Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site mhuxm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!alana
From: alana@mhuxm.UUCP (whipple)
Newsgroups: net.motss
Subject: Re: no wonder we look bad
Message-ID: <515@mhuxm.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 9-Feb-86 12:41:05 EST
Article-I.D.: mhuxm.515
Posted: Sun Feb  9 12:41:05 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 11-Feb-86 06:10:31 EST
References: <500@drutx.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill
Lines: 20

What Brad brought up is traditionally a problem for the gay community.
Unfortunately, institutions that we would like to be politically
correct are in truth run by entrepreneurs attempting to make a living.
Perhaps they have noble intentions, but they still must sell their
products.  Supposedly many businesses have been reluctant to advertise
in the ADVOCATE due to its pink (now mottled) section.

How can you sell a magazine to a limited target population except by
appealing to its lowest common denominator, in this case, homoerotica?
I also would think that if the publication is so enormously successful
that it is the leading gay (probably mostly homosexual) publication in
the state, it could afford financially and on the basis of its
reputation to branch into less ephemeral matters than one's next lay.

We should also consider that, probably, for a lot of people, this is
their only exposure to gay people.  Where else should they place their
personal ads?  One's baser instincts must be served before going on to
more enlightened stuff.

Alex