Mapping same-sex couple family households in Australia

Abstract

The map (1:1,218,987) accompanying this report is the first to depict the distribution of same-sex couple family households across Australia. The map and the report contribute to emerging scholarship combining critical geographies of sexualities with quantitative techniques and GIS in order to advance the political claims of sexual minorities. The data were collected through the 2006 Census and obtained via consultation with the Australian Bureau of Statistics. These data included the number of same-sex couple family households for all Statistical Divisions across Australia and for Statistical Sub-Divisions within metropolitan capital cities. Geographical concentrations of same-sex couple family households were determined by calculating the proportion of couple family households that were same-sex in each Statistical Division and Statistical Sub-Division, since the Census defines cohabiting same-sex couples as a subset of couple family households. To visualise where the proportions fell above and below the national average, and thus where concentrations were found, these ratios were converted to location quotients using the Australian average as the denominator. The map combines different scales -Statistical Divisions and Statistical Sub-Divisions -to illustrate distributional patterns between inner-city and suburban areas, as well as between urban and regional localities. While high concentrations are found in inner-cities, there are also significant suburban and regional concentrations, thus contesting assumptions about same-sex couples' inner-city residential choices. Moreover, since same-sex couples were found in most Statistical Divisions, areas below the national average cannot be considered devoid of these families, with implications for constitutive identity politics and the operationalisation of equal rights legislation.

Minority stress and community connectedness among gay, lesbian and bisexual Australians: a comparison of rural and metropolitan localities

“…Inner metropolitan areas of major cities (>1,000,000) tend to be the most ‘gay friendly’ localities in Australia with comparatively large, well‐established and highly visible LGB communities. Indeed, available empirical data indicates that inner city areas in Australia tend to have: a) the highest proportion (and highest absolute numbers) of LGB individuals; and b) the lowest levels of homophobic attitudes of any locality 21,22 . As a result, respondents residing within inner metropolitan areas of major cities served as the reference group for all locality‐based comparisons.…”

Geographic Information Technologies for cultural research: cultural mapping and the prospects of colliding epistemologies

“…This sense of opening up theoretical and practical possibilities has further expanded through research collaborations with cultural geographers; the commercial encroachment of GPS chips into a range of everyday mobile technologies; and the continued rise of social networking technologies. Among a growing list of examples of applications of Geographical Information Technologies for cultural research are: participant action research in urban planning and use of mapping in community empowerment (Elwood, 2006a); mapping of gay and lesbian histories in urban neighbourhoods, informed by queer theory (Brown & Knopp, 2008); demographic mapping of same-sex couples and sexual citizenship (Gorman-Murray, Brennan-Horley, McLean, Waitt, & Gibson, 2010); mapping of environmental cultures in rural regions witnessing profound demographic change (Lake, 2009); critical work on the racialization of maps in postKatrina New Orleans (Crutcher & Zook, 2009); on tracking the gendered nature of movements through city spaces (Kwan, 2002); and historical research on the everyday practices and spaces of movie-going (Klenotic, 2008).…”

LGBT Neighbourhoods and ‘New Mobilities’: Towards Understanding Transformations in Sexual and Gendered Urban Landscapes

“…As Cresswell () argues, physical movement reflects the raw materials for the production of mobilities, and we can thus mark out, locate, map and track the changing organization of LGBT people in and beyond the cities. Some scholars have used newly available census data in the USA, the UK, Canada and Australia, as well as other quantitative and qualitative data, to plot shifting locations of businesses, services, leisure spaces and family spaces (Birrell and Rapson, ; Cooke, ; Duncan and Smith, ; Cooke and Rapino, ; Visser ; Gorman‐Murray et al ., ; Browne and Bakshi, ; Gorman‐Murray and Brennan‐Horley, ). In tracing movements over urban and regional spaces, this research finds new ‘queer’ neighbourhoods in Sydney and Melbourne (in the inner suburbs and periurban areas) and in Toronto in newly visible post‐gay, gay‐friendly and gay/straight landscapes (Visser, ; Gorman‐Murray and Waitt, ; Nash, ).…”