Talk:Gay village

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Gay village article.
Article policies
Archives: 1
LGBT Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
B This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.
This article covers subjects of relevance to WikiProject Urban studies and planning, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as mid-importance on the assessment scale.

Contents


[edit] Race? Gay *white* people.

I am extremely appalled at how this article is silent on the matter of race. It assumes somehow that we know who created/occupied/built/rioted the gay ghetto. Excuse me, but white people did most of the work and "gay whites" should be mentioned as relevant detail. Should the millions of international Wikipedians come to this article and just assume the gay movement in America was some racially harmonious gay rainbow smorgasbord then they will be deceptively mislead. Why is this an issue now? Besides the scholarly work on race, gender and sexuality, the Los Angeles Times just broke news on wealthy whites in West Village trying to push out the rowdy black and Hispanic gays invading their little historic village. This is white flight in reverse. And those who know Stonewall know how white it was. Let's not fool ourselves or the world on this very relevant perspective. 75.72.162.175 09:07, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Gays have actually been historically more racially diverse and that is indeed evident in the multiracial Stonewall riots, that indeed, on the surface, may have appeared white but were ethnically and racially diverse. I'm not sure if there have been studies done but my experience is that gays have continually been on the gentrification front as they have been more willing to move into poor and transitional neighborhoods fixing up properties and raising home values in the process. For a broader perspective these issues would probably be more relevant in the related Racism in the LGBT community with a summary section placed in this article. Benjiboi 07:18, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] unclear text

Under the picture of the Montreal station, it says: "Metro station in Montreal's Village gai. It's the largest in North America." largest what, metro station? village? can someone clarify this text? also is it in terms of square mileage, population? how large is it?

[edit] incorrect text Re: population

this statement is incorrect: "The US city with the largest gay population, by far, is New York, with an estimated 569,000 gay residents. Los Angeles is a close second with 442,000, followed by Chicago with 289,000."

If you view the source: http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsinstitute/publications/SameSexCouplesandGLBpopACS.pdf on page 8 of 25, it states actually that he is talking about metro areas, not cities.

I am now correcting this as well as adding a listing from that article of size of population by state and also size by city. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Screenie (talk • contribs) 01:17, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

I'm pretty sure that the population of the SF/Bay Area is much higher than stated and the whole table needs to be sourced more. It's a good start though! Now that the IRS and Census are more accurately counting LGBT people it might be good to incorporate those figures with proper footnote that figures count only those who self identify as LGBT people which leaves out a lot of folks who choose to not labels themselves for cultural, religious and safety concerns. Benjiboi 07:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] happy hallucinate

Some days ago, weeks ago [??], I think that I'd seen a story about a "Gay Street" in Rome, Italy.

Today, I saw a portion of a story, where there had been a streetsign that may have said "Gays Wells". Is there such a locale? Is it in Wisconsin?

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 16:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

There's numerous streets named gay but they aren't listed here. Benjiboi 16:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
True, ["There are..."] however, these two cases, to the extent that my perceptions may be accurate, have some specific memorable qualities,...

In the Roman case, it had seemed that they had specifically typewritten in English language , or American-English , in order to attract more newscameras. Very much influenced by "Greenwich Village", et al.

In the other case, it seemed to be the sort of community-sign typically employed in order to designate a district, hamlet, village, town, city, county, et cetera. I may have misread the name, as it did not linger on the screen very much. If you are aware of any district w/ a similar name in any state which has had a reign of rain in the past month, please do list it; rein the truth into my perception, if you can, please.

Thank You,

[[ hopiakuta | [[ [[%c2%a1]] [[%c2%bf]] [[ %7e%7e%7e%7e ]] -]] 21:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NY Times article

Someone may want to add the information in:

-- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 21:27, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Top US Cities

I don't fault the editor who added this, since it seems to be done in good faith and faithful to the source, BUT the source is so chocked full of errors rendering these tables useless. Lets pretend the percentages of LGBT people for each city and metro is correct (and you must pretend, because its conjecture), then the numbers do not add up for any recent census figures on the few cities I checked (Dallas and Houston being two that I checked...both 2000 census and 2006 census estimates). I am not sure how useful this information is even if it were even remotely correct, since it doesn't even attempt to say that these people all live in gay neighborhoods. As it is now, its just "sorta" interesting info that isn't terribly accurate and not related to the article. Jacksinterweb (talk) 22:15, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Couldn't have said it better myself. Quacks Like a Duck 04:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Can we pull the plug on this section? Unless there is an objection, I think its time to retire these tables. Jacksinterweb 05:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
There is something dubious going on here. I put in a link to the original ACS survey data, which does ask unmarried couples in households to identify themselves as "unmarried-partner" vs. unmarried roommates, according to the source cited in the Williams Institute study.[1] However, the ACS data doesn't declare what percentage of the entire population was gay/lesbian, let alone bisexual. Remember, the census did not ask sexual orientation! Instead, the Williams study worked like so (see page 4): the National Survey of Family Growth estimates 4.1% of Americans are gay/lesbian/bisexual; the number of "unmarried-partner" households reported in the census form (which are about 0.6% of the population) is assumed to represent GLB couples; and the total GLB population is assumed to be proportional to the number of couples. Probably the last is the most questionable assumption, since it probably depends on local rents and cultural pressures. I understand that in scientific estimates it is best not to round significant figures if the standard error or confidence interval is specified, but here... it isn't. So through the magic of the spreadsheet, a single imprecise number, "4.1%", has been turned into reams of precise down-to-the-individual counts for every state. I think that for encyclopedic purposes it is important to make the estimation clear by at least reducing the data provided to two significant figures, and it may be necessary to start considering the Wikipedia "undue weight" policies. Wnt (talk) 23:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)