First, law professors are law professors; the law is what they know how to do, and many of them would like to keep doing it. They know how to extrapolate from race and gender praxis to same-sex praxis when both are, by and large, market-free. But dabbling in unfamiliar or "unprecedential" marketplace myths might impose unanticipated risks, or even threaten them with obsolescence. Moreover, much of LesBiGay civil rights litigation historically took a defensive or reactive posture, which encouraged theorists and practitioners to rely on existing legal analyses rather than to venture into new and forward-looking frameworks.¹²²

Second, many law students (from which some law professors eventually come) may profess an ignorance or fear of mathematics, statistical analysis, quantitative research, and other market matters. To them, commercial discourse of any character might be frightening as the mere overture to deeper forays into finance. Third, in a related sense, law is lofty, whereas commerce is crass, or at least that is the aphorism that lawyers may espouse. For them, the dignity and respect attaching to human liberty and equality in the tales of the law should not be debased by stories of the "buying into" and "selling out of" commodified identities.¹²³

Fourth, and hardly last, LesBiGay law professors typically share the resistance to societal oppression that generally falls more heavily on their nonprofessional brothers and sisters. Though they may themselves constitute a privileged class, these academics tend to be sensitive to the charges of elitism that may be lodged against them even for conceptualizing LesBiGay struggles in commercial terms. Since the queerfolk, in particular, expanded their LesBiGay studies to include the intersectional concerns of race, ethnicity, gender, and class, they and other LesBiGay scholars might fortify themselves against any market-based analysis that could threaten to obscure their concerns. Because race, ethnicity, and gender track economic class differences so closely, they may fear that any such analysis deeply tied to capitalist exploitation likely will reinscribe these class differences and all of their correlatives.