An explorative approach to the cross-section of international migration and sexual preference: same-sex couples in Germany

Genus

Journal of Population Sciences

Table 3 Bivariate statistics: Union type and exogamy (in %)

A) “Migrant”	Exogamy		Endogamy		Total
	%	N	%	N	%	N
Lower boundary for “reporting type”***
Opposite-sex unions	21.9	6,989	78.1	24,964	99.7	31,953
Same-sex unions	65.2	60	34.8	32	0.3	92
Upper boundary for “reporting type”***
Opposite-sex unions	22.3	7238	77.7	25224	98.6	32,462
Same-sex unions	23.0	109	77.0	364	1.4	473
B) “Native”	Exogamy		Endogamy		Total
	%	N	%	N	%	N
Lower boundary for “reporting type”***
Opposite-sex unions	5.6	6,989	94.4	118,916	99.4	125,905
Same-sex unions	7.4	60	92.6	752	0.6	812
Upper boundary for “reporting type”***
Opposite-sex unions	5.6	7238	94.4	122534	98.0	129,772
Same-sex unions	4.2	109	95.8	2502	2.0	2611

Source: Calculations based on German Micro census SUF 2013 (N_{lower boundary} = 158,762; N_{upper boundary} = 165,318)
Note: Chi² distribution test is significant with p < 0.001. Using “upper boundary” for “migrant status”