March 10, 2005
D.C.: Young and Restless
If you're 35 to 54 years old, single, and scouring the web for some singles action, well, D.C. may not be the best place to get lucky.
The Post reports today that newly released census figures find that the city's pool of 25 to 34 year-olds is increasing faster than the national average, though at the expense of the 35-54 crowd. The census estimates show an increase of 9.5 percent for 25-29 year-olds and a 2.3 percent increase for 30 to 34 year-olds from 2000-2004, compared to an 
William Frey (at right), a scholar at the Brookings Institution and expert on demographics, notes:
The District is middle-aging like the rest of the country. Where it's different is it gets these younger people. Where it's losing out is in these prime early middle-aged years. These baby boomers made a beeline to the suburbs.
This youthful boom has been a boon to the city's economy, if rising property values and increasing development are any indicators. And, as DCist has noted in the past, it is young men that seem to getting the better end of the deal -- the 52.9 percent of the District's residents that are women are left fighting for the mere 47.1 percent of residents that are men.
|
Dudes, hate to wake you up to reality but those 52% of women "fighting" for the 47% of men in DC has a delusional element we thought DCist would realize. There's a big gay community in DC, if you haven't noticed, and the last census estimated the number of same-sex couples as high as 18% of the total number of unmarried cohabitants in DC. That's a big chunk of people you left out of your calculations.
So fight on ladies, it's an even more hopeless effort than you realize. And party on, gay guys :) Logan Circle welcomes you...
My mistake. I suppose my skills in demography are not as well developed as I would have hoped. Then again, if anywhere near 18 percent of D.C. men are gay, that leaves the 52 percent of D.C. residents that are women working with an even smaller pool of available men--29 percent of D.C. residents! That's approaching 2 to 1 in our favor!
The 18% figure referred to "unmarried cohabitants," not all residents, and without knowing what percentage of the city's population are "unmarried cohabitants" we can't know how big a slice of the population that 18% represents. The figure also would include lesbian couples as well as gay men, and there's no obvious guide for how to distribute it across the two genders.
In other words, the numbers in your first estimate may have been a little bit suspect, but the math in your "revised" estimate is completely off base.
Called out on my horrific handling of numbers not once, but twice. Proof positive that I should stick to the written word. Thanks for the corrections!
To clarify the male same-sex couple issue...
The 2000 Census shows 248,590 households in DC, of which 2,587 are represented by male same-sex partners, roughly 1 percent of total households. Not exactly an earth-shattering statistic. However, there are numerous flaws with the data:
1) Same-sex partners are less likely to file as "partner" households, but rather as "unrelated" households;
2) Partner data doesn't capture the gay population that is single, which would significantly beef up the numbers.
Hope I haven't bored y'all to tears.
I recall reading somewhere that 5% of DC households were gay - by far the highest in the country - but that doesn't really matter at all since gay "couples" are theoretically off the market anyway (being coupled up and all...)
Regardless, that 47% probably includes a lot of gay men (I mean, throw a rock anywhere in this city - I guarantee you that you'll hit a couple of mo's - but please don't actually throw rocks at people, and if you must, please keep them aimed at the Republicans), so (allowing for a modest number of lesbians) single hetero women in this city really do get the short end of the stick...
Looks from the demographics of the respondents, Martin, like you's got yourself a 'mo' following among your readers. You'd better re-affirm your straight-hood, otherwise, the ladies are agonna be focusin' their sights on someone else, or your special other is gonna be awonderin'.
I would have written, too, being a semi-professionally certified homosexual myself, to point out that there are gay folk lookin' for other members of the same gender. I wouldn't have couched it with a wagging finger tho, just a 'hey, by the way, we're here, too.'
Thanks for your enjoyable posts.
I think District-wide statistics are incredibly misleading, especially for the very focused group of people who read this blog.
I'd be more interested in a study that showed simple interaction across racial and economic lines in the District. I'd guess that personal interaction between disadvantaged communities in NE and SE and the "professional" hubs of NW are minimal (not a political statement, just the facts).
This, of course, would make District-wide demographic statistics like these almost meaningless on a personal level (i.e., single hetero women compared to single hetero men).
Again, you're right.
The statistics don't adequately reflect the obvious economic and social divisions in the city.
I've never seen this much discussion over demographics! Maybe I should post on this more often...
"Oh, people can come up with statistics to prove anything, Kent. Forty percent of people know that."