
Originally Posted by
gaybucks_chip
AJ and I had actually discussed a similar idea a few months ago, and AJ talked to Chi Chi about it. She wasn't very hot on the idea, but I could see it as being a positive thing that could definitely have an effect.
We haven't done anything with our exterior packaging, but we made a minor change in our end credits on the DVD we just sent to manufacturing, adding a statement at the end of the production credits to the effect that "to ensure the safety of our models, all models were tested for STIs prior to production, and condoms and safer sex methods were used in all scenes in this video." Idea being that perhaps if the *buyers* are encouraged to think about the safety of the models, perhaps they will start choosing more safe titles when they buy.
That isn't to say that bareback as a niche doesn't have a place. I think that the product that people like Tony and Cam produce is a different product designed to appeal to a specific market segment. It just shouldn't (in my opinion) become the norm, and particularly not in twink porn, where the models are frequently young enough and impressionable enough to be talked into doing something without truly realizing the risks.
The sad thing is... twink producers seem to think they *need* to produce bareback in order to sell product, but this simply isn't true. Our distributor tells us that our *back catalog* product (some of which is 2+ years old) is outselling the majority of their new releases, and one of our recently re-released titles that is close to 3 years old is among the top twink titles for our distributor right now. It has everything to do with the quality of the title and not whether or not it is bareback.
I would have to discuss with AJ, but I think we would be in favor of some sort of "best practices" certification, and I do think that it could have an impact.
Bookmarks