Labour phase 2

Labour are imploding.

RT @simpsons_DG: So, you like doughnuts, huh?. Well, have all the doughnuts in the world! Ahahahaha!

First solo paper for 18 months 😭.

Trans subpops.

Also the guides themselves aren’t a perfect representation of LGBT+ space. establishments were curated by Bob Damon who was gay + white, also the consumers reflect this demographic. This leads to bias in venue selection by underrepresenting spaces for lesbians, LGBT+ PoC, and….

providing MSA-level estimates until 2003 (I think).

The MGG data span from 1981 to 2003, but I focus on the 90s due to the availability of relevant contextual data. Main issue is that Census data on same-sex partner households isn't available before 1990 at the MSA level. Also ACS didn't start. .

Will be updating the paper as I have a load of robustness tests/descriptives to add to the supplemental material. But wanted to get this out ASAP.

3 takeaways: . 1. We get an overview of establishment dynamics in terms of the stability/volatility of different types of LGBT+ establishments. 2. We shouldn't neglect LGBT+ spaces in small-city geographies. 3. Quantitative methods are super useful in LGBT+ spatial research.

This convergence in outcomes across city sizes may reflect a broader homogenization of socioeconomic, demographic, or cultural conditions influencing LGBT+ establishments during the 1990s.

This suggests that factors such as economic vibrancy.or cultural prominence associated with city size were not decisive in shaping LGBT+ establishment trends between 1990 and 2000.

In these models, I find that smaller city status did not have a statistically significant impact on the entry, closure, or persistence of LGBT+ establishments between 1990 and 2000.

I also estimate a series of DiD models to assess turnover dynamics in smaller cities relative to other MSAs.

The growth in same-sex partner households suggests an increasing visibility of LGBT+ populations in these areas.

However, between 1990 and 2000, these areas posted stronger economic gains and a dramatic increase in same-sex partner households, which could indicate an emerging potential for LGBT+ establishments.

In 1990, “small(er) city” MSAs were less socio-economically advantaged than other MSAs, potentially limiting their capacity to support LGBT+ establishments.

these places are structurally different to other MSAs on various characteristics:

To this end, I also look at trends in MSAs with a population between 50k-500k. Here's establishment counts and types in these smaller MSAs for 1990 and 2000.

I also look at establishment trends in MSAs with varying population sizes. There's a tendency in the existing scholarship to focus on larger cities, but smaller cities also begin to emerge at LGBT+ hubs in the 90s.