The social integration of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals: Exploring the role of the municipal context

TY - JOUR

T1 - The social integration of lesbians, gay men and bisexuals: Exploring the role of the municipal context

AU - Fischer, M.M.

AU - Kalmijn, M.

AU - Steinmetz, S.

PY - 2019/11

Y1 - 2019/11

N2 - This paper examines possible differences between lesbians, gay men and bisexuals (LGBs) compared to heterosexuals with respect to their integration into the residential neighbourhood. By means of a multi-level analysis, we examine if there is a gap in social integration between LGBs compared to heterosexuals, and if so, to what extent municipality characteristics can account for variations in this gap. Specifically, we test a cultural hypothesis (i.e., how liberal or conservative the cultural climate is) and a social hypothesis (i.e., how large the share of LGBs is). In total, we analyse 7,320 LGBs and 114,298 heterosexual respondents from four pooled waves of the Dutch Safety Monitor (2012–2015). We link these individual level data to an external survey, which allows the measurement of the cultural climate in each municipality. Overall, we found little evidence that there is an integration gap between LGBs and heterosexuals in the Netherlands as a whole. We find some support for the social hypothesis and no support for the cultural hypothesis. The analyses highlight the particular role of Amsterdam. While both heterosexuals and LGBs are less integrated in Amsterdam compared to less urbanized areas, this is more so the case for heterosexuals. The social integration among LGBs does not drop as sharply as it does among heterosexuals, suggesting that LGBs also benefit socially from living in Amsterdam.

AB - This paper examines possible differences between lesbians, gay men and bisexuals (LGBs) compared to heterosexuals with respect to their integration into the residential neighbourhood. By means of a multi-level analysis, we examine if there is a gap in social integration between LGBs compared to heterosexuals, and if so, to what extent municipality characteristics can account for variations in this gap. Specifically, we test a cultural hypothesis (i.e., how liberal or conservative the cultural climate is) and a social hypothesis (i.e., how large the share of LGBs is). In total, we analyse 7,320 LGBs and 114,298 heterosexual respondents from four pooled waves of the Dutch Safety Monitor (2012–2015). We link these individual level data to an external survey, which allows the measurement of the cultural climate in each municipality. Overall, we found little evidence that there is an integration gap between LGBs and heterosexuals in the Netherlands as a whole. We find some support for the social hypothesis and no support for the cultural hypothesis. The analyses highlight the particular role of Amsterdam. While both heterosexuals and LGBs are less integrated in Amsterdam compared to less urbanized areas, this is more so the case for heterosexuals. The social integration among LGBs does not drop as sharply as it does among heterosexuals, suggesting that LGBs also benefit socially from living in Amsterdam.

KW - sexual orientation

KW - social integration

KW - multi-level

KW - neighbourhood

KW - social context

U2 - 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.06.011

DO - 10.1016/j.ssresearch.2019.06.011

M3 - Article

SN - 0049-089X

VL - 84

JO - Social Science Research

JF - Social Science Research

M1 - 102320

ER -