Eine Metastudie beschäftigt sich mit dem Verdienst von Lesben und Schwulen im Vergleich zu Heteros:
Most studies show that gay men earn less and lesbians earn more than their heterosexual counterparts, but the size of estimated sexual orientation differences varies greatly across studies. Using studies published between 1995 and 2012, a meta-regression shows that the gay sample size, sexual orientation measure, and controls for work intensity explain variation in estimates for men. For women, there are few conclusive influences although controlling for work intensity seems to be most important.
Es sind einige interessante Daten enthalten:
Wenn ich das richtig sehe, dann Verdienen Frauen die schon mal was mit Frauen hatten 15% mehr als rein heterosexuelle Frauen und Männer, die schon mal was mit Männern hatten verdienen 16% weniger, allein wegen des „Sexuellen Verhaltens“, also des gleichgeschlechtlichen Sex. Das ist ja schon ganz erstaunlich und in den biologischen Theorien besser unterzubringen als in den feministischen: Dort würde man erwarten, dass Lesben auch weniger verdienen, weil sie doppelt diskriminiert sind.
Contrary to the theory about sexual behaviors being less overt than couple status or identity, the studies using sexual behavior measures, primarily the GSS, find the largest earnings differences: –16 percent for gay men and +15 percent for lesbians. These larger differences from the GSS could result from the studies including as sexual minorities those who have had same-sex sexual partners in the past who might not be in a same-sex partnership or identify as gay or lesbian. The smaller differences found in studies using couple status is somewhat surprising, especially for women, given that many of these studies compare those in same-sex couples to those in married different-sex couples, which generally gives larger gaps than when comparing to cohabitating different-sex couples. Several studies have suggested that bisexuals may actually have worse earnings outcomes than gay men or lesbians (Carpenter 2005; Cushing-Daniels and Yeung 2009). Sexual identity questions are most likely to be used to estimate separate earnings differences for gay and bisexual respondents and that might explain why the estimates here for gay men and lesbians are smaller in size for studies that use identity measures.
Controls for work intensity are added in Model 3 showing that studies that limit samples to full-time workers or control for hours worked find smaller earnings penalties (more positive earnings estimates) for gay men by 14 and 8 percentage points, respectively. The hourly earnings study indicator coefficient was also positive, but not significant. This result is consistent with studies finding fewer hours and less full-time work for gay men than for heterosexual men (Elmslie and Tebaldi 2007; Klawitter 2011). Gender wage gaps could be the key influence here in that earnings for a current or future male partner could encourage gay men to choose more leisure or home work, but discrimination could also limit available work hours. After controlling for work intensity, the coefficients on the gay sample size and U.S. studies indicator become larger and more significant showing that studies with larger gay samples find smaller penalties for gay men and U.S. studies find larger penalties. The proportion of variation explained for men jumps considerably after adding the work effort variables, from R2 =.26 to .66.