<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Pink Pound Lives On&#8230;.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.benlight.org/2009/03/the-pink-pound-lives-on/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.benlight.org/2009/03/the-pink-pound-lives-on/</link>
	<description>adhoc ramblings about digital media and everyday life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 12:51:02 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Light</title>
		<link>http://www.benlight.org/2009/03/the-pink-pound-lives-on/comment-page-1/#comment-1427</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Light</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Mar 2009 16:55:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benlight.org/?p=217#comment-1427</guid>
		<description>I agree about &#039;The Gays&#039; very strange.  

Also, you are right, this research is very gay man focussed even though the term LGBT is used...  I think this is influenced in part because, and this is a bit of a guess, the survey is pushed out online via Gaydar (and possibly Gaydargirls?) Gaydar is the larger of the two communities by member base and thus they&#039;re gonna get more data from them...  Of course, there may also be some traditional stuff about &#039;men being the breadwinners in here&#039; although if they really wanted to tap into their stereotypes of course all Lesbians are homebirds who are only interested in getting married - so there&#039;s a massive market for Hilton on the civil partnerships front! ;o)  Supposedly.... 

Also yes, I also picked up on LGBT as not the norm!  Of course diversity is a wonderful thing - but to suggest diversity = consumption of Grecian 2000 and the like is just silly!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree about &#8216;The Gays&#8217; very strange.  </p>
<p>Also, you are right, this research is very gay man focussed even though the term LGBT is used&#8230;  I think this is influenced in part because, and this is a bit of a guess, the survey is pushed out online via Gaydar (and possibly Gaydargirls?) Gaydar is the larger of the two communities by member base and thus they&#8217;re gonna get more data from them&#8230;  Of course, there may also be some traditional stuff about &#8216;men being the breadwinners in here&#8217; although if they really wanted to tap into their stereotypes of course all Lesbians are homebirds who are only interested in getting married &#8211; so there&#8217;s a massive market for Hilton on the civil partnerships front! ;o)  Supposedly&#8230;. </p>
<p>Also yes, I also picked up on LGBT as not the norm!  Of course diversity is a wonderful thing &#8211; but to suggest diversity = consumption of Grecian 2000 and the like is just silly!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: suchprettyeyes</title>
		<link>http://www.benlight.org/2009/03/the-pink-pound-lives-on/comment-page-1/#comment-1426</link>
		<dc:creator>suchprettyeyes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 08 Mar 2009 21:47:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.benlight.org/?p=217#comment-1426</guid>
		<description>This is fascinating stuff. The same reports from Outright are plain alarming. I think the use of the term &quot;The Gays&quot; is an interesting one in and of itself and I&#039;d love to know how they found their straight control group to compare with. Do you know of any similar market research of gay woman? I am assuming they were not included in Outright as the reports seemed very gay man focused. Something I&#039;ve noticed is that lesbian just doesn&#039;t exist as a marketing identity as we get clumped in with all women and are seen to have little pink pound to spend (and can be seen as not as trensetting/cutting edge as gay men). I think this is quite the random cultural cliche. 

I&#039;m actually interested in the stats vs a long running Gay Times/Diva (market research) survey as I remember it used to find rather less obvious findings but then I don&#039;t recall them pitching results against straight control groups in the same way (interesting cultural point there - if straight = control does that = normative where gay is not normal?!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is fascinating stuff. The same reports from Outright are plain alarming. I think the use of the term &#8220;The Gays&#8221; is an interesting one in and of itself and I&#8217;d love to know how they found their straight control group to compare with. Do you know of any similar market research of gay woman? I am assuming they were not included in Outright as the reports seemed very gay man focused. Something I&#8217;ve noticed is that lesbian just doesn&#8217;t exist as a marketing identity as we get clumped in with all women and are seen to have little pink pound to spend (and can be seen as not as trensetting/cutting edge as gay men). I think this is quite the random cultural cliche. </p>
<p>I&#8217;m actually interested in the stats vs a long running Gay Times/Diva (market research) survey as I remember it used to find rather less obvious findings but then I don&#8217;t recall them pitching results against straight control groups in the same way (interesting cultural point there &#8211; if straight = control does that = normative where gay is not normal?!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
