If a gay producer makes a straight video, is it bareback?

[hdkbill]

When there is a gay producer that is condom - only that starts to produce straight material, but does so without condoms, is that bareback?

Seriously, is that producer who makes condom-only gay content but does not use condoms in their straight content, are they a bareback company or not? Should their material be excluded from awards considerations?.

Chad,

The majority of the straight producers don't use condoms and I've never heard of them referred to as bareback studios. A gay studio that produces straight films, I wouldn't think, would ever refer to the film as bareback nor do I think anyone within the straight industry would refer to the studio as a bareback studio by other straight studios. Gay studios, on the other hand, would most likely use the term, which really solidifies the double standard we have within our gay industry.

Currently, straight studios who do not use condoms are NOT excluded from the straight AVN Awards. Hell, that would be excluding about 85% of the straight studios.

Bill

[hdkbill]

What about the awards shows?

If gay bareback content is excluded, why not the same standard for straight condom less films?

Because the majority of straight studios DO NOT use condoms. Or, they allow the models to make the decision whether or not to use a condom. Of course, little is said about the fact the model is offered more money for shooting without condoms....just as she is offered more money to do anal sex.

If a producer makes gay films WITH condoms and straight films WITHOUT condoms, is that gay content considered to be from a "condom" or "bareback" producer??

Nope, as I said, the word "bareback" really does not exist within the straight industry. It is only considered to be from a "bareback producer" when it is a gay film. I know a gay bareback company that also produces straight porn films, they have never been referred to in news releases or reviews as a "bareback" company when referring to their straight films.

Bill

[hdkbill]

this is an entertainment award, not a social services award.

i can't see any reason ,if this is a single-title award, why the entire output of the company should be considered. that's like denying an author a fiction award because she wrote non-fiction books the same year. if companies making gay bareback videos are eligible for the award, so should companies making str8 bareback videos.

Patty,

Actually gay bareback companies, to the best of my knowledge are not banned from participating in the GAVYN awards. GAYVN magazine reviews are films and we've always been invited to submit our films for consideration for the GAYVN awards. We choose not to participate in any of the awards handed out by the adult entertainment industry becasue we've never felt they were honest or unbiased.

If memory serves me correctly, Cobra Video, or maybe it was another bareback producer, did win a GAYVN award several years back.

Most bareback studios just choose not to participate in the hypocrisy and, like us, do not send in their films for consideration. Heck, a GAYVN award and $2.00 will buy you a cup of coffee (unless you drink Starbucks). The buyers, the people who pay our salaries, could care less.

Bill

[hdkbill]

It is all about "industry" awards and not peoples' awards - and it is all about the most money a company can spend to promote their videos - HOWEVER, since we have not been given the chance to have our titles reviewed or even advertised freely in GAYVN or other publications (because of industry standard, supposedly) we are not given a fare shake by the panelists that make up the rules for submitting content...

rather biased I'd say -

strange thing is, we ALL use the same videographers, same editors, same replication houses, same printers, and oh yes, some of the same models too -

to tell you the truth, I would never submit anything to the GAYVN group, or their awards knowing how short sighted and venomous the industry can be - not in a million years !

WELL SAID!!

Bill

[chadknowslaw]

.

I see content that is produced without condoms to be morally unacceptable to some parts of the adult industry, just as content that has blood, pissing, fisting, or other acts to be unacceptable for whatever reason. I personally do not consider content without condoms to be anything other than another niche.

However, it is ultimately the consumer who has the money in his pocket and is ready, willing, and able to buy who makes the ultimate decision as to what is acceptable and what is not.

.

[Chris Ward]

During our production of GRUNTS (The big gay movie for 2007--to be released in Dec) we had a straight stag film as part of the B-roll. The straight scene was filmed under AIM guidelines with testing and did not use condoms. Before including it in the final film we consulted with Chad Beecher and the staff of GayVN magazine to make sure this would not exclude GRUNTS from award consideration (it has a very good shot at Best Picture). GayVN responded that a straight scene without condoms in the context of an otherwise gay film would not be excluded from awards consideration. We acted accordingly based on their written assurance.

Chris Ward
Raging Stallion Studios

[chadknowslaw]

During our production of GRUNTS (The big gay movie for 2007--to be released in Dec) we had a straight stag film as part of the B-roll. The straight scene was filmed under AIM guidelines with testing and did not use condoms. Before including it in the final film we consulted with Chad Beecher and the staff of GayVN magazine to make sure this would not exclude GRUNTS from award consideration (it has a very good shot at Best Picture). GayVN responded that a straight scene without condoms in the context of an otherwise gay film would not be excluded from awards consideration. We acted accordingly based on their written assurance.

Chris Ward
Raging Stallion Studios

<shakes head>

If a man sticks his cock in a woman without a condom, that does not disqualify a film, but if a man sticks his bare cock in another man it will disqualify the movie.

I just do not understand the logic behind it. It seems like additional hurdles or requirements are placed on gay sex that are not placed on straight sex.

[CamCruise]

<shakes head>

If a man sticks his cock in a woman without a condom, that does not disqualify a film, but if a man sticks his bare cock in another man it will disqualify the movie.

I just do not understand the logic behind it. It seems like additional hurdles or requirements are placed on gay sex that are not placed on straight sex.

Well said Chad.
This shows that GayVN and Chad Beecher think that men's health is more important than women's health.

This shows that discrimination is the issue here and not the well being of both men & women on the set.

They should ALL be ashamed of this double standard!!

[chadknowslaw]

well, you know those homos are all disease-ridden whores and straight models are always clean, upright moral citizens so that justifies the disparaging treatment.

[chadknowslaw]

I think there are a lot of awards that distinguish or disallow videos that do not use condoms, not just AVN.

If the condom rule was applied to straight content, there would hardly be any content left worth judging.