Queer Money

[handiacefailure]

Found out about this podcast a few weeks ago.   A gay couple does a biweekly podcast    They talk about money matters and how it applies to the LGBTQ community and they are pretty funny.   

 

 

[+ FrankR]

47 minutes ago, handiacefailure said:

Found out about this podcast a few weeks ago.   A gay couple does a biweekly podcast    They talk about money matters and how it applies to the LGBTQ community and they are pretty funny.   

 

 

Please clarify…are they pretty or are they funny? Hard to believe they are both! 😉

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

3 hours ago, handiacefailure said:

Found out about this podcast a few weeks ago.   A gay couple does a biweekly podcast    They talk about money matters and how it applies to the LGBTQ community and they are pretty funny.   

 

 

The subject manager alone sounds hilarious 😆 

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

Gay Men, particularly married Gay Men, have higher income than heterosexual couples.  However, lesbian and transgender people and couples have less income.  So "queer" money is a queer story indeed, as it's two different tales for Gays vs the other queers.

 

[+ sniper]

On 7/12/2025 at 4:20 PM, Vegas_Millennial said:

Gay Men, particularly married Gay Men, have higher income than heterosexual couples.  However, lesbian and transgender people and couples have less income.  So "queer" money is a queer story indeed, as it's two different tales for Gays vs the other queers.

 

There's a selection bias in stats on coupled gay men's finances in that part of the reason they are "out" and in the data is they can afford to be, while straight data includes everyone.  I definitely delayed coming out until I felt financially secure that even if I lost my job over it I would find another one etc. And I know a lot of single gay fiscal trainwrecks.

[KeepItReal]

29 minutes ago, sniper said:

 And I know a lot of single gay fiscal trainwrecks.

Or as I like to call them: my regular hires! 

[Luv2play]

These days there are more professional lesbian couples who have reached retirement age and are in the >150K$ income bracket. My sister is one of them. But they don’t participate in the gay community. They live in a college town and lead a quiet life. 
They have younger neighbours who are in similar circumstances eg. 2 doctors pulling in >500k$ annually. Times have changed since the 70’s when I was young. Most lesbians I knew then were poor. 

[+ Charlie]

I'm wondering how one finds reliable statistics on such a subject.  I would think most of these generalizations are based on anecdotal information, because many gay couples are not legally married, so they don't file tax returns with that status, and single gays don't file as "gay." Most gays probably don't even reveal their actual incomes to their friends; I can only guess at the incomes of even my closest friends.

[Luv2play]

On 9/27/2025 at 12:29 PM, Charlie said:

I'm wondering how one finds reliable statistics on such a subject.  I would think most of these generalizations are based on anecdotal information, because many gay couples are not legally married, so they don't file tax returns with that status, and single gays don't file as "gay." Most gays probably don't even reveal their actual incomes to their friends; I can only guess at the incomes of even my closest friends.

My sister has been in a gay relationship for over 18 years. For a number of years they both filed as single even though they were living together. 
Then the tax authorities got after them and they had to restate their joint income going back 3 years. They were considered as common law partners for that time. 
The math worked in their favour though as they were able to split their income and reduce the rate my sister paid as she was the higher earner. 
Her partner though lost some benefits she was previously claiming as a low income person. She had to pay those back and got a wrist slapping from the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario. 
 She’s a fundamentally dishonest person though and we don’t get along. 

[+ SirBillybob]

On 9/27/2025 at 12:29 PM, Charlie said:

I'm wondering how one finds reliable statistics on such a subject.  I would think most of these generalizations are based on anecdotal information, because many gay couples are not legally married, so they don't file tax returns with that status, and single gays don't file as "gay." Most gays probably don't even reveal their actual incomes to their friends; I can only guess at the incomes of even my closest friends.

The data, then, reflect conjugal filing which enables stratification by same-sex vs different-sex couples as well as extracting single filing data, given that each partner files and enables individual income stratification by gender in the context of homosexual orientation. It is legally imperative and usually advantageous, so reasonably reliable data are accessible. That enables extracting comparator data for homosexuals in relation to coupled heterosexuals. One bias, as you suggest, is the lack of single filer data by orientation, or nondeclaration of relationship status, essentially under the radar. Couple income is also influenced by parental leave and stay-at-home partners. 

There is a huge Canadian study on some of these questions, reflecting trends from 2000-2019. 

If you really want to get into the weeds on nonconjugal data where individual income filers opt to identify as gay male, lesbian, or bisexual male or female, it so happens that bisexuals are, by far, the lowest income earners (data from 2015-18 reported in 2022). Gay/lesbian orientation appears to nullify the gender wage gap seen for heterosexuals but does not reduce the gap between gay/lesbian persons and heterosexual men. Those data are only as good as willingness to enter orientation on mandatory statistics forms where for some items the preference to not answer is permitted, or the answer is non-verifiable.

One very tentative explanation for the bisexual income disparity is that those who reported bisexuality tended to be younger, so possibly earlier within career trajectory and more comfortable transcending the orientation binary as far as simply checking a low-impact demographics box. 

Edited Sunday at 09:14 PM by SirBillybob

[+ SirBillybob]

1 hour ago, Luv2play said:

My sister has been in a gay relationship for over 18 years. For a number of years they both filed as single even though they were living together. 
Then the tax authorities got after them and they had to restate their joint income going back 3 years. They were considered as common law partners for that time. 
The math worked in their favour though as they were able to split their income and reduce the rate my sister paid as she was the higher earner. 
Her partner though lost some benefits she was previously claiming as a low income person. She had to pay those back and got a wrist slapping from the Integrity Commissioner of Ontario. 
 She’s a fundamentally dishonest person though and we don’t get along. 

Such sentiment suggests that you may be admonishing multitudes of young guys to declare substantial proportions of your hard-earned retirement net income to CRA, RevQC, etc. 😂

Edited Sunday at 09:25 PM by SirBillybob

[Luv2play]

8 hours ago, SirBillybob said:

Such sentiment suggests that you may be admonishing multitudes of young guys to declare substantial proportions of your hard-earned retirement net income to CRA, RevQC, etc. 😂

I’ve actually discussed it with one of my regulars. He declares the income he derives from our sessions but includes it with a side business he operates. 

[+ SirBillybob]

7 hours ago, Luv2play said:

I’ve actually discussed it with one of my regulars. He declares the income he derives from our sessions but includes it with a side business he operates. 

Side business … so both active and passive income. 😏

[+ Vegas_Millennial]

On 10/5/2025 at 2:07 PM, SirBillybob said:

Such sentiment suggests that you may be admonishing multitudes of young guys to declare substantial proportions of your hard-earned retirement net income to CRA, RevQC, etc. 😂

 

On 10/5/2025 at 1:04 PM, SirBillybob said:

The data, then, reflect conjugal filing which enables stratification by same-sex vs different-sex couples as well as extracting single filing data, given that each partner files and enables individual income stratification by gender in the context of homosexual orientation. It is legally imperative and usually advantageous, so reasonably reliable data are accessible. That enables extracting comparator data for homosexuals in relation to coupled heterosexuals. One bias, as you suggest, is the lack of single filer data by orientation, or nondeclaration of relationship status, essentially under the radar. Couple income is also influenced by parental leave and stay-at-home partners. 

There is a huge Canadian study on some of these questions, reflecting trends from 2000-2019. 

If you really want to get into the weeds on nonconjugal data where individual income filers opt to identify as gay male, lesbian, or bisexual male or female, it so happens that bisexuals are, by far, the lowest income earners (data from 2015-18 reported in 2022). Gay/lesbian orientation appears to nullify the gender wage gap seen for heterosexuals but does not reduce the gap between gay/lesbian persons and heterosexual men. Those data are only as good as willingness to enter orientation on mandatory statistics forms where for some items the preference to not answer is permitted, or the answer is non-verifiable.

One very tentative explanation for the bisexual income disparity is that those who reported bisexuality tended to be younger, so possibly earlier within career trajectory and more comfortable transcending the orientation binary as far as simply checking a low-impact demographics box. 

That's not surprising that bisexual people earn the lowest income.  With twice as much of the population to have sex with, who has time to work!

[+ SirBillybob]

2 hours ago, Vegas_Millennial said:

 

That's not surprising that bisexual people earn the lowest income.  With twice as much of the population to have sex with, who has time to work!

And, for some, the income metrics skewed lower by larger sugar bowls.

Edited yesterday at 12:04 AM by SirBillybob