Not for me. I’m sure if asked, Dora would identify as female & use she/her pronouns.
You are probably right but also some people may like to see them too. I wasn’t too sure if they qualified.
Why should gay apartments be relegated to a separate site? They have as much right to be on the VH site as any other apartments. If straight members object to them there is a very simple solution, don’t watch them, it ain’t rocket science.
In fact since this forum started it has become quite apparent that there are many more gay members than I ever thought there were in fact they often outweigh the straight members. Maybe if there were more gay apartments perhaps they could be indicated in some easy way on the apartment listing so no dumbo’s accidently click on any and get traumatised for life 
. Perhaps it may be simpler to just group them together in the listings to avoid any mix up with the straight apartments. Either way they have as much right to be on VH as any other orientation.
So come on VH give these gentlemen a fair crack of the whip eh.
1 Like
MMF are always good for my entertainment. I really enjoy it when they play and sex chemistry hits all three…
I don’t think something like that would work. I have 0 interest in camshows and lesbians. Should I also be able to buy a subscription for only the apartments I would potentially watch? Maybe ideally, I should, but I think a system would be difficult to implement in reallity.
It seems that no one in this thread has touched the real issue at sake here. The true problem is that VHTV is far too performance based! A constant threath where you have to do more and more to keep the viewers, and then do even more to maybe gain new viewers, and so on, just to survive til the next month, is obviously going to hurt diversity. It has not only made it impossible to survive for less popular apartments, such as a gay apartment, but it is also pretty much suffocating the voyeurism. The participants don’t have time to just live their lifes, and we don’t have time to develope attatchments to the participants, because it’s all a constant threath to survive, and a great number of apartments doesn’t even last two months.
I don’t think there are many viewers who watch all 35-40 apartments, we all have our favourites. I for one am just interested in 5 or 6 apartments at any given time, but I can choose my 5-6 favourite places from 35-40 apartments and I might occasionally change my favourite, so I have no problem with the system as it is. my solution was more to address the problem that gay viewers have, as if there was 2 gay apartments that they could watch and they had no interest in watching the rest, it would be fair to let them have access to those two places only at a lower cost, this would allow more gay viewers to subscribe as it’d be more reasonable and affordable to do so, and makes it more sustainable for the apartments by relying on the extra income that they can receive from viewers who only subscribe to watch them.
That could then be classed as sexist, most people view the rooms as they wish , they like gays they stay watching , if they dont they move on, so why a reduced subscriptions , whats next ? reduced fees for coloured folks , higher fees for white folks etc etc.
No, it´s just not fair if gay pays the same amount of money for 1-2 rooms, while straight or bi-sexual pay the same for at least 10x more content. If it was approximately equal, then ok.
1 Like
I don’t think you fully understood my comment, it had nothing to do with sexism. if you have followed this topic, it has been stated by VHTV management, that the reason those gay apartments failed in the past was due to the lack of interest/views from the members and some gay members argued that it did not get enough attraction as many of them did not want to pay the full price and support the other 35 apartments while they were only interested in those two apartments. so I don’t see how it could be sexist or discriminatory against anyone to give the gay members that option to be subscribed to the gay only content for a reduced fee, of course anyone who wants can still pay the full price and have access to everything that this site has to offer.
2 Likes
If as you say give them the option of reduced fee s , then im becoming a minority of being a white british hetrosexual male , can I have reduced fee s please. It could end up as a never ending complication of fee scales that im sure vhtv dont need or want.
Ok I get it now, you are one of those old white men who feels threatened and victimised anytime a minority group gets a bit of equal opportunity or relief. TBH I have no sympathy for you.
2 Likes
I don’t think there is or ought to be much pressure to keep doing more per se, but I feel like there should be some understanding that there’s an expectation of some kind of minimum activity, even if there aren’t any penalties for not hitting it. Whilst some here may be content simply watching a bunch of teens thumbing their smartphones in their underwear, others like to '‘get to know’ their preferred cams and then it’s all the more interesting when stuff happens. If you literally know nothing is going to happen beyond passive nudity however it does make things a bit dull, particularly if you can’t even understand any speech due to language barrier etc.
Yeah maybe, but then again if you’re looking for premium rare content you really shouldn’t be complaining about paying full price here. Share your login with your straight flatmate or something 
Surely the real solution though is to incentivise gay participants so as to attract more? Personally I’m straight and have no interest in seeing the sexual side, but having gay friends myself, I would bet a large sum of cash they’d have some rocking parties and know some beautiful girls to invite as well, although this does blur the lines a bit if you’re hell bent on offering limited subscriptions to just the gay cams.
You could just offer the option to subscribe to only certain cams but this would hurt revenue. Therefore making it the ‘gay’ option was inevitable as allowing people to simply subscribe to one or two cams would just tank your incoming profits.
Loud & pushy minority groups are why we have problems in the modern world because the internet has made it easier to shout, has modern tech made the world a better place ?
ok, just to understand what I mean, lets reverse the scenario here, if VHTV was offering 33 gay apartments and 2 straight apartments would you still be interested in paying the full price only to watch those two places ?!? I know I would not. and it’d not tank the income, as the site can attract more subscribers that otherwise would not join.
of course, it’s a better word for minorities compared to the past 
1 Like
Don’t forget the shenanigans with Bango and his mates over the last few days. Not specifically gay I realise but note worthy for sure! 
Now your being stupid or just jesting but NO I would not join a site on those grounds I have zero interest in gays in any shape or form on site or in real life , so to turn that around i presume your gay or a minority of some form pressing your views when not asked for , then the question is you came to the site as a free member/ guest and could clearly see its a near zero gay site so why pay and then moan ?
No, I get that. But it’s a bad example because straight voyeur stuff is available readily elsewhere, my point was more about the scarcity of gay voyeur porn and it maybe being worth the cost. Besides if you’re only interested in 2 out of 40 cams or whatever, you’d consideder the perceived value at half the sub for each cam, which for some people might still be decent enough value. My point about tanking income is if VHTV offered the ability to subscribe to ONLY say, 4 cams (gay or straight) at a pro rata’d sub amount. People would probably only do that, and since most cams here are straight/bi, VHTV wouldn’t be making the max sub fee per user as they do now even if you only care about a handful of cams.
now you are being Rude so there is no point to discuss anything with you.
1 Like