The magazine solely represents the LGBTQ+ community. I feel as though in more progressive times as shown through 'Attitude' as an example, the medium itself acts as a positive representation of the community, For example, it represents its audience as empowering and encouraging to the rest of its community. However, this may do more bad than intended. To a large extent, having a brand almost entirely dedicated to one subgroup of society in such a manner, might reinforce the differences it attempts to stray from . Whilst it can be argued that it is a celebration of the gay community, there is a subconscious sense of unintended marginalisation of it too. Having a medium transformed to appeal to just an LGBTQ+ community, almost reinforces an 'otherness' surrounding it. Therefore, this creates a blurred line as to whether this inclusive representation instigates more circulation of harmful values within society.
Stuart Hall would suggest that Attitude utilises 'shared conceptual roadmaps' regarding the LGBTQ+ community. For example, the lexical field surrounding the community itself can be found within the copy. Words like 'queer', 'pride' and 'trans' can all be semantically associated with the community and are evident amongst the general discourse that surrounds it. The rainbow imagery is a visual code that needs little to no deconstruction; it is considered to represent the gay community universally. The 'trans' flag is yet another visual signifier of the portion of society Attitude aims to represent.
Not only do we see repeated use of flag imagery, but it is also presented to us in more abstract ways. The trans flag being represented through an interpretation of it on an eyelid, assumes that we know it is a flag and reinforces its established status within society today. This strengthens Stuart Hall's assertions surrounding products using 'shared conceptual roadmaps,' that we know and understand in society.
Comments