Washington Post Accidentally Mistakes Argentinian Gays For Their Rich, Educated American Counterparts


In discussing the 140 gay weddings that have taken place so far in Argentina since the country legalized marriage equality, the Washington Post‘s Juan Forero unleashed this doozy: “Gay couples, she said, have spent as much as $25,000 on the big day, far outspending their heterosexual counterparts. As in the United States, gays in Argentina are relatively well-educated and upwardly mobile.” Score one for generalizations! GLAAD is so upset they’ve found a reason to use the word “hackeneyed”; we’re told via email the group is “reaching out to the Washington Post to discuss this article and the false and hackneyed content.”

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #argentina #glaad(gayandlesbianallianceagainstdefamation) #media stories and more


  • CJ

    Where is the link to the Washington Post story??

  • peteNsfo

    Wasn’t it Scalia that said, the gays have more income and don’t need special protection under the law… (paraphrasing) Can anyone find that quote?

  • CJ

    Gay affluence has been an increasing stereotype for the past 10+ years in my opinion. If I recall, there were some studies or articles about this in recent years. I remember hearing that marketing companies and the media were the ones most “guilty” of continually promoting this perception of gay individuals and couples. Will & Grace, Queer Eye for the Straight Guy, HGTV showing rich gay couples renovating their houses, etc. In my opinion, you also have a handful of “out” gay celebrities, giving similar impressions of gay/wealth/popularity. Straights AND many gays equally believe in this “affluent” perception. And yes, Scalia did make a reference to it a few years back. Of course, there are many other gay stereotypes too.

  • Chris

    surely there are more offensive stereotypes?

  • Bareback Hussein Osama

    This means I can raise their taxes!

  • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

    How about some fact checking?

    1) Juan Forero is a man; Juanita is the female name. But this is a Juan, and if you go to the Post web site you can see Juan is a Juan.

    2) It is a myth that gays earn more than straights and that lesbians earn less than straight women. The Williams Institute study of the US Bureau of the Census American Community Survey reveals the reality: straight men earn 15% MORE than gay men; lesbians, though earning less than gay and straight men, earn about 15% more than straight women.

    Check out the report which covers singles and couples.

    3) The purpose for perpetuating the myth is as stated in @No. 2 PeteNSFO. By repeatedly stating the gays earn more income, wingnuts and fundies use that false information to make average Americans think that we don’t deserve civil rights equality since we can simply purchase the rights we need. That is a very effective tool and its a shame that Gay, Inc. has failed to address correcting this notion.

    4) Gays WITHOUT children do tend to have more disposable income JUST LIKE straights without children. Raising children costs money and lots of it. But childless straight couples are the one who receive the most benefits; not us. While both childless gay and straight couple save the costs of raising children, straight couples also receive all the economic benefits of marriage.

    What is important to not is that approximately 1 in 3 lesbian and 1 in 4 gay households include children. So for many, there is not any extra disposable income, indeed for those, there is LESS, 15% LESS than for their straight counterparts.

    5) To PeteNSFO, yes Scalia wrote in his dissent in Romer v Evans (the case against Colorado’s Amendment 2) the myth that hays have higher disposable income. You can Goggle the case and dissent, then use “FIND” for “have high disposable income” and you’ll have it.


    I do love seeing that picture, above, of the happy Argentine couple. They were one of the 6 couples who were married before the new law was enacted and had to seek a jurisdiction that not only married them but the judge in their case threatened indictment against the judge brought in by wingnuts attempting to have the marriage invalidated. The happy couple here fought hard and won, for themselves and for all Argentines. True heros.
    Also, there is an excellent article from the Williams Institute (if you don’t know the Williams Institute, it is a think tank/study institute at UCLA that focuses on GLBT issues; highly regarded in academia) for the myth (also has a couple hot photos too):

  • Jeffree

    @Mike in Asheville: Thank you for putting the record “straight” on the myths about the incomes of gay men & women. I hear those tired old stereotypes from decades ago getting trotted out again and again.

    No one who claims our economic prowess seems to call on the fact that, untill ENDA is passed, some gay men/women may be doing well financially but that there’s no economic security as long as we can be fired *just* because of sexual orientation in many states/cities.

    Plus, that economic advantage of being DINKs is eroding as many couples adopt children.

    Media portayal of gay couples focuses on “guppies” and not those of us who wait tables, do customer service, perform home health-aide services or work in retail, etc. Not all of us are lawyers, doctors, floral shop owners or home decorators !

  • Samwise

    I wish people would stop spreading this false idea that all gay people are wealthy and successful.

    But not as much as I wish it was true!

    :::goes off to cook some Ramen noodles:::

  • Ben

    Who the fuck cares about this fluff?

  • Hal Shipman

    “Gay couples, she said, have spent as much as $25,000 on the big day, far outspending their heterosexual counterparts.”

    Bull. Shit.

    Even if that was the average bill for a gay wedding, which is NOT what she says, but then tries to imply, straight couples spend far more than that all the damned time.

Comments are closed.