In the section of Tops, Bottoms, and the structures of Queer studies, Poor Queer Studies Journal of Homosexuality, by Prof. Matt Brim, I found that because top universities may well be the reason for stratification in higher education, we’re noticing who is not getting the same opportunity and how these results are being managed. I thought this idea being of most concern and troublesome, that “If the top schools leave poor and minority students behind, they also leave poor and minority queer students behind. Yet these are the schools being recognized as the top schools for queer students” (15). What this means is, regardless of who is at the bottom of the exceptions to top universities, the gap is far to large to not be noticed. How can a top university for Queer studies not at least, for periods of time accept poor-Queer students who are deserving of the same desired education, despite their financial hardships ? Are they too, not part of the same community, as identified? The same poor-queer students could maintain and acquire the same academic knowledge, success, respected reputation and desired career based on their potential and capacity to learn, lead and inspire others.