I’m voicing my opinion on this a little late, but the more I think about it, the less sense it makes. I really don’t think the “gay” tag should be included in the unpopular tags group. It’s currently grouped under the same muted bundle as incest, guro, furry, monsters, etc. New users have all of these hidden by default. I get that the goal is to sort out “niche” stuff, but putting gay content in that pile sends the wrong message.
A new user could sign up, not notice that gay content is muted, look around, see nothing, and leave. Besides hurting visibility for gay creators, it also feels a little homophobic to label gay as “unpopular.”
I’m not trying to start drama. I genuinely think this deserves a second look. A site that wants to support all creators shouldn’t hide a whole category by default. Maybe new users could be asked upfront whether they want to see gay or straight content, or both.
And if we really wanted to be extra inclusive, there could even be an option to hide straight content for gay users — but that would require a “straight” tag. That’s probably extreme, but it shows the imbalance.
And yeah, there’s no consideration for a bisexual tag at all, but I’m used to bisexual stuff getting sidelined… (which is why I call myself a gay robot instead of a bisexual robot.)
Either way, I feel like this is worth talking about, and I’m hoping this post helps start that conversation.
I agree 100%. Look, I’m not into gay porn…unless, FOR ME, it is a few cute femboys or very feminine presenting guys. THAT IS JUST HOW I LIKE MY BOYS.
I get that the majority of users love to see girls getting blasted, railed, CUM COVERED by HUGE FAT VEINY COCKS …..but I do think there are quite a few here that prefer masc guys doing their thing as well.
Just my opinion…
I dont peruse the content nor do I even have the tag hidden, but I thought gay’s under the Yall need Jesus tag, which isnt the default iirc. I thought its under the No degen group which has the other stuff? So unless something changed I was under the impression it wasn’t auto hidden.
This is a half-truth. It’s included in the unpopular group and the unpopular group includes the controversial tags.
This is not true. The unpopular tags are opt-out. Controversial tags are opt-in.
I’m not really sure how to respond to this. It’s an emotional arguement and I understand why. There’s a lot of really stupid politics surrounding identity, both from left and right circles. All I care about is treating everyone with respect, regardless your opinions or politics we are all human and are deserving of love and respect.
If I’m being honest, I’m considering this, im actually in favor of the idea. I’m always up for improving the user experience for everyone. I actually have plans to improve the onboarding process for new users and adding a straight tag requirement would make that easier.
I love discussion. I’m not always the smartest person in the room. Often my ego shields me from outsider perspectives. I love when people challenge me and make me think and justify or change my perspectives.
To answer why it’s there, I would find it improbable that it’s a desired tag for more than 60% of people. It really is that simple, It’s also not hidden by default. It’s just a group to quickly and easily opt out of some of the more unpopular tags.
According to the site rules, the Mute Controversial group is supposed to be the one automatically applied to new users — and that group does not mute the gay or trans tags.
However, it looks like @Mute-Unpopular is actually being auto-applied to new accounts instead. Might need to double-check the site settings there:
Thanks for the reply. I want to clear up one thing because I actually made a new account just to test it, and the experience was not what you’re describing. When I signed up and checked my filters, every tag in the “unpopular” group was muted. I knew exactly what I was looking for and still missed this ‘opt out’. So a brand new user who doesn’t already understand how the tag system works is very likely to miss it completely, especially some horny dude looking for porn that skips a bunch of reading. That’s the part that concerns me most.
My intention wasn’t to say anyone did this with bad motives. I wasn’t trying to make an emotional argument, just talking about how it feels on the user side when a whole category is grouped with taboo tags and muted in practice. Even if that isn’t the goal, that’s how it comes across.
I really do appreciate that you’re open to adding a “straight” tag and improving onboarding. Something simple like asking new users “Do you want to see gay content, straight content, or both?” would solve the whole thing without anyone feeling singled out. That’s really all I’m hoping for, a setup where people don’t accidentally miss content that’s meant for them.
I think its inclusion in the unpopular tags made sense, but I also really think these suggestions for changing on-boarding are great.
Adding a straight tag to old topics would be a nightmare xD It’d be a positive change though.
maybe I’m not reading enough into this, but uh, isn’t the unpopular tag list solely based on which tags are used the least..? I don’t think 1’s and 0’s have the capacity to be homophobic
I’m in favor of adding a straight tag just for the sake of, but I’m afraid not all content can fall under one or the other …
Pot stirring intensifies
This was a mistake, probably caused by me at some point and I never checked it. I just corrected it and applied it historically. Not many users were affected.
Like I said, I understand why, I appreciate how some users may feel about that but it truly isn’t anything against those demographics. It’s purely a numbers game and that’s why the group is titled “unpopular” ( I deliberately changed the names of the groups, to better reflect the tags a couple weeks ago )
This is probably going to happen. I actually really like the idea for a few reasons including the onboarding reason. The more I think about this, the more I like the idea.
I understand that it may not be the most popular thing, especially on this site specifically, however it’s not really about numbers. It’s about the perception of the user. Grouping gay content with tags like guro or incest sends a message that the community the user is joining thinks it’s inherently niche or taboo, and it might make them feel not so welcome here.
Off the top of my head the way I think this would visibly look is having a tag group for orientation.
straight, lesbian, gay, trans, probably others
A given post requires at least one of those tags, and should include all that are included in the media.
For ex. a media that includes gay content and straight content, can have both tags.
If a user wants gay content but not straight content they can ignore the straight tag and it wouldn’t be visible. A user that’s cool with both tags can see it. This would mean a bisexual tag wouldn’t be necessary.
Well, that logic can be applied to almost any tag.
The current layout is just about ease of use for the members and to avoiding the need to separate everything into various different tag-groups.
While I respect a users feelings about this. You can’t please everyone. I would argue critical thinking skills are necessary to be here, and thinking in bad faith is not the sort of user I want on the forum anyway.
This forum is a place where I want everyone to feel included, respected, welcomed. Anything I can do to improve that in on the table, but I’m more concerned with function over fashion. If a user feels unwelcome based on the inclusion of a tag in a lineup without reading into the context, I don’t think I would be able to satisfy them.
Not sure how you’d handle non-gendered content? Either the tab group would need to not be strictly mandatory, or include a gender agnostic tag. The latter solution does seem reasonable to me.
Approximately 3% of the global adult population identifies as lesbian or gay, according to a 2023 Ipsos survey. If a presidential candidate polled at 3% that would make them unpopular, their opponent at 97% would be considered popular. Right? It’s no disrespect, its a numbers thing. now if said unpopular candidate was also running against bad mustache guy in todays times he would also be in the unpopular category. This does not make the unfavoured candidate equal or the same as bad mustache guy.
I’m open to ideas but I think I would prefer to stick to outwardly appearance in hardware if you catch my meaning. I think the main tags would accomplish the goal. If outliers appear, we’ll cross that bridge when we get there.
