Queer Experience Survey 2018

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

[qesurvey]

Posts on this project have already been flagged for removal by tumblr’s automated system.

The posts on this blog have been backed up to three locations: archive.org, archive.is, and my personal hardware.

As soon as a new location for hosting this project has been identified, I will let you know where we are moving to.

Thank you for your patience.

I know this is a hard time for all of us.

[qesurvey]

Our appeals may have been approved. The notification of posts being flagged has disappeared, but I have not received any kind of confirmation email.

I still intend to move this project to another public platform as soon as I find one whose spread and messaging functions I feel are appropriate to the project’s needs.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

Posts on this project have already been flagged for removal by tumblr’s automated system.

The posts on this blog have been backed up to three locations: archive.org, archive.is, and my personal hardware.

As soon as a new location for hosting this project has been identified, I will let you know where we are moving to.

Thank you for your patience.

I know this is a hard time for all of us.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

[butts-bouncing-on-the-beltway]

Calling all LGBTQIA+ folks

My agency is currently allowing me to direct it’s efforts to be more inclusive and positive towards LGBT+ clients. This means writing policy on what inclusive language looks like, what emotional and social support for LGBTQIA+ issues would look like, that sort of thing.

If you’re interested in contributing to this direction please let me know! This is with regards to both sexuality and gender and other aspects you as an LGBT+ person feel would be important.

You can either reply to this post that you’re interested, or message me directly on Tumblr.

This offer is on-going because it will likely be a long process however I really need some responses to start my proposals with by Friday 11/23/18.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

[aroacepagans]

Oh, btw cus I haven’t seen any posts about it yet, the 2018 asexual census survey is up, and people should defiantly go take it so that we can continue to have up to date information on community demographics.

You can find it here if you’re interested 

[wardenofannwn]

Why? Why is demographic information so important?

[aroacepagans]

Demographic information, and other information gathered by this survey can help us recognize and address community needs, gain funding for ace community issues, and help us improve research on asexuality.

If I’m trying to fund a group for ace sexual assault survivors, then I want hard numbers to show potential donors that will make them say “yes, this is a problem that I should put money twords”

If I’m doing research on the intersection between trans-antagonism and ace-antagonism then it helps to be able to access data on how many ace people identify as trans/GNC befor I start my research, so I can understand the scale of what I’m looking at.

Demographic information is important for a lot of things and the people who run the ace census very graciously synthesize and provide that information for us for free, so while no one is under any obligation to take the survey, I do highly suggest that you do whether you’re ace or not (they need comparative data as well). They do important work and if you have the time it’s good to participate.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

vikomprenas asked:

"For the time being, as long as you provide credit, citation, or attribution, you are welcome to use the data and writing here freely." this is exactly CC-BY

So it is!

I have such a difficult time with copyright and legal terminology, even the ones intended to be highly accessible. That’s why I have a legal editor.

I’ll ask them to confirm this for me tomorrow, and see about getting one of those little buttons on here that lets people know about the attribution stuff.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

hailmaryfullofgrace55675 asked:

Hi. I'm updating an LGBTQ+ terminology webpage for my university. Can I, crediting you, use your definitions of prejudice, discrimination, oppression, heteronormativity, and gender binarism?

Absolutely!

If I ever manage to develop a comprehensive enough understanding of creative commons licenses, I imagine I’ll put up one of those eventually.

For the time being, as long as you provide credit, citation, or attribution, you are welcome to use the data and writing here freely.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

[qesurvey]

Hey so, you know how people in the notes of your posts like to claim how 10k responses is too small a response pool?

https://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/lgbtq-in-the-us-poll

Here is an article abt a comprehensive poll of the LGBTQ community that has… 880 responses. Not even 10% of what y’all got. Y’all are good. (Granted, Buzzfeed is hardly the highest quality of news anywhere but still.)

—

You might be surprised about the quality of sourcing on Buzzfeed. The only issues they have with fact-checking are over 5 years old, or the result of trying to break news stories too quickly. In terms of research postings, they tend to be significantly higher quality than some more traditional, “mainstream” media sources.

This, of course, refers to their journalistic departments. Their entertainment department leaves much to be desired.

However, as this article comes from their journalism department, and as they are one of the few popular news outlets which offer extensive LGBT[…]+ news without being explicitly LGBT[…]+ focused, it’s quite a helpful resource.

I will say this: Buzzfeed has much, much more money than we do. Which is to say, any money at all. 

As such, they were able to high a national research group, WINS, to perform a more randomized and thus more representative survey. A sample of ~900 respondents is plenty large enough, when randomized, to draw some very significant conclusions about a population of 1.5 million people. 

Without access to a random population of LGBT[…]+ respondents, this survey requires a much larger sample to be comparably representative.

[thesaviorofmisbehavior]

Peer reviewed research journals have been know to accept qualitative studies with six participants and treat the findings as legitimate. I’ve seen quantitative peer reviewed articles with ~100 respondents, which is p common especially in psych, soc, and lgbt+/human sexuality studies. A small pool does not make the findings and trends less legitimate, it just means that someone else now has a platform to get funding for a larger project with a more representative sample.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

snakelung asked:

Why don't you include transsexual along with transgender on the list of gender identities?

To be honest, it genuinely didn’t occur to any of us that we should.

Now that you’ve pointed it out, this is a significant oversight, and it will be addressed in the 2019 and later versions of the survey.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

lesbiangerblin asked:

Have you looked into doing statistical analysis into the results that you get? Rather than just percentages, doing the math to see statistical significance and that kind of thing?

Due to the enormous sample sizes and limited randomization, any T-test is going to produce a p-value of less than 0.01, and an ANOVA test produces similar “highly significant,” values. Margin of error calculations will give a margin of well under the 0.1% I already use as my standard of publication on this blog.

For more detail on why I do not publish statistical analytics on this data on this blog, here are some previous posts on the methodology of this survey and its results.

[Queer Experience Survey 2018]

Hey so, you know how people in the notes of your posts like to claim how 10k responses is too small a response pool?

https://www.buzzfeed.com/dominicholden/lgbtq-in-the-us-poll

Here is an article abt a comprehensive poll of the LGBTQ community that has… 880 responses. Not even 10% of what y’all got. Y’all are good. (Granted, Buzzfeed is hardly the highest quality of news anywhere but still.)

—

You might be surprised about the quality of sourcing on Buzzfeed. The only issues they have with fact-checking are over 5 years old, or the result of trying to break news stories too quickly. In terms of research postings, they tend to be significantly higher quality than some more traditional, “mainstream” media sources.

This, of course, refers to their journalistic departments. Their entertainment department leaves much to be desired.

However, as this article comes from their journalism department, and as they are one of the few popular news outlets which offer extensive LGBT[…]+ news without being explicitly LGBT[…]+ focused, it’s quite a helpful resource.

I will say this: Buzzfeed has much, much more money than we do. Which is to say, any money at all. 

As such, they were able to high a national research group, WINS, to perform a more randomized and thus more representative survey. A sample of ~900 respondents is plenty large enough, when randomized, to draw some very significant conclusions about a population of 1.5 million people. 

Without access to a random population of LGBT[…]+ respondents, this survey requires a much larger sample to be comparably representative.