Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Young LGBT people are more politically engaged than the rest of Generation Z

Opinion

Deckman is a professor of political science at Washington College. Kromer is director of the Sarah T. Hughes Field Politics Center at Goucher College.

Last year's midterm elections were a "rainbow wave," with more openly lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people elected to public office than at any other time in American history.

According to the Victory Fund, a political action committee that supports LGBT candidates, a record 627 openly LGBT candidates ran for public office in 2018, with 399 appearing on the general election ballot.

However, LGBT Americans still remain woefully underrepresented in political office, which suggests that political participation by older generations of LGBT Americans is less frequent than political activism by their straight counterparts. This dynamic, however, may be changing with future generations.

Recent surveys on young Americans in their late teens and early 20s — including one we conducted — reveal that the youngest generation of LGBT Americans is far more engaged in politics than their straight counterparts.


In a June 2017 national survey of 2,023 young Americans age 15 to 24 conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute and MTV, one in 10 young Americans identified as LGBT.

This group of LGBT Americans reported higher levels of engagement on seven separate measures of political and civic participation.

Young LGBT Americans were roughly twice as likely as their straight counterparts to report attending a political rally or demonstration, donating money to a political campaign or contacting an elected official. They were also much more likely to engage in online political activism, whether that involved signing a petition, posting about an issue that mattered to them, or following or liking a political campaign.

Combining these individual acts of political participation into a scale, the average young LGBT American reported participating in 3.7 political activities in the past year. Meanwhile, young straight Americans averaged 2.1 activities.

This difference in behavior is also present among members of what we call the "activist class": the young people who have indicated a strong desire to run for office one day.

In May, we conducted a survey of alumni of IGNITE, a nonprofit that trains young women to run for public office, to better understand how they benefited from the organization's programming. We also wanted to understand their views about political engagement more generally and to get a better sense of their political identities.

Here, we focus on the 410 respondents who are 18 to 24 years old.

Seventy-two percent of IGNITE respondents identified themselves as heterosexual and female. The rest identified with another sexual orientation (homosexual, gay, lesbian, bisexual or something else) or gender identity (transgender, gender queer, gender nonconforming or something else). Given the current estimates of the number of openly LGBT Americans nationally, IGNITE is drawing a disproportionately high number of LGBT participants to its programming.

On all comparable measures, IGNITE participants who identify as LGBT reported higher levels of political engagement than straight IGNITE participants, although the differences are not nearly as stark as those in the PRRI survey.

(This may be a reflection of the fact that the IGNITE alumni are a group that self-selected into a women's political training program and thus are more likely to be politically engaged compared with the average 18- to 24-year-old.)

LGBT IGNITE participants averaged four political activities in the past year, compared with 3.2 activities done by heterosexual women.

Both surveys show that this new generation of young LGBT Americans resoundingly rejects both conservatism and the GOP. This may be a factor in their heightened engagement.

Donald Trump's presidency could also be sparking interest in political action. For example, Trump's support of the right of business owners to refuse service to gay Americans because of religious differences has outraged the LGBT community. In the PRRI/MTV study, fewer than 6 percent of LGBT respondents had a favorable view of Trump.

In the IGNITE sample, 57 percent of LGBT women said that Trump's election encouraged them to participate in politics, compared with just 50 percent of the straight women.

Moreover, the PRRI/MTV survey found that only 8 percent of young LGBT Americans identify as conservative, compared with 25 percent of their straight counterparts. More than half of LGBT Americans in the PRRI/MTV poll are Democrats, with just 8 percent declaring they are Republican. The rest identify as independent or with a third party.

The IGNITE survey paints an even bleaker picture for the political right when it comes to young, activist members of the LGBT community. No LGBT respondents to the IGNITE survey identified themselves as a conservative or Republican.

There is very little research on the political engagement of LGBT Americans historically, either because many such Americans may have been reluctant to disclose their status, or because most older surveys did not ask about sexual orientation. So, we can't say for sure if this younger cohort of LGBT Americans participates more in politics than previous generations.

But our work suggests that political engagement among young Americans will largely be driven by progressive activists, including a disproportionate number of LGBT Americans.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Conversation


Read More

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

US Capitol and South America. Nicolas Maduro’s capture is not the end of an era. It marks the opening act of a turbulent transition

AI generated

Nicolas Maduro’s Capture: Sovereignty Only Matters When It’s Convenient

The U.S. capture of Nicolás Maduro will be remembered as one of the most dramatic American interventions in Latin America in a generation. But the real story isn’t the raid itself. It’s what the raid reveals about the political imagination of the hemisphere—how quickly governments abandon the language of sovereignty when it becomes inconvenient, and how easily Washington slips back into the posture of regional enforcer.

The operation was months in the making, driven by a mix of narcotrafficking allegations, geopolitical anxiety, and the belief that Maduro’s security perimeter had finally cracked. The Justice Department’s $50 million bounty—an extraordinary price tag for a sitting head of state—signaled that the U.S. no longer viewed Maduro as a political problem to be negotiated with, but as a criminal target to be hunted.

Keep ReadingShow less
Red elephants and blue donkeys

The ACA subsidy deadline reveals how Republican paralysis and loyalty-driven leadership are hollowing out Congress’s ability to govern.

Carol Yepes

Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis

Picture a bridge with a clearly posted warning: without a routine maintenance fix, it will close. Engineers agree on the repair, but the construction crew in charge refuses to act. The problem is not that the fix is controversial or complex, but that making the repair might be seen as endorsing the bridge itself.

So, traffic keeps moving, the deadline approaches, and those responsible promise to revisit the issue “next year,” even as the risk of failure grows. The danger is that the bridge fails anyway, leaving everyone who depends on it to bear the cost of inaction.

Keep ReadingShow less
White House
A third party candidate has never won the White House, but there are two ways to examine the current political situation, writes Anderson.
DEA/M. BORCHI/Getty Images

250 Years of Presidential Scandals: From Harding’s Oil Bribes to Trump’s Criminal Conviction

During the 250 years of America’s existence, whenever a scandal involving the U.S. President occurred, the public was shocked and dismayed. When presidential scandals erupt, faith and trust in America – by its citizens as well as allies throughout the world – is lost and takes decades to redeem.

Below are several of the more prominent presidential scandals, followed by a suggestion as to how "We the People" can make America truly America again like our founding fathers so eloquently established in the constitution.

Keep ReadingShow less
Money and the American flag
Half of Americans want participatory budgeting at the local level. What's standing in the way?
SimpleImages/Getty Images

For the People, By the People — Or By the Wealthy?

When did America replace “for the people, by the people” with “for the wealthy, by the wealthy”? Wealthy donors are increasingly shaping our policies, institutions, and even the balance of power, while the American people are left as spectators, watching democracy erode before their eyes. The question is not why billionaires need wealth — they already have it. The question is why they insist on owning and controlling government — and the people.

Back in 1968, my Government teacher never spoke of powerful think tanks like the Heritage Foundation, now funded by billionaires determined to avoid paying their fair share of taxes. Yet here in 2025, these forces openly work to control the Presidency, Congress, and the Supreme Court through Project 2025. The corruption is visible everywhere. Quid pro quo and pay for play are not abstractions — they are evident in the gifts showered on Supreme Court justices.

Keep ReadingShow less