22
those establishments resulted in counts of businesses that were generally one-tenth of those for
men.
14
Esping-Andersen’s defamilialization index offers a more family-specific measure, but he
calculates it for only a small subset of the countries of interest here.
15
For the United States, there was one two-year period in which the President and majorities in
both houses of Congress were Democratic.
16
The categories counted are gay centers, gay liberation, religious groups, social clubs (of
various kinds), health service, help, gay radio station, switchboards, and help lines.
17
In Canada, a national organization was formed in 1986.
18
Because the country is the unit of analysis, these averages are not weighted by population or
sample size.
19
The differences in means between SSPR and non-SSPR countries are significantly different
for the variables from the WVS. In an individual level regression of country dummies and a
constant on the WVS variable, the average coefficient was statistically significantly different
between the two groups of countries.
20
Some variables in Table 2, such as the divorce rate, Catholic background, and national gay
organization, were never statistically significant, so they are left out of the regressions reported
in Table 2.
21
Cohabitation is positively correlated with positive attitudes about homosexuality: the
correlation coefficient is 0.63 and statistically significant with “homosexuality justified.”
22
Church attendance and union density are strongly negatively correlated, with a statistically
significant negative correlation coefficient of –0.64. Union membership and church membership
are not signficantly correlated.
23
This question was not asked in Switzerland and Poland, so in Table 4, I substituted the value
derived from the question about whether homosexuality is ever justified. The values of the two
tolerance measures are quite different for South Korea, which could be due to a translation
problem. Given the paucity of gay businesses and organizations in South Korea, I have used the
low score on beliefs about the justifiability of homosexuality to code South Korea as a 0 for
tolerance.
24
Note that there are no contradictory terms, that is, no combination of values has both countries
with and without SSPR laws. This is also true in the model with more variables discussed
below.
25
In this analysis I use the fs/QCA software by Ragin, Drass, and Davey, 2003.
Convention