Content Provider Category Question...

[Lee]

Why is it that whenever a guy is 'naked' on his own, they are automatically put in to a 'gay' category?

Why not put them in to a category such as...

Males
Guys
Solo Men
Etc...

I know its stupid but sometimes this really bugs the hell out of me, just because a guy is on his own and naked, that doesnt make him suitable for a gay website $0.02

Regards,

Lee

[longboardjim]

I am agreed but it's "automatic" to assume a "naked man" is not for "straight" ( there are very few "women sites" ) , I tried explaining once to a client that the content could be considered "gay" if the model performed with "toys & such" of course we all know there are straight men out there that like "anal stimulation".

jim

[Seth]

, just because a guy is on his own and naked, that doesnt make him suitable for a gay website

Umm, yes it does. It certainly doesn't make him gay but 99% of the people that will want to see him naked are men.

[longboardjim]

I'm one of the 99% but it makes no nevermind to me if he's gay or straight ( interpreted: you add alittle more alcohol to straight for gay result! ) , I'm sure it probably doesn't matter to the average gay viewer. ( interpreted: "straight" only becomes an issue if it's a "drama" and the "straight hunk" is playing a "gay role!" )

I find it amusing at times when I get a "nervous" straight guy model I always tell them I'm going to shoot you "straight" and then hand them a pair of "boxer shorts" to wear v.s the sleazy "thongs" , it's kind of a "lionel blanket" approach - charlie brown :crazy:

jim

[JOELK]

I have a "gay" solo feed that is up on a few straight sites as bonus content and it burns some bandwidth.

[webnet]

I think is because the girls not watch porn, when appears a man is for a gay people ;-)