This year on IDAHOTB, we want to call on the community of professionals engaged in policy research and planning across the LAC region to put their diagnostic tools to use to help to close the LGBTQ+ data gap. Taking these steps can help to redress the invisibility of the LGBTQ+ populations on the region’s policy agenda. Similar challenges have been successfully addressed in research on other sensitive social issues, such as violence against women.
Survey interviewers must be trained to safeguard safety and confidentiality, and to recognize situations that may harm the integrity of the responses or the individuals themselves. It is preferable that surveys with SOGI questions be carried out privately with individual interviewees or to be self-administered. However, when this is not possible or when the objective of the study is focused more on characterizing exclusion based on SOGI, rather than population size, other sampling methods already in use in LAC (such as Respondent Driven Sampling or snowball sampling) can also provide valuable data. Gather representative data: The inclusion of SOGI questions in census survey or use of randomized or stratified sampling of clearly definable populations (students, subnational or national populations) for SOGI research would be optimal.
Yet, there is also a real need to find alternative approaches that are less direct, and as such, potentially less threatening. The Williams Institute has compiled best practices for asking SOGI questions in population surveys that can help guide future endeavors.
And in Chile, a survey by MOVILH reported that 50% of LGBTQ+ individuals have experienced discrimination, and of these, only 7.4% reported it to the authorities. For example, a study by Mexico’s National Council for the Prevention of Discrimination ( CONAPRED) found that 30% of respondents would reject their children for being gay, while a Health Ministry survey in Costa Rica found that 20% believed LGBTQ+ persons should not frequent the same public spaces as the rest of the population. Many studies in the region have sought to measure societal attitudes toward LGBTQ+ persons, and direct experiences with discrimination. The Pew Research Center highlights strong stigma and the fear it produces as key causes of under-reporting. In the Caribbean, for example, in the Attitudes Towards Homosexuals’ survey, 9% of respondents did not identify their sexual orientation in Barbados, 15% in Guyana, and 6% in Trinidad and Tobago.
In surveys that ask direct questions about SOGI, not all participants respond. In our study of existing research, Towards a Better Understanding of Discrimination based on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity, we found little data that can be used to estimate the size of the LGBTQ+ population in LAC. These same forces can also cause their outright omission in social and economic research and data collection, making inequalities hard to diagnose. For many LGBTQ+ persons, the risk of exposure can seem too great to self-identify. But how can we fully understand and address these challenges if LGBTQ+ individuals are absent from the data that inform our public policies?ĭiscrimination and social stigma can force targeted individuals to hide themselves. Today is the International Day against Homophobia, Transphobia and Biphobia (IDAHOTB), a global annual landmark dedicated to increasing our awareness of the struggles people with diverse sexual orientations and gender identities (SOGI) continue to face. Without such information, how can we possibly treat our social ills? Much like x-rays and blood tests, data helps to identify where the problems lie and to uncover their causes. In the realm of public polices, data is a great diagnostician.