You may not believe us, but we read every single comment that comes our way. And we certainly read all the comments in the roaring debate surrouding yesterday’s Morning Goods. Some readers j’adored French model Jeremy Dufour, while others were less enthused. We were especially taken by this comment:
It’s clear from your choices the person(s) that select your “Morning Goods” are effete older queens with a penchant for trying to look 10 years younger than they really are. You’ve probably all had lots of bargain plastic surgery (think Nicholas Cage/Paris Hilton). Here’s a suggestion: Try finding a pair of shades that cover half your face you’ll save lots of money
.
Ouch.
The Morning Goods are, in fact, chosen by us: the Queerty Boys. We don’t want to toot our own horn, but we’re kind of cute and though we may kid, we’ve had no plastic surgery. So there. Anyway, we’ve decided to switch things by opening Morning Goods up to you, our darling readers, in two ways:
First, we invite all of your suggestions. That way you can see the boys you like – at our discretion, of course – and we can put an end to some of this kvetching. Second (and far more exciting, we think) we want readers to send in pictures of themselves, their lovers, their friends, etc. Send your pics our way, we’ll take a look, and if we think you’re Morning Goods material, we’ll feature you.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Deal?
Cullan
I kind of have to agree. The models of late have tended to be on the lithe and fey side. How about a bit broader representation? And by broader, I mean in the shoulders and chest. A guy one might mistake for Sasquatch. He doesn’t go to a doctor but a vet. Yes, that’s it – a beast. A beast who will grab you with big, callused hands and f**k every last desire to give a damn what the hell is happening on America’s Next Top Model right outta you. You’ll be left exhausted, spent, and find that your oil has been changed and that leaking faucet fixed.
Ryan
Other than opening up Morning Goods to any potential hot readers, I don’t see how this diverges from your former policy. Haven’t you always taken recommendations for Morning Goods? (After all, you took mine a few months ago =p)
C4bl3Fl4m3
I know this sounds a bit radical, but how about throwing in a girl or 2 for your female readers? I mean, I’m bi, so I don’t mind looking at men (However, your taste in men is far from mine. If I was a gay man, I think I’d be involved in the bear scene.), but I do prefer looking at the female form.
Oh, and I support what Cullan says wholeheartedly. I’m attracted to masculinity in men (although androgyny is also very sexy). The first thing I ever remember being attracted to way back when my horomones kicked in at puberty was broad shoulders and broad chests.
Cruz
I vote for Francois Sagat. The former Raging Stallion, now TitanMen pornstar. He has a myspace page… 😉 myspace.com/fsagat.
Deuce La Cock
The whole reason for the fact that there are five billion blogs on the internets is cuz everyone has their own tastes and opinions. Blogs aren’t supposed to represent the entirety of what every reader could possibly find hot; they are there to represent what that blogger finds hot. If you’re bi and want to look at women and bears… start a blog or read one that caters to your tastes. Queerty is one of the best blogs out there, and one of the reasons (besides all the hot pics of lithe and fey guys) is that they do their own thing, with intelligence and humor. Why ask them to change now?
Josh Raso
I think Queerty does a fine job of picking the Goods, although I think Cullan above makes a good point. I’m not a bear hunter, but some of the guys, say, on Made In Brazil, are not just handsome, but burly and rough some times. But the lithe sprites are just fine.
Nick
Uh, Deuce, because it calls itself QUEERTY, not BUFFGAYMANTY. Just because you might only be interested in white twinky boys doesn’t mean that the majority of the readership is. The blog purports itself to be for the larger LGBT community, and giving lip service to a couple of lesbians getting fired here and a transsexual in jail there doesn’t make it very diverse. “Gay” doesn’t present a monolithic image, as much as some Chelsea boys and Castro queens wish it did.
In my experience, the comments have contained a lot more bitching about the desire to see guys who don’t look sixteen than praise of the same. And since it looks like the Queerty editors are looking to makes some changes and appeal to more readers (which they’ve begun to do), then why not let them? It’s their blog, not yours. You can scroll past the women and bears–I’m sure there’ll be plenty of Jeremy Dufours left for you, too.
Deuce La Cock
Nick, never been to Chelsea, not very often to the Castro and have never heard of or seen Jeremy Dufours in my life until you brought him into this. But I have a question: So anyone who uses the word “gay” or “queer” in their publishing endeavor must therefore represent the entirety of the gay or queer experience? I never suggested in my post that Queerty shouldn’t change if they want to, but they made pretty clear they were doing it shut up all the bitching. And in my defense, if you’d check out my blog, you’d see that the idea of me only being into white boys is laughable.
MattyMatt
Yay for a diverse selection of sexiness. I’d like to cast a vote for lads in the genre of Teen Bear Magazine.
ggreen
I assume since your describe yourselves as “boys†and “kind of cute†you must all be under 13 years old and extremely humble. What mystery of mystery keeps you from posting current pictures of yourselves?
WriteQueer
I’m sort of new to the sight but this “controversy” caught my eye yesterday. I kind of felt like everyone was really harsh. As though to be lithe and fey (our words for the day) was somehow offensive?
I’m all for diversity, I love bears, I think they’re hot. And I think women should be able to oogle each other in a sexist free environment.
But (and it’s just my personal impression) some of the comments struck me as… a little homophobic. Or maybe the right word is heterocentric? It felt like people had a problem with a picture of a gay guy who was *too* gay.
I understand if you like what you like, that’s great, but, would you really make that big of a stink every time a gallary of someone you’re not attracted to is posted? Or is it something about *that guy* people actively disliked?