveling business men. but the catch is they were married. and when asked by the person doing the ehtnography (sorta, but without the participation in the sex acts, which would make it a 'true' ethnography) they all described themselves as heterosexual. so whats my point? to be gay, you have to do more than engage in sex with a man, although that would be enough for most people to slap on a label. you have to actually self-identify as being gay. that would make a problem for statistics.

 

[Matt]

bingo....

total can of worms on this one.

SO MUCH OF THIS HAS TO DO WITH CULTURE AND RELIGION...our views on masculinity...feminity, etc.

So...if a man has any sort of sexual relations with another man, he is branded 'gay' by our culture for the rest of his life. If a woman has any sort of sexual relations with another woman...it's 'sexy', 'experimenting', 'natural', blah blah blah...ummm....are you freakin' kidding me??? So...women can happily be on the spectrum and our society deems it ok...but a man cannot? Blows my mind...makes utterly no logical sense. It makes many people (and yes...mostly 'straight' men) very, very uncomfortable to go there.

Yes, pat...this 1/10 is widely known for one because of kinsey...and yes...it was the result of personal disclosure either verbally or by checking a box. I can rattle off at least 5 people at the top of my head who would never check that box....and spend a good deal of time lying to the world (and themselves)

am NOT a fan of some 'lifestyle' choices many people make with their sexual practices....and that means people of all sexual persuations...'gay' defined people don't hold the candle on that one at all.....but I can see why some people stay hidden sexually....so much hatred out there...and people turn that hatred/anger inward....and are so afraid to be themselves (please...there have been questionable comments on this very board!)...it's pretty sad, actually....totally fucked up...

 

[Patrick]

well if it was the kinsey report, then i dont think we can consider the one in ten number correct at all. The same research suggested that heterosexuals were far wilder in the bedroom than previously assumed by popular opinion. Unless I am mistaken (could be confusing the research study with another one) the kinsey report has been widely abandoned as a source of academic knowledge, due mostly to self-selection bias in the study, meaning the 'freaks' in the bedroom were a disproportionate share of respondents. ill see if i can find some info on this.

and yes it is fuct i agree. it all stems from insecurity...people lash out at others when they are insecure about themselves. and you might get a straight person who hates gays who feels totally 'secure' with their own maculinity and sexual orientation, but chances are they learned their behavior from someone who was not as secure. same thing happens with racial jokes and instances where american automakers gang up and beat the hell out of japanese toyotas...all relates to one form or another of insecurity whether it be job, sexual, or racial superiority.

lexicon sure knew what would get the general section back to life.

 

[Matt]

yeah...and a healthy dose of some deep-seeded fear....we view the world by our own vantage point, like it or not...some people freak out when they see someone else who has a totally different perspective (gender, race, sexuality, nationality, religion etc etc etc)....based in fear....unless that person wants to admit it (and colosally get over themselves)...nothing's going to change...yeah...don't get it...but of course...you and i beat to the same drum

iif someone is totally 'secure' in themselves...it wouldn't really matter what cultural influence there is....if they are willing to have the balls to seperate the both...and stand up for what they believe in. 'coming out' isn't just for gay people...it's for anyone who is afraid to stand up for whatever they are or believe in.....the fear of rejection or whatever is the exact same...cult behavior....know a lot of 'straight' cowards, that's for sure....

 

[DudeUrSistersHot]

statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant.

10%? uhh... no.

Don't as me how in the world they come up with the numbers, or what the degree of accuracy is that characterizes the estimates, but to the best of my knowledge (from sociology courses etc.) most people put a number of one out of every ten people as being gay by nature (dont want to debate the nurture v. nature thing, please). this number varies, of course, depending on whose opinion you seek, but 10% is the figure I have heard most consistently reported. that doesn't make it right. but assuming it is correct uuntil someone gives me reason to believe otherwise, that would place boston's gay population at roughly 10%, or rounding, at 60,000.

the 10% mark would be especially true for a large city because the more people you have the less prone you are to have a bad batch of random sampling over which the bell curve of sexual orientations can fall.

sorry if you touched on any of these topics already, matt, i responded to dude before reading your post.

I'd be very surprised if it were even as high as 5%. Probably 3% or less

 

[Patrick]

statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant.

10%? uhh... no.

Don't as me how in the world they come up with the numbers, or what the degree of accuracy is that characterizes the estimates, but to the best of my knowledge (from sociology courses etc.) most people put a number of one out of every ten people as being gay by nature (dont want to debate the nurture v. nature thing, please). this number varies, of course, depending on whose opinion you seek, but 10% is the figure I have heard most consistently reported. that doesn't make it right. but assuming it is correct uuntil someone gives me reason to believe otherwise, that would place boston's gay population at roughly 10%, or rounding, at 60,000.

the 10% mark would be especially true for a large city because the more people you have the less prone you are to have a bad batch of random sampling over which the bell curve of sexual orientations can fall.

sorry if you touched on any of these topics already, matt, i responded to dude before reading your post.

I'd be very surprised if it were even as high as 5%. Probably 3% or less

Well the point of the above discussion is that you cannot tell the gays in the population simply by surveys and statistical extrapolations...what would make you think you could tell by observation, especially when you don't even live in the city? I think you better get ready to be surprised.

 

[kz1000ps]

another forumer was describing a section of the city where all the 'gay' gays go. i forget the section he mentioned, but i recall the post because he is gay and said he made sure to stay away from that section because of his dislike for the stmosphere. i want to say it was the south end, but i dont know wnough about boston to know if that is a ridiculous or plausible thing to say. statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant. the perk of legal marriage i would assume would drive the numbers up, but i could be wrong.

That was me, but one thing first, I said I am NOT gay and that's the reason why I stay away. The place I was talking about is the Back Bay Fens park, anywhere along the waterfront where those invasive species the phragmytes live.

Around my neighborhood (East Fenway/ southwest Back Bay), I'd say the gay percentage is somewhere up around 20%, if not more. There's the Fenway Community Health Clinic right behind my building, which specializes in needs of the gay community, and then there's the usual contributors such as the area arts and music schools. 3 buildings away from me, there lives a "pack" (in the words of my friend who works at a restaurant they frequent) of gay men who have gotten breast implants, wear makeup, womens-fitted clothes..almost the whole shebang. And they're not the only ones.

Although they're at this point in time dispersed all over the city, I can only conclude that this area has to be one of the more prominent centers for them. They're everywhere....and to be completely honest, I've grown quite tired of the looks and propositions, whether by their eyes or words....they're nearly as bad as the stereotypical horny male chilling on the corner making cat calls to the foxy ladies walking by. But I must also say that this isn't how the majority of gay people act (of course), but there's certainly a vocal and visible minority around my area...

 

[Ron Newman]

As a straight male, my impression is that the gay and lesbian population is large, generally accepted, and dispersed through many neighborhoods.

Fenway, South End, Jamaica Plain, Cambridge, Somerville, Arlington come to my mind first, but really you'll find gay people everywhere.

 

[atlantaden]

kz, after having read your post, I've come to the conclusion that you must be one hot dude; all those looks and propositions! I should be so lucky! I imagine that you must have the same luck with the girls since, if the gay boys find you hot, then I'm sure the girls must be all over you! Life is good!

 

[kz1000ps]

I don't like boosting my ego, but yeah I'm a fairly attractive guy. And I dress fairly well too. So I guess overall I'm fair. And yeah, hehe, I can sweet-talk my way into any girls'........heart. I'm a guy with the gift of gab...it makes it seem like I "care" about what they have to say HA-haha :lol:

 

[Patrick]

another forumer was describing a section of the city where all the 'gay' gays go. i forget the section he mentioned, but i recall the post because he is gay and said he made sure to stay away from that section because of his dislike for the stmosphere. i want to say it was the south end, but i dont know wnough about boston to know if that is a ridiculous or plausible thing to say. statistically speaking, there should be about 60,000 homosexuals, both men and women, living in the city, holding all else constant. the perk of legal marriage i would assume would drive the numbers up, but i could be wrong.

That was me, but one thing first, I said I am NOT gay and that's the reason why I stay away. The place I was talking about is the Back Bay Fens park, anywhere along the waterfront where those invasive species the phragmytes live.

Around my neighborhood (East Fenway/ southwest Back Bay), I'd say the gay percentage is somewhere up around 20%, if not more. There's the Fenway Community Health Clinic right behind my building, which specializes in needs of the gay community, and then there's the usual contributors such as the area arts and music schools. 3 buildings away from me, there lives a "pack" (in the words of my friend who works at a restaurant they frequent) of gay men who have gotten breast implants, wear makeup, womens-fitted clothes..almost the whole shebang. And they're not the only ones.

Although they're at this point in time dispersed all over the city, I can only conclude that this area has to be one of the more prominent centers for them. They're everywhere....and to be completely honest, I've grown quite tired of the looks and propositions, whether by their eyes or words....they're nearly as bad as the stereotypical horny male chilling on the corner making cat calls to the foxy ladies walking by. But I must also say that this isn't how the majority of gay people act (of course), but there's certainly a vocal and visible minority around my area...

It was actually another forumer, I just didn't want to say his name because its not my place to be pointing out people's orientation (although I don't think he would have cared either way). There are tons of gay people in portland, but to tell you the truth I can't pick them out. sometimes i am surprised to leanr that someone I know is gay because they are not the stereotypical version we are all so used to imagining in our heads. the people you described with breast implants sound more like trans-sexuals/hrmaphrodites/cross dressers than gays. i know of some cross dressers here in maine who are totally straight, but weird. I have never understodd the cross dressing thing, but then again ive never tried either.

 

[Patrick]

I have never understodd the cross dressing thing, but then again ive never tried either.

haha is that what one might call a freudian slip or what