So far none of the comments or your own examples are from the "m/m publishing industry". They're mainstream works from other genres which happen to feature gay/bi characters.
M/m is 'gay romance by [inaccurately-labelled] straight women' as sold by Romance publishers and there's only one NY company who has picked any of that up - Running Press. (http://www.perseusbooksgroup.com/runningpress/home.jsp)
Some gay presses also publish "m/m" (if you define it as a gay romances by straight people.)
I like a number of authors also self-publish (and that doesn't necessarily mean at a lower quality, since too many of the pro epresses don't exercise high standards at all).
SF has always had a stronger representation of queer characters than most genres. But it's not 'm/m' just because you have a gay character or even two of them. At least, it's not how the industry defines it. After our discussions elsewhere, I assumed it was the potentially exploitative stuff you focused on here? If not, I apologise for butting in.
no subject
M/m is 'gay romance by [inaccurately-labelled] straight women' as sold by Romance publishers and there's only one NY company who has picked any of that up - Running Press. (http://www.perseusbooksgroup.com/runningpress/home.jsp)
If you want to look at slash gone pro, then you need to look at stuff published by
Torquere - http://www.torquerebooks.com/index.php?main_page=index
Loose ID - http://www.loose-id.com
Samhain - http://samhainpublishing.com/category/gay-lesbian-romance
MLR - http://www.mlrbooks.com
DreamSpinner - http://www.dreamspinnerpress.com/store/
etc
Or as featured in reviews here:
http://unique.logophilos.net/
http://bookutopia.blogspot.com/search/label/genre%3A%20gay
Some gay presses also publish "m/m" (if you define it as a gay romances by straight people.)
I like a number of authors also self-publish (and that doesn't necessarily mean at a lower quality, since too many of the pro epresses don't exercise high standards at all).
SF has always had a stronger representation of queer characters than most genres. But it's not 'm/m' just because you have a gay character or even two of them. At least, it's not how the industry defines it. After our discussions elsewhere, I assumed it was the potentially exploitative stuff you focused on here? If not, I apologise for butting in.