And here we go again. The New York Times is getting in on the stereotyping action this time. The article, in the Business Media/Advertising section is titled "A Community With Money? Of Course Marketers Want In on That" and it's full of the same type of mythology you might find in an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia:
Howard Buford, the president and chief executive for Prime Access, a multicultural advertising agency, said one factor favoring the group for advertisers is two-income households where both partners are men, who still make more on average than women.“When you have a male couple, that effect gets amplified,” Mr. Buford said.
And while more LGBT couples are having children of their own or adopting children, Mr. Buford said many couples did not have children, leaving them with more disposable income and “disposable time” for travel and entertainment. The sour economy might also prompt brands to go beyond their usual general market targets, Mr. Buford said. “The need for sales and profitability is more compelling than, ‘Hmm, I wonder if we should do this.’”
See? Two men make money and childless gays make even more! We're really just swimming in the money here. Seriously, you should all be gay so you can get rich, too! Except that's not the case at all: