Dreams of Spanking: fairtrade spanking, corporal punishment and discipline fantasies by Pandora Blake. Join us »

 

Radical porn: complicity and the status quo

"I'm not intolerant but my customers might be"

"I'm not racist but my customers might be so I won't hire black people" #transsummer paraphrased from staff at gorgeousbrides.co.uk

This tweet is exactly how it sounds to me when porn producers and website owners refuse to hire male spankees, or feature M/M scenes. The excuses blur into each other after a while; they all start to sound the same. "I don't mind looking at male bottoms, but my customers might." "I don't mind if people want to play M/M scenes in private, but my customers might be put off, so I can't include them on my public tube site/paysite/blog/event flyer." If your customers were put off by people of colour, would you feel this comfortable catering to their prejudice?

My emotional reaction to statements like this is increasingly, perhaps irrationally, strong. But despite my frustration and disappointment, I know that a comparison between the gender of porn performers and their skin colour is not a straightforward one. Most porn producers inhabit a gendered niche - for instance, either heterosexual or gay - and even "pansexual" queer porn producers tend to feature far more female bodies than male ones, with porn that treats cis male bodies as equal objects of sexual desire still very much in a minority. Sexuality is, for most people, gendered; is staying within the boundaries of a gender niche really comparable to racism? Sexual taste is, by its very definition, highly subjective and discriminating for each individual. And this goes beyond gender: I'm already operating within a tiny niche by producing spanking porn. If I criticise those currently producing /F for not including /M, could the same argument be turned round to suggest that I should broaden my scope and, for instance, cater to all fetishes other than spanking?

It's tricky. All porn is niche, and that's why it works. Branch out beyond the boundaries of that niche and you'll lose the audience that has come to rely on you to represent their interests. By and large, your sexuality is not something you can change. But should we tolerate kinks which exclude on race or gender lines? Imagine a website owner or event organiser excluding people of colour, saying, "I'm not racist, but I don't want to watch brown bottoms get spanked - that's just not my kink". Would that be okay? I don't think so. And if that's not okay for race, why is it okay for gender?

If we accept that gender preference is inherent in most people's sexuality (in a way that race is not) then we can perhaps accept the choice of an individual producer to discriminate on gender lines. Diversity issues then arise when the majority of producers happens to make the same choice as a result of ingrained cultural prejudice. I wouldn't blame a straight individual for the oppression of LGBT people; but I would hold them to account for homophobic behaviour. There's a gap between personal taste and oppressive behaviour, and that's the one I'm interested in exploring. It's the gap between not watching porn which doesn't interest you, and insisting that your favourite websites exactly cater to your tastes to make sure you never have to scroll past.

I certainly don't believe that every kink producer has a social responsibility to cater to any kink they don't want to for the sake of diversity. And yet I do feel that a society with truly healthy attitudes towards sexuality would support diversity across the porn industry as a whole. I would like to see producers who primarily present young, white, slender women as sexy to acknowledge that this is a preference as niche as any other; it's not representative of human sexuality as a whole. I'd like producers and site owners not to advertise themselves as general representatives of, for instance, spanking porn, unless they weren't willing to discriminate on gender lines.

In particular, in creating Dreams of Spanking I want to be as inclusive as possible (albeit within the highly specific genre of spanking) in terms of race, gender, sexuality, body: because not only thin, white, young, cisgendered, able-bodied women like being spanked, so why the hell should they be the only ones to get spanked in porn?

Actually, for me personally, it goes further than that. As a feminist I speak out for my right to choose sexual submission rather than deny my sexuality. The flip side of that is defending the right of any woman who is not sexually submissive, and any man who is, to follow their own desires just as freely. I'm deeply uncomfortable with a sex industry which values female submissives more than male submissives, because implicit in that is the idea that submission suits women better than it does men. If we - men and women - want to fight for our right to choose sexual power dynamics on our own terms, we have to resist that idea wherever we encounter it.

I'm starting to get tired of nearly every producer I talk to saying "Oh, I'd like to include X, but my customers won't like it" when challenged on gender and body inclusivity. Not because I think that particular individual is responsible for the whole tedious trend catering to this perceived "male gaze" that can only see one type of body as sexy (whereas we all know perfectly well that most men are far broader than that in their taste in real life partners; never mind that not only straight men look at porn!), but because if everyone stopped making that excuse, the whole fallacy would collapse.

Still, it's a thought-provoking question. To what extent can we hold individual producers (or indeed individual consumers) responsible for a large scale cultural inequality? On the face of it, the answer seems to be that of course no single person can be blamed for an ongoing pattern writ large. We're all born into this screwed up society and we're all taught to go along with it from a young age. It starts with "women are just nicer to look at than men", or even "boys will be boys", and it ends with a porn industry where skinny white women in plot-free 'insert girl here' scenarios sell best, and everyone else can go hang.

If you try to suggest that perhaps we can do better than this, you're told that you're naive and that market forces will win over good intentions.

"Market forces"

I'm always a bit sceptical of this resort to "market forces" as a way to silence and deter people seeking greater creativity and inclusivity in our media. As if the lowest common denominator was all we were capable of aspiring to; as if society never changed and evolved.

When Star Trek showed the first interracial kiss on TV, NBC executives expected an outcry (and only released the kiss because the actors deliberately sabotaged the non-kiss takes). But in fact, the reception to the episode was widely positive. The risk paid off.

Defence of the status quo in the face of proposed improvements is a recognised cognitive bias - called, unsurprisingly, the status quo bias. It's related to system justification. The status quo bias describes the tendency of people "not to change an established behavior unless the incentive to change is compelling". (My response: well, those of us who want to change the world and our media for the better will simply have to provide compelling incentives!) System justification refers to the social psychology behind this tendency. People tend to defend systems which oppress them because, on average, people need and want to see prevailing social systems as fair and just. Opening your eyes to injustice and inequality, especially where it negatively affects you, can be deeply troubling, and many people prefer not to go there. But that doesn't mean change can't be for the better; and it doesn't mean what's radical today can't become normal or popular tomorrow.

The other reason market forces aren't a static, fixed thing is twofold: who is actually buying within a given industry, and what is available for them to buy. If an industry alienates a subsection of society, that doesn't mean they'll never contribute to "market forces": it means they'll only start doing so once they no longer feel alienated. Historically, women have not bought a lot of porn. Does that mean there's no market for woman-targeted porn? Increasing numbers of successful producers think not. Submissive men have been told by entertainment media their whole life that male submission isn't worth looking at and actually, their fetish is "femdom". Does that mean that's what all submissive men want at heart, or does it mean that's all they've believed they could get?

In the porn industry, "the market" consists of the overlap between three circles of the Venn diagram:

  • people who are currently comfortable with a porn-buying identity;
  • people who are sufficiently well off to be able to afford occasional luxury goods;
  • people to whom the industry currently caters.

Beyond the existing market is a whole world of potential consumers who are, at present, not buying the products which are available for whatever reason. If the products change, the market may change. If society changes (to make porn-buying more widely acceptable, and more people affluent enough to consider it), the market may change. If technology changes to make porn-buying easier or improve the quality of products, the market may change. The market is not fixed in stone.

This is why, if you have opinions about what you'd like to see in porn and are financially able to do so, you should buy from producers who are making changes in the right direction. They don't have to be perfect. Boycotting the whole industry because it makes you feel alienated is not how change is achieved. The way to change the industry is to vote with your pocket: support the people who are taking steps in the right direction; write to them and tell them the things you'd still like to be improved. If you're financially able to buy porn and you don't do these things, you don't get to complain about how no-one's making the kind of porn you'd like to see. Well, not and have producers take you seriously, anyway.

This is the first half of a two-part article; part ii  can be read here.

Comments

Intriguing

You are completely right that this is a complex and contentious thing.

What we are turned on by is influenced by choices and experiences, but ime is typically not chosen. Everyone has heard the term 'sexual experimentation', usually applied to lipstick lesbians in US colleges, but it's called that for a good reason. We're trying to find out, not determine, what will work for us.

I'm exactly in the market segment that makes producers who really are just responding to market forces twitchy. I'm male, I am from the generation for whom the internet really was mostly for porn until we left Uni, I'm cis and straight and do lose my stroke if presented with unexpected M/M bits in a mixed scene, let alone stealth bishounen porn.

Doesn't mean I won't watch it; even mainstream media has managed to film M/M sex so well and lovingly that I could enjoy engaging with the visual narrative (Shortbus to be precise). But it does mean that if I'm actually having a wank, as opposed to watching the material for some other reason, when I run into M/M I will move on.

But I am also a good example case study for you because that very much applies to products, not producers. I have no problem with M/M content on the same menu page as M/F, just as I have no problem with F/M content. I just won't click it. It certainly wouldn't stop me paying for the content I did want from a given site.

I'm not unique, particularly among men from my internet-biased generation. We were all exposed to a very wide range of weird, often whether we liked it or not, at a much younger age than our parents generation. That does incline us to have a fairly casual attitude towards things we see on a computer screen that are not really our thing.

A much higher percentage of us grew up with out gay friends than our parents generation. We grew up with choice in porn, which our parents did not beyond soft-core / hard-core.
And there are, as you say, other options in the marketplace.

The issue of persuading women to a) relax about and then b) pay for porn is a wider marketing issue, and one I'm very much hoping to watch you solve <3

"What we are turned on by is influenced by choices and experiences, but ime is typically not chosen."

The thing is that until one has done that experimentation alongside a critique of received preferences, it can be *really hard* to tell whether your tastes are personal or cultural. Where we each deviate from the normal, it's easy to tell. I'm queer, we're both spankos... expressing those sexualities in the world which generates Cosmo magazine takes some gumption and on average people tend not to bother without good reason. But liking slender, petite, femme women and muscular, butch men? Being attracted to cis bodies of the opposite gender? Without some serious personal assessment and, as you say, experimentation, it's impossible to say whether this is what we like because nothing else will work for us, or if actually, those tropes don't define the limits of "sexy" at all. Cf my taking a few years to realise that actually, sod cultural brainwashing, I like big women too.

Some people come to kink fantasies late in life because they didn't have the impetus or opportunities to question how well vanilla sexuality patterns actually suit them. In asking the same questions of M/M I'm not trying to persuade everyone to like it, or persuade anyone that they're queer - but I am asking people to consider the reasons behind their preferences and work out whether the boundaries might be less clear than they've been told.

In some ways you're not a particularly good example case study because you already DID all of this analysis before I even met you. I just wonder how many people (men, really) with a kneejerk discomfort around M/M haven't really thought critically about how politics, porn and sexuality interrelate. Gently pointing out how many straight spanko women are perfectly comfortable watching F/F - even having F/F fantasies - without wanting to sleep with women is usually a good starting point for conversation.

Your reaction to it is pretty much exactly what I'm hoping for from straight men. You don't have to get off on it, as long as you can tolerate its presence.

"I do lose my stroke if presented with unexpected M/M bits in a mixed scene"

This is why categories and tags are very, very important on a mixed website, and I hope that my labels will be clear enough not to give anyone any unexpected surprises.

Tolerance

The only thing we should be intolerant of is intolerance itself.

For me I am aroused by (in order of preference) by F/M, F/F, M/F. But I am interested in any spanking.

I imagine that the bottom half of an M/M pairing feels much as I do when bottoming to my good lady. That delicious anticipation, the thrill of the warm up, the gradually intensifying sensations as you near you limits, etc etc… That probably means I have more in common with him (in spanking terms) than I do with the lady I have committed my life to. So a site including the views from any male bottom will interest me. And I hope we continue to get the views as well as the action. Because for me spanking is mainly about the theatre, yes I love to be well spanked and a moderate to firm caning is my idea of bliss. But it’s the bits around the spanking that make it. The gentle tapping of a cane as the stroke is gauged. The uneven pauses between stroke, the walking around my bent figure surveying her handiwork. The list is almost endless and not gender linked….

And what about admiring the stripes in the mirror afterwards? This crosses over to bottoms whoever the top is.

Would I watch an M/M video, yes if the scenario or position or implement intrigue me. Would I object to its presence, absolutely not. If we forget the complexities of multiple tops / bottoms then a balanced site would give me a good percentage of things that fit my niche.

As for what shape / race etc is sexy. I find my wife incredibly so, and hope and believe this is recipricated. I do however doubt that either of us would make the cover of Vogue.

Give me a video of a real spankee with a few extra pounds over a drop dead beauty from eastern europe who clearly doesn't want to be there any day. I have left a site before where the latter started to appear. The same is true of tops, there is nothing worse than seeing the inept use of a cane from someone who "fits" the nice tight leather outfit but doesn't know, and is not interested in, the finer points of our kink.

Finally, regarding market research, I've belonged to a few sites over the years and whenever I've left the questions asked have never really been pointed in this way. Also it only asks those who joined in the first place. I've never been asked why I didn't join....

"I imagine that the bottom half of an M/M pairing feels much as I do when bottoming to my good lady."

Yes - yes, *exactly*. I'm not genderqueer - identifying with the male bottom in a M/M pairing doesn't say anything about my identity, it's about imagination and empathy. And I absolutely agree with you that the rituals and power of CP transcend gender. I know that by including a wide range of material in my site not all of it will appeal to everyone, but that's not my aim - the aim is to have a substantial proportion which appeals to most people, and a lot of variety within that.

"Give me a video of a real spankee with a few extra pounds over a drop dead beauty from eastern europe who clearly doesn't want to be there any day."

I'm the same - if I don't believe beyond reasonable doubt that the spankee is genuinely kinky and enjoying their performance (even/especially if their character hates it!) it can turn me right off a scene. Sites which provide no information about the models are very frustrating for this reason.

It's one of the things that annoys me about Lupus Spanking, who otherwise perfectly cater to a big part of my kink. I know from speaking to Adele Haze, Niki Flynn and Ludwig that most/all of the Lupus actors are enthusiasts from the Czech kink scene. Those who are vanilla enjoy the performance and creative aspect. But why should I need 'insider knowledge' to have this trust? Would it kill Lupus to let us hear it from the models themselves?

Market research is an interesting one. I'm considering it at the moment and there is definitely a fear of being pushy and annoying. But I think I'm leaning towards having a quick question pop up if someone clicks away from my join page without signing up, to try and find out what put them off. (Lack of funds? Something in particular that was off putting?) It'd be optional and hopefully not too intrusive. But I'm still hesitant about it - and it'll involve a complex little bit of code - so I can see why many producers don't bother.

I am looking forward to part two of this, but wanted to make some other points.

I also notice the lack of afro-Caribbean in spanking porn, which I see as a real shame.

On the subject of male bottoms, when you do see a male on the receiving there is real effort taken to make sure you only see his bottom and not his genitalia. A big part of my kink is the embarrassment factor for the receiver, just picture the girl standing with one arm across her breasts the over covering her vagina being made to uncover herself.

Or bending over, made to spread her legs knowing the view from behind will show her off.

But the male tends only to have his pants only lowered to the crease of his bottom, or made to stand legs together no chance of anything being seen.

I do hope that when this site launches no males will be spared there blushes.

The whiteness of spanking porn, to me, reflects the whiteness of the kink scene in general rather than intolerance on anyone's part. As a producer I can tell you it's harder to find performers of colour in the UK (male or female) as it is to find youthful, beautiful men who can act. But because I don't want to have a totally whitewashed site, I'm doing my best to find people... and if that means persistently putting out calls on model sites specifying that I'm particularly interested in models of colour, that's what I'll do.

Actually you know what, so far I think D and I are the only performers whose genitals are visible on the website. I don't like asking other bottoms to show everything because for me, the intensity comes from the psychological situation and I'd rather concentrate on the narrative and emotions of the scene than get lots of gratuitous close ups. So neither girls nor boys end up showing themselves off so far (except for me, because I can make that call for myself more comfortably than I can ask one of my performers to do it). I absolutely agree with you however that this shouldn't be distinguished on gender lines! If the female spankees have to show all, so should the male ones. Perhaps a humiliation scene with girls and boys forced to endure frontal nudity in front of each other is in order...?

tolerance v preference

I think it is morally essential that we support people who have a kink which we may not share but is legitimate. But to suggest or even imply that we are wrong not to want to be exposed to a kink which we don't share is a whole new level of intolerance in itself. IMHO.
TC

That would be all very well in a porn industry which was truly equal. But the reality is that femsub is massively in the majority across the spanking/BDSM genres. Mainstream/general sites tend to focus on it to the exclusion of malesub material. Femsub is "default" and malesub is "niche" - M/M all the more so.

Imagine for a moment that you didn't like femsub spanking porn. Could you avoid being exposed to it? No. You'd see it everywhere you looked - on blogs, on tube sites, on social networking sites. The "featured photo" on fetlife is always femsub, never malesub. Result: you'd either get used to scrolling past, or you'd stop using online kinky spaces entirely.

Why should fans of malesub be put in this position and not fans of femsub? It isn't fair. If one group should have to put up with exposure to stuff which isn't their kink, so should everyone. That's not intolerance; it's equality.

In response

I understand your argument, but I can't agree, despite having tried to imagine the scenario you describe.

Surely in a perfect world we should be able to go directly to the content we want and only see the other stuff by choice. You suggest that just because some people have to see stuff they don't want to see in order to get to the stuff they do want then everyone should have a similar problem.

I don't think that is about fairness or rebalancing,.

I guess it's a question of context, right? If you've paid for access to a porn site and you're settling in for some happy time, you don't want to have to click through extensive graphic representations of stuff that's going to turn you off. That's fair enough.

So anyone who's going to be so squicked out by even scrolling past thumbnail photos of a chap in a suit spanking a chap in school uniform is not my intended audience. There are loads of sites which people who are squicked by male spankees can visit, I'm perfectly happy for people to continue using those if they like to get their rocks off.

But if you're reading blogs of a morning, browsing tumblr or clicking around on SpankingTube or Fetlife, is it really reasonable for every single person, with all of the diverse, varied and often highly specific tastes that we all have, to expect to NEVER have to see a turn off? I don't think so: with crowd-sourced content you just can't control for your own preferences that closely.

If you're saying that porn sites should all be very very niche when it comes to gender: fine, there are loads of sites which agree with you. I'm trying to reach out to the people who actually don't mind the gender of the actors as long as it's a good quality spanking scenario, or who don't mind scrolling past some thumbnails to get to the stuff they want to see. It's not going to be everyone and I'm fine with that.

But expecting crowd-sourced content sites censor their users so as to cater to the prejudices of people who don't like seeing bottoms of one particular sex? Not okay, in my opinion.

Black Male Het Top Perspective...

Pandora, this is quite an insightful analysis and essay of the complexities involved in determining an ethical stance on gender, kink, and discrimination. I'll start by saying that I definitely agree with your take on it and support the fact that you are actively engaged in expanding offerings and hopefully our consciousness in the process.

As a black man who grew up in a small town in the South of the U.S. I do understand prejudice and discrimination. They finally integrated schools when I started 3rd grade in 1973. My take on allowing so-called "market forces" to decide not to feature black performers is that I think it is a more highly emotionally charged issue than M/M or other kinds of gender discrimination. And I think that's due to the fact that races (if you believe in the concept of race, which I don't) can live separately and therefore one race can more completely oppress and crush another. Whereas there can be a heinous level of abuse from men to women, men must keep women healthy and have relationships with them in order to survive. Having said that, I don't think there is any valid excuse for either kind of discrimination.

I certainly agree with your analysis of the prevalence of status quo bias. I find that type of bias disturbingly often, and it can work against the very people who could make situations and societies better for the people exhibiting that bias. But then, that's one of the kinds of resistance leaders like you typically face. One type is from contemporaries and competitors who have been too lazy to lead and be different. Another is from potential customers (or constituents) who are resistant to change, largely because of anxiety and insecurity.

As one of the few who are out front and doing something to change things, I think you're handling it perfectly. You're not acting like people don't have preferences. You're making it possible for them to see what they want. At the same time, you're deepening the palate and opening the possibilities. And without those who are willing to step forward, we all stay in one place and stagnate. We've got to progress and often the only way to do that is to get outside our areas of comfort.

Keep up the great work.

Best Regards,
Quai

p.s. I'll have to read part to later today if I can squeeze it in...

Another Angle..

I forgot to mention another thing that occurred to me - that of the parallels between religion/spirituality and sexuality. Another aspect of my experience in the Southern U.S. is the un-forced segregation that remains among people attending churches. While there has been progress among institutions of worship towards greater racial integration, I think people still voluntarily segregate themselves in their houses of worship to a higher degree than in other social gatherings. I'm sure there are many sociological reasons for this, but I've always felt it mostly has to do with religion being seen and felt as such a personal thing. I think people feel they can tolerate discomfort a lot less when the endeavor is that personal and so they tend to associate with those they feel most comfortable. I tend to think sexuality and sexual entertainment is much the same. It is deeply personal to many people and for those whom it is uncomfortable imagining or seeing M/M scenes, they are even less willing to be vulnerable to be that uncomfortable when trying to satisfy a sexual urge.

Of course that comfort level can change and it will change as the milieu of the porn industry begins to change towards more acceptance of unconventional wisdom. We can be the leaders in that change.

Interesting point! One of the things I noticed ages ago was the extent to which "alternative" scenes in general were disproportionately white - i.e. more white than the demographic of the town they're in. It's not just the kink scene - the goth scene, for instance, is the same way. I don't know if that's a class thing (on average white people tend to have more money to spend on clothes, clubbing and hobbies), or just a fact that a lot of social groups (in the UK anyway) are still pretty segregated by colour without any intentional exclusion being involved, and "scenes" are just networks of social groups.

But yeah, you're right about the last bit. I guess sexuality and sexual preference throws people's tiniest social discomforts into perspective. But, I dunno, I do think that it would be great if we could get people on average to deal better with tolerating the presence of porn that doesn't suit them - especially people in the group whose tastes are currently catered to more than any other!

Key Issues

Firstly: *wave* Nice to see you. Pandora introduced me to your work a few weeks ago, and I was rather impressed. I don't write much kink (oddly) but I do write a lot and recognise technique when I see it :)

Secondly; I'm addressing a point actually made by nicespanking above but linking it to your post because you exemplify a difference between the two sides of the pond quite neatly.

In the US, the narrative of colour is radically different to the UK because of demographics. IIRC non-white USians are in the 40th percentile of the population. A US site that features only white models can be fairly judged to be selecting for them.

In the UK, people of colour are in the tenth percentile at most, and IIRC it's about 12%. There is then a secondary pressure in that a much higher percentage of USian people of colour are educated/middle class than the percentage in the UK. And public kink remains a fairly middle-class game in both cultures, partly because of social assumptions and partly because it's a pretty expensive hobby.

I'm white, middle class and unemployed. My tastes run to extravagant decadence with historical costumes. I enjoy manipulating scenes to investigate the discourse of class as power dynamic, which of course involves the ability to act the part and spend the money.

We are actively looking for PoC models and finding them difficult to locate in the UK scene. Otoh, Alan of Firm Hand (who shoots mostly in the States) took the same decision and was able to not only find a pair of lovely young PoC ladies, they were twins...

Briefly digressing away from the immediate point, the mainstream discourse in the politics of colour (in the English language) is driven by a country in which PoC will soon be the demographic default. For countries where this isn't true, the language framed by USian activism often seems out of context. Just as it did when I was growing up in a village in Sub-Saharan Africa, where children really will spy on you in the shower because they think you're black under your clothes.

I should have known you'd post a comment that would genuinely make me think and question my assumptions :)

Thanks for the input on race vs gender: it's very much appreciated. I can absolutely see your point that race is a more highly charged issue, and one in which there is currently more active aggression and oppression.

Having said that, I do think there are similarities in the way that both people of colour and e.g. male submissives are othered and invisibled by a lot of the media and imagery within the kink scene. When the majority of films, posters, artwork, event flyers, websites all feature white women.... I imagine that, as a person of colour, walking into a dungeon full of white people with art of white people on the walls must have similarities to the way a male sub feels walking into a dungeon full of women being played with and art of women on the walls. In other ways it's opposite, though: sexual representations of people of colour often objectify/fetishize their colour in a way that sexual representations of male submissives don't fetishize their maleness.

I don't think imagery can fix everything and clearly social and economic factors play a part in the colour mix of any social scene. But I do think that representation is an important part of inclusivity. I think that's got less to do with me being a feminist/hippie and more to do with me doing branding and graphic design professionally. My work involves subtly affecting people in emotional ways they aren't aware of by the sort of imagery you provide. It does give you a heightened awareness of the impact of advertising and media.

It certainly seems to me that those who say that a certain area of porn won't meet their audience's needs should back up such a statement. Have they run a poll of the subscribers? Brought the subject up on a forum? It's my guess that anyone proscribing a specific kink is doing so from personal opinion. I'm open minded. I'm attracted to females, always will be, BUT I've seen scenes of M/M affection or love and I'm actually affected (positively) by that. I haven't really seen any M/M porn but I can't say one way or the other until I do. It's not my personal predilection, but I don't object to a site that features it.

Going into market forces *yuk* , it also seems very short-sighted of a producer not to see the potential of a different niche. Their current subscribers may or may not like it, but they have the option not to click on it as another respondent has said, but surely it can only be in their best interest to attract new subscribers?

To answer your first question, I don't know if all of them are speaking from experience but usually site owners have a pretty solid idea of what their members like if their site gives them the option of giving feedback. I get the impression that a lot of people currently subscribing to members sites are very fussy and have a single thing which they want to see repeated over and over again. Any deviation from that formula receives negative feedback.

Of course, because everyone's formula is different, you can never please everyone, and so the range of a site's remit is I guess down to the personal taste of the site owner, in terms of how many specific formulae they want to cater to and how they want to market their product. Some UK spanking sites are perfectly comfortable including curvy or mature spankees, others aren't. So as I say in part 2, everyone takes different risks. The pattern of a particular site's offering is the result of which risks the owner is prepared to take based on their personal taste. I just think it's interesting that including male and female spankees together seems to be felt to be riskier than any of the other creative risks which UK spanking site owners already take.

When I was chatting to the Restrained Elegance team about this they made a point I couldn't really argue with: almost by definition, producers tend to like variety and customers tend not to. So trying to teach your customers to like variety isn't a game you can win. I guess they're right, but I'm sure that not EVERYONE who likes variety (within eg spanking) has the opportunity/means/inclination to produce; is there not an untapped audience there, for starters? (I'm certainly hoping so!)

some do

Kink.com and Chantasbitches are bondagesites with spanking, that do have some black subs and doms. Also Realspankings. And some Femdom sites.
But as you say, colour and gender are two very different things in sex and porn. Quote:"If we accept that gender preference is inherent in most people's sexuality" - How could we not??
I will not boicot your site if you have some M/m films. But I dont promise I will look at them!
A 'radicalism' I would welcome is female dommes age 50+. And if F/m, with pretty boys. And, why not 3 or 4 boys witjh the mature Domme. If you can afford them!

You have to be logged in to comment. Click here to login to your account. If you don't have a username yet, it's free to create one - click here to register.

Enter a name and URL to leave a comment:

« Back to recent posts

View all scenes »