Since you already know where to find it if you want to see it,it can stay right where it is; in the gay/bi/tranny sections.

[Link]

I think the barriers to male-male sex should be broken down, not built up. The consumer will still be able to make the choice as to whether to purhcase the movie or skip the scene altogether.

A good example of how it can be done is a French porn movie called Virginie (from Cal Vista). It seamlessly wove in a male-male scene amongst the hetero and female-female scenes. There was only one scene with male-male so you didn't get the sense it was overwhelming.

[Link]

While there have been attempts to add bisexual content to hetero porn, the results have obviously not been good enough for it to become regular content. Since porners are in it for the money, do not expect them to continue putting in content that makes their customers unhappy.

However, by all means, get yourself into the business and have a go, if you feel that strongly about it.

PS - The 'female-female sexuality' done in porn plays to heterosexual male fantasies. I would venture to say that most real lesbians would laugh at such portrayals.

[Link]

I take your point.

An interesting concept is what some people have referred to as "semi-bi" for men. This is where predominantly straight men engage in some male-male contact but don't go "all the way" as in fully-fledged sexual penetration. This might be an area where some of straight porn's big companies might want to go if they're prepared to be a little bit adventurous.

[Link]

As a porn producer, unless you have reason to believe there is a great untapped market for this, I don't think you're gonna sell much product with it. As Hardware said, if pornographers thought there was money to be made from this, I think we would have it already.

Porn and sex seem real personal for most people, and most porn buyers are real specific in what they want in their porn. And what they don't want. And even in this time of enlightenment and most people's acceptance of the sexual fetishes or proclivities of others, that doesn't mean they want to watch it, and more importantly, pay for it.

I think we've already had some stuff that I think gets close to this in straight porn, (Nacho Vidal going back and forth between girls and trannies, and I think he might have sucked his own dick in some flicks), but I don't know how well they were received.

We had an impassioned discussion about this a few years back, here.

We all got told we were homophobic because we wouldn't buy male homosexual activity in our straight porn, and hypocritical because we DO buy female homosexual activity in our straight porn.

BSD

Edited by - BSD on 4/18/2007 12:44:02 PM

[Link]

I worked as the stock clerk (person who ordered the product) and counter person in a porn shop in downtown Toronto for a few years. And I have no doubts that integrating male-male scenes into porn marketed for heterosexual men would enrage many of our customers. People who are into porn are already able to find movies or combinations of movies that meet their needs.

The straight porn customer identifies as just that, straight. Heterosexual guys are not going to be pleasantly surprised to buy a movie with gay content, nor are they going to want to spend money on things like "Virginie" (unless they already *know* that they are into male-male stuff) because nobody wants to have a DVD with a scene they know they are going to want to skip even before watching it.

The way porn is categorized into straight/gay/bi/tranny/etc. helps people find what they want.

Can you imagine having to appease a straight customer when they return with the DVD you sold them horrified at having seen something they did not pay for?

You would have to call these films bisexual, and that already exists. So would you just market it as straight with a warning sticker that mentioned to the customer that in fact it was bisexual and not really straight?

I understand that you want porn genera to lose their boundaries, and that is why you can shop in all the different sections of a store. Because adding gay content to straight films would not go over well as far as I see it.

"At the moment, it seems that anything with a male-male content gets categorized as "gay" or "bi" as if to rope it off away from everything else." -- john45 It gets categorized this way because that is how customers are able to buy things that cater to their particular likes and avoid things they dislike.

Nobody wants to pay for things they aren't expecting even if they are arguably similar. White wine better not start coming out of my red wine bottles, and if it does, I don't want to be told to accept it because hey, they're both wine.

Edited by - conquistador on 4/18/2007 12:19:07 PM

[Link]

When Howard stern had the lesbian kiss on Dave Letterman or Leno...whichever one it was...It was part of an overall strategy. Joe Sixpack goes crazy over two women kissing.....very few letters of protest......very few people thumping bible, etc.

the door is open......now a year later, when more openly gay men are being put on tv, joe average's protests seem hollow because it wasn't "an abomination""sin""wrong""against nature" when the women were kissing.....

In boxing, it's called the okey doke...wind up your left fist..and then hit them with the right.

I thought lesbian community should have protested when this "male fantasy" version of lesbianism was being used in this manner....
=====================================================

Having said that.....people can tolerate seeing an openly gay character on tv.......as part of a cast....but in porn world where you can get specifically the type of content you want (race/gender/action/setting)...people have little room in their porn collection for anything that they don't specifically want to see.

Straight man doesn't even have to look at heterosexual performers or genres or acts that he doesn't want to see...NO way he'll accept bi or gay elements.

I'm a straight man and like to watch boy girl action...specifically black curvy females with small waists..getting banged out orally or vaginally ....I might expand my tastes to include women of other color who is built a certain way or thinner or heavier black women or maybe occasional anal scene involving a woman....but that's about it.

I think it's mission impossible to expect people to accept things so far out of their personal tastes.

[Link]

What you really are saying is that people tolerate the weirdest circus acts, just not male-male sex, no matter for how brief a timespan or no matter if it there is no penetration. That is a how it is, but it is no doubt hypocritical of the people who get "horrified".

The argument about what to expect doesn't really count because a lot of weird stuff shows up in movies that were never announced. As long as the major theme is as advertised, I see no more justification for complaining at a minor male-male scene/incident compared to any other unannounced activity.

Edited by - BigMatt on 4/18/2007 2:06:05 PM

[Link]

What I am really saying is that it is all already out there and there is no need to combine it. If a viewer wants to see male/male sex acts they can, if a viewer wants to see fat white guy/skinny black midget sex acts they can as well, the two don't need to be on the same disc.

Also I never ever call someone hypocritical over their own tastes in porn. What would you expect an employee to say?

"Sorry sir, I understand that you find this sort of human behavior repulsive but you'll have to watch it because you bought and weren't expecting it. No refunds." It is seriously way better to make customers happy then to piss them off.

BigMatt: I understand that your tastes in porn are different then mine. Everyone's are different and not a single person is a hypocrite for their tastes.

If I said to you (assuming you were working in an XXX shop) that I wanted to buy a straight porn disc and then you sold me a disc that had homosexual porn (I don't like "lesbian" activity in my straight porn) while maintaining that it was "straight" for instance, I would be an unhappy customer. Not likely to come back either.

It's bad business to sell customers something they don't want to see mixed in with things they would enjoy. A dirty trick.

Edited by - conquistador on 4/18/2007 2:43:25 PM

[Link]

First of all, I am not saying people should be deceived. Far from it. Deceiving people would be tricking them into buying something that was something completely different than what they wanted. I have never advocated such a thing and I can not understand how you can say that I do. And just note that I see no reason to be rude or deragatory to a customer no matter what he/she is complaining about. I would never act the way you suggest a clerk would do in my case.

Second, this has nothing to do with "my taste". Far from it. I never claimed that people were hypocritical for their taste. However, if someone was "horrified", as you yourself put it, from any remotely gay activity in an otherwise "normal" porn movie, that person could likely be hypocritical to complain about that. The reason is that there are a lot of activities that are not everyone's cup of tea in porn these days, and a lot of these activities are thing that rarely happen in bedrooms and could be labeled "circus acts". I gave several examples of such "hardcore" stuff. Do you have people running down your doors complaining about rimming in a scene? Or dicks touching in DAP? Or the DAP scene itself for that matter? Or A2M? These acts are in my opinion more "explicit" than gay sex. And do you see many complaining vocally about them to the clerk? If they don't, they would be hypocrits to complain about comparable minor gay activity.

A movie with a notable gay scene, or prolonged gay activity, should of course not be labeled "straight". THAT would be deceiving. It would rather be labeled "straight/gay" or straight/straight/straight/gay/straight/straight/lesbian if each scene is catalogued. Simply "bi" can work, but people usually want more info than that. Besides "bi" would be meaningless considering all the lesbian scenes that are so common today. If there is a very brief gay scene or gay activity in a long movie (like max 2 minutes out of 90), I really don't think a warning should be necessary. I don't really see this being the case except for in movies that try to tell a story though.

The underlying argument here, and it should probably be mentioned so that the rest does not get lost as subtext, is that male and female sexuality is treated very differently. The reason is probably as simple as that the vast majority of porn viewers are men. So the business and their products reflect that. When on top of that, you have a society which is much more afraid of one kind of homosexuality than another, you end up where we are today. In a porn shop you can browse the shelves and buy a straight movie, simply to discover that it indeed has one or more scenes with M/F/F where the women do interact. Or a "straight" movie could actually have pure lesbian scenes. If anyone rented a movie where the opposite was the case, meaning gay activity, there would probably be disgust, outrage and complaints. This simple fact is the reason why hypocrisy is a relevant topic to the discussion. Because no one can deny that it is there.

Edited by - BigMatt on 4/18/2007 3:12:36 PM

[Link]

Male-to-male sex belongs in Gay and Bi-sexual product, not in Straight porn. This is why we have different categories
Really.

[Link]

Also, for these scenes you could use talented actors (like Christian) that have shown not to limit themselves to performing only straight sex acts.

Edited by - The Pervert on 4/19/2007 3:51:34 AM

[Link]

Edited by - The Pervert on 4/19/2007 3:53:14 AM

[Link]

Then who decides what sex acts are more explicit than others? That's a matter of taste again. Take the laws of my country for example... if there was a movie where 50+ men came into a girl's asshole and another girl put her nose in there and snorted all the cum up her nose, as long as everyone survives you could buy that stuff at my place, but no matter what a slight amount of pussy juice a woman squirts, that part of the movie would be cut out if you're "lucky", or the whole movie banned if you're unlucky.
Or someone could say missionary sex is the most hardcore stuff because the woman has to bear the man's whole weight, and while she can get vocal if she loses consent in having sex with a certain man for some reason, she still will have at least two or three seconds of unconsenting sex because she can't stop the action herself in that position. In a quadruple penetration cowgirl scene she could walk off the set before the men even managed to get all these dicks in her ass.

If anything, there should be movies without g/g interaction for those women (and men) who are into it for the men only. And if they had to look for these movies in the bi or gay or a new special sector, would they be any less happy with it? I mean, I would get squirting stuff even if I had to fetch it in the for-perverted-people-who-really-need-help sector. But they don't even give me such a sector in my country. Life is a bitch. Sometimes.

Panties - maybe not the best thing in the world, but next to it.

[Link]

Edited by - BigMatt on 4/19/2007 8:07:24 AM

[Link]

But I notice that many people think that gay sex is less acceptable than other things they don't like. I don't feel very different about heterosexual acts that turn me off than towards gay sex. I am not more turned off or repulsed by one compared to the other. My impression from this thread seems to be that most guys are in fact quite repulsed at gay sex and think that it is in a very different league than other "niche" stuff. I don't and that assumption may have caused some misunderstandings.

Edited by - BigMatt on 4/19/2007 8:27:40 AM

[Link]

Funniest and dumbest post i have ever read.

[Link]

I like the suggestion by the poster who said that companies like Vivid or Private might want to put out two cuts of the same movie, one that includes a little bit of male-male sexuality and the other that doesn't. As to how far the male-male sexuality should go, I don't mind if it's only "semi-bi" as I mentioned earlier.

[Link]

Straight porn is made for heterosexual males, so the woman(no matter what act she is invloved in or who she is doing it with) is the key to it all.

Remove the woman you remove the notion that it's straight porn.

I think the issue is some men like john are in denial about the fact they are gay or at least bisexual so they try to convince theselves that all straight men must think like them.

if you get turned on by sexual activity by two men you are gay/bisexual, it's not a crime and there is nothing wrong with you but don't try and make everybody fit into the same box as you just to make yourself feel more normal.

You are 100% normal you just have to come to terms with the fact you aren't heterosexual.

[Link]

I think I need more bran.

[Link]

In a different thread I said that I buy porn to watch beautiful women act sexually. It can be with men, other women, toys, whatever, if the woman is hot and puts on a good performance, that does it for me. I don't care about the male, his sole purpose as far as I'm concerned is to please the woman. He's a scene prop for her to work with, and will preferable take up as little camera space as possible. If the male takes centre stage, I'm out, even if it is a heterosexual scene. Any porn scene where the male is the centre of attention will not work for me, it's as simple as that. Any male-male action will necessarily put males in centre of attention, so there's no way such a scene will work. And that has nothing to do with having a problem with homosexuals, I think it's great that they have their gay parades, their clubs, their unions, and they should be given every right to live together, marry, adopt that any heterosexual couple has. But they should also respect other people's right to be heterosexual, those who don't are IMO the hypocritical ones.

[Link]

BUT as I tried saying earler in a number of ways, there are disparancies here. And I merely pointed to them, I did not ask for any sanctions like the original poster.

The dispariancies are that there is plenty of lesbian action in "straight" porn, while there is practically no gay action. Is that "fair"? "But most porn viewers are male" you say. Yep, good point. But it still doesn't change the fact that the sexes are treated differently. Lesbians are tolerated but gays are expected to stay out of straight porn. In fact, the tolerance for gay action in straight porn is not even minimal, its is none whatsoever.

So, all the arguments here, that are used on lesbians or gays, or women and men, should in my opinion be turned around to see if they hold up. If you want to show equal respect to mens and womens sexuality, you have to be able to come up with an argument you can stand for regardless on the sex you are talking about. That does not mean I argue for forcing gay scenes into straight porn. But I recognize that something is skewed or wrong about the way things are now, and I don't find it hard to admit that.

[Link]

Steve Holmes

[Link]

Zen

"...you must be ONE! ONE with your DICK!" - Jose Duval, The Pillowman

[Link]

Lesbian porn is made for straight men to watch (NOT lesbian women). While gay male porn is made for men who are gay or bisexual (and women too).

It's natural that straight porn has lesbian sex and no gay male sex. Because straight porn is bought mostly by straight males who don't get turned on by gay male sex but do like some lesbian porn because they are turned on by women.

And as Steve Holmes said, most male performers in straight movies won't do gay male porn because they are straight and don't get off on other men.

It's not a matter of not accepting gay male sex. It's just about giving the audience what they get turned on by.

[Link]

And yes I do realize gay people can watch straight porn for other reasons, but they are not the target audience.

[Link]

Edited by - hardware on 4/22/2007 1:48:46 AM

[Link]

As far as I can see the OP wants to take bi porn and label it as straight. You aren't breaking barriers by doing that, you're simply mislabeling a product.

[Link]

Relatively minor things can ruin an otherwise good straight scene for me. If male-male contact/action was a regular occurence in regular 'straight' porn, there would have to be some pretty great stuff on the rest of the disk to compensate for it.

If it were to occur in a scene with my favorite female(s), it would ruin that scene for me as I often buy dvds for the presence of just that one girl. I would probably take out my video editing software and try to edit the scene to salvage it in terms of being watchable to me, but I would be pissed off if I had to do this more than occasionally (in fact, I already do this sometimes with straight scenes that have too much focus on male performers that I don't like, e.g. too many cutaways to the male performer's face, which I hate.

The two most sensible suggestions in this thread ar have been the following:

- Mark g/g action in straight porn as on the box as well;

- Producers might want to shoot a bi version as well as a fully straight version of some movies, label the versions appropriately, and market the bi version along with the other bisexual products, in the apprioprate section.

This would have the additional advantage of diversifying the content for the consumers in the bisexual market niche, as it would include more 'general', non-bi-specific titles that will still include some of their preferred action but don't focus on it because it would be in a more 'straight' format.

- In sum, let's have more labelling, not less (Straight, Straight/Lez, Straight/Bi etc.)

[Link]

I think it's easy to see that most of the women in lesbian porn these days are not really in to each other. They are only doing it because the porn business expect the female performers to do lesbian scenes as well.

Edited by - lange on 4/22/2007 5:59:05 AM

[Link]

Panties - maybe not the best thing in the world, but next to it.

[Link]