So does that make Santa Rosa the lesbian mecca?
I had no idea we were a lesbian mecca. Of course, I see plenty of same sex couples, but I never thought the numbers were unusually high. Maybe I just never thought about it.
I would have guessed the little towns of Guerneville or Sebastopol (just outside of SR) as having more gay and lesbian couples than Santa Rosa.
We spend a week in Guerneville every summer with our kids, and I can’t say for certain, but I usually get the distinct feeling that my husband and I, as an opposite sex couple, are the minority on the river’s beach.
Isn’t it true that there are soooo many gay people in San Francisco… that at one time, the NFL considered changing their team to the San Francisco 69 ers? 
I don’t know. Do lesbians orient themselves towards Santa Rosa when they pray? Do they make pilgrimage to Santa Rosa? Is there a big shrine there where the first lesbian worshipped?
From the statistics posted so far in this thread, it looks like the numbers are, if not equal, at least close:
Which brings the gay female population to approx. 6.5%.
Um, wow. Please no one ever accuse me of being able to do math. 7.5% is the correct value.
No. No it’s not. In fact the 49ers have had some recent trouble with the team’s relationship with San Francisco’s gay community and the team’s gay fans.
And since straight couples engage in 69 too, your “joke” isn’t funny no matter how many smilies s you attach to it.
It in fact makes it rather funnier!
This thread is raising more questions in my mind than it has answered.
First of all, how are these statistics compiled? How do they really know with any accuracy what the real gay and lesbian population is in a given place? How do they count them? How much accuracy can they vouch for?
I’m very happy for all the lesbian Santas out West. Now where are the best places for lesbians on the East Coast?
Thanks for writing in from Santa Rosa, psycat90. I followed your link and saw nothing but gay men. This reminds me:
Does anyone get the impression that gay men get more prominence, attention and information than lesbians? This may be heading in the direction of Great Debates, but don’t you think that reflects male domination of society on the whole?
One thing I can tell you is, in the trans community, it’s totally lopsided. Often MTFs are 100% represented and FTMs are zero; always MTFs and their stuff outnumber FTMs. This troubles me. One theory that probably goes a long way toward explaining the lopsidedness is that FTMs can disappear and become invisible so much more easily. They usually get attention only when they choose to. What makes me uncomfortable is the possibility that MTFs may be carrying over assumptions of male privilege into their female gender roles, and that just ain’t right. (Yeah, like I of all people should talk, right? Of all the out transpeople here at the SDMB, we’re all MTFs.)
So I’m just saying I think lesbians should get equal time, equal attention.
Market research surveys (Overlooked Opinions used to do a lot of this in the 90s; don’t know if they’re even still around and care even less) and statistical analysis. Also census data which for the last two censuses had a check box for same-sex couples sharing living quarters.
I’ve seen a lot of stories that discuss the reluctance of lesbians to self-identify in situations like health care acquisition. Lesbians tend to be underserved because of the assumption of heterosexuality, and lesbians have potential risk factors for diseases like breast cancer (no birth children, no breast feeding) that many straight women don’t. Not to paint with too broad a brush, but gay men haven’t been as able (even if they wanted to) to disappear in the health care system for the last couple of decades because of AIDS.
Going back to the early days of the modern gay liberation movement, it’s certainly true that there was a lot of division between gay men and lesbians. And a lot of that, based on the history I’ve read, is rooted in sex stereotypes and the advent of lesbian feminism. In a nutshell, lesbians got tired of being expected to make the coffee at the GAA meetings so they left, in many cases focusing more on women’s issues generally instead of lesbian issues specifically. See for example the rise of collectives like The Furies.
Men were also more sexually visible, what with bath houses, public cruising and sex, etc.
I think that women’s sexuality is seen as more trivial than men’s. Ironically, this gives them a little more freedom in some areas. Historically, woman aren’t supposed to really be in to sex anyway, so there really hasn’t been a societal difference between closing your eyes and “thinking of England” or closing your eyes and thinking of Charlene. As long as women fulfill their social roles (and many lesbians historically have married and had children despite not being in to it- as have any number of women in arranged marriages etc.) society really doesn’t mind how they spend their spare time. They simply don’t see women as powerful enough to be threatening.
Anyway, I can confirm there are plenty of women in San Francisco. Sheer numbers wise you are better off in SF than a smaller town. There is so much to see and do and so many places to go and meet people that gay people don’t really affect things much.
They all flee to Santa Cruz.
Seriously, Santa Cruz has a reputation of being a lesbian haven (i’m not sure how true that is, perhaps someone else knows better than I?)
I thought it was vampires.
Come on, there must be some lesbian spots on the East Coast. New York? Atlanta? Asheville?
Bryn Mawr?
Yeah, it does. Maybe even sven can tell us more about that. Then of course, there are the famous LUGs-- Lesbians Until Graduation-- at UCSC. But Santa Cruz is still pretty darn small, so it wouldn’t take many lesbians to make it seem like there were a lot.
BTW, I meant that even sven used to live in Santa Cruz, not that she’s a lesbian.
“Not that there’s anything wrong with that!” 
Northampton, Massachusetts has a huge lesbian population and has been called Lesbianville USA
Santa Cruz does have a lot of lesbians, but not to the point that it’s absurd or anything. For example, most of us have probably had a lesibian co-worker or two. In SC, it’s pretty much the same, except every job you work has a lesbian or two on the staff. Lesbianism is not, as far as I can tell, a major facet of social life and the gay male community is still, I think, more socially prominant (although maybe that is just a reflection of the people I know.) LUGs are a factor, as is the fact that straight girls flock to the gay establishments (which there are few of because it is such a small town) to avoid sleaze, and the sleaze follows them, which dilutes the queerness.
Certainly being a lesbian would be no problem in Santa Cruz, and nobody would even think twice of seeing two moms rolling a baby carriage or a couple of girls smooching on the beach. There is a yearly “dyke march” and heavy lesbian presence in the (large) feminist community and events. Transgendered people still raise some eyebrows and may feel uncomfortable at times. While FtM’s are pretty much adored by the lesbian community, MtFs (especially FtM lesbians are laregly shunned by both the gay and straight community.
Boston? Provincetown?
Smith College, I get it. So my Bryn Mawr guess may not have been that far off.
I guess I’ve nearly come to terms with being despised and shat upon by just about every known group under the sun. With one exception: Witches. I love Witches.