Reader comments · Feature: Gay Times strips off in support of the Terrence Higgins Trust · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Feature: Gay Times strips off in support of the Terrence Higgins Trust

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Spanner1960 21 Jan 2013, 12:41pm

    Why do gay mags have to do naked shoots all the time? No wonder we get such a bad reputation when everyone thinks all we do is talk about sex all the time.

    I thought Gay Times was a reputable publication, not a soft porn mag.

    1. Because it sells.

      People without clothes and with concealed genitals = ‘soft porn’ to you? Seriously?

      1. Spanner1960 26 Jan 2013, 8:15pm

        Yes. Seriously.
        It’s hardly fcking art, is it?

        1. Well no, not fucking art. I don’t think that’s Gay Times‘ remit.

    2. It’s not just gay mags, lads mags and certain ‘newspapers’ have soft porn in them all the time.

      Even straight women’s mags have naked pics in them pretty often these days.

      1. That doesn’t make it right!

        1. Gene in L.A. 23 Jan 2013, 6:36pm

          What makes it wrong?

          1. Spanner1960 26 Jan 2013, 8:18pm

            Because it’s meant to be a serious journal.
            All they do is degrade their integrity.
            The fact that Red Tops have some bint with her tits out on page three simply reinforces how shallow their readers are. That stuff ought to be cast to the trash can of history.

    3. Because the gay lifestyle is perverted

      1. Thank you for making such an effort to find a gay site to share your thoughts.

      2. Spanner1960 26 Jan 2013, 8:20pm

        No more perverse than the straight lifestyle.
        However there is a time and a place for everything.

    4. Rudehamster 1 Feb 2013, 2:33pm

      Having read all of your comments on this subject, I’ve come to the considered opinion that you’re a right bloody whiner.
      Creep out from under your blinkered little stone and you’ll note that there are nude calendars and photo-shoots everywhere. All in aid of one charity or another. Whilst you’ve been living in a Victorian world where flesh is still seen as naughty and shameful, the rest of us in the Western World have realised it’d perfectly natural. Perhaps you’d be happier in Afghanistan or settled somewhere in Utah?
      Gay Times are merely following on with money going to a very worthy cause. If you want to blame anyone, then blame the dear old ladies of the WRI. After all the Calendar Girls started the whole trend off.
      Incidentally, why are you so uppity about the sight of male flesh?

  2. Elvis Chomsky 21 Jan 2013, 12:46pm

    Heaven forfend that anyone might think being gay has anything to do with sex!

  3. barriejohn 21 Jan 2013, 1:15pm

    Does anyone still read Gay Times? I was a long-time subscriber but gave up when, out of nearly two hundred pages, there were less than two pages of British news and two of world news -yet the editor seemed to think that a motoring section was just what was wanted! I am all for a varied menu, and realize that we are talking about an adult publication here, but style seems to have well and truly triumphed over substance now.

    1. de Villiers 21 Jan 2013, 2:28pm

      (If you speak French)

      1. barriejohn 21 Jan 2013, 2:57pm

        That looks like an excellent publication. I switched to the Pink Paper myself, but that has now disappeared both in print and online. It was a different kettle of fish, though, as is Pink News. It seems a pity to me that we don’t have something more like Tetu in Britain.

        1. Spanner1960 26 Jan 2013, 8:22pm

          I miss both the Gay News and The Pink Paper.
          Now Gay Times has gone from a serious magazine to “GT” – nothing more than a puffed-up soft porn lads mag.

  4. ‘It’s all for the THT’
    Is GT giving money from every issue to the THT then? No, I presume.

  5. Why doesn’t GT do its due dilligence and find out how much of the money that is given to the THT actually reaches the front line in the form of effective HIV campaigning (ie. that which can be accurately measured in terms of impact on the targeted audience) and quality of services for user clients?

    Were they to partake in such an exercise they might in fact be enamoured to donate to a charity more worthy of their efforts:- for example one that does not award it’s executive six-figure salaries and gilt-edged pensions while investing surplus millions into prime real estate in central London.

    The THT like many former charities today have long been subverted for political purposes and are chiefly self-serving:- quangos by any other name.

    Charity needs to get back to its original grass roots purpose of serving those they were set up to help in the first place.

    1. “Charity needs to get back to its original grass roots purpose of serving those they were set up to help in the first place” –

      This is a “nice” idea but it ain’t gonna happen, so why not accept that & try to influence what you can Samuel. You can bleat on all you like but, the reality is that the Government is not particularly interested in Sexual Health / HIV. There is no National co-ordinated plan for these services, shortly your Town Hall will be holding the budget, some of which will spend such monies with the likes of Virgin or other commercial outfits.

      As I have said before, be careful what you wish for, THT may not be ideal but it is the best we have at the moment. You should take a more pragmatic view rather than your ever so rose tinted utopian approach. There are no THT executives on 6 figure Salaries which is something you continue to falsely claim & have done for 2 years to my knowledge. Read the Trustee statement!

      1. With all due respect, W6, you seem to be stuck on the same groove of the record.

        The point of my posting was to open the likes of GT to the possibility that their money is more needed and would be far more appreciated and better spent with a genuine charity and not one that sits on millions invested in property and which fritters much of the rest on HIV campaigns which, frankly, are not designed to work due to the PC constraints that are imposed on all staff and volunteers who enter the THT quango with its furiously revolving doors into big pharma and assorted governmental departments.

        All I “wish for” is for gay men to stop being shortchanged where HIV prevention is concerned and for service users to stop being fleeced by greedy chief execs who streamline services to the bone while awarding themselves exorbitant salaries.

        It is because of these failures that HIV services are now going to the private sector, and you are wrong to cite this as reason not to voice our outrage.

        1. Seems I am not the only one stuck in the same groove of a very old & broken record…………….this Government is responsible for HIV services going to the private sector, why are you not outraged at that?

          Are you really happy for your local Town Hall to use the money they will be given to have a race to the bottom in terms of prevention services? If you think THT are fleecing us +ve individuals why not ask about the fat cat salaries these Chief Execs are on.

          That is what is an outrage, not the charity sector caught in the middle with no solid funding & only uncertainty

          1. Caught in the middle?

            Please read what I said more carefully, W6.

            THT’s failures precipitated the Government handing over services to the private sector, nothing else.

            Why should THT continue being awarded government contracts when its history of failure precedes it?

            Sure, it is clear a rat can be smelt a mile off where the palming off of any public health contracts to the government’s pals in the private sector is concerned, but your anger should be directed at THT for enabling such a situation in the first place.

            It says a lot when the state of sexual health has arrived at a point where anything other than THT is worth a try to improve the ghastly mess it has made of HIV prevention and related services.

            Frankly things couldn’t get much worse, and your belief that the status quo should be maintained for the reasons you outline, frankly, speaks volumes for the blind adherence you ascribe to this inept and botched organisation.

          2. I think you will find it was this written Government t that decided to shake up the NHS and fragment a cohesive approach to HIV & sexual health. Perhaps you don’t understand the implications of the new Health & Social Care Bill, but you never have shown much interest in detail Samuel.

            In some respects it could be good news for THT and other providers as it brings together local services for local people but I am very sure the fat cat Town Hall leaders and their bloated buerocracy that will be the beneficiaries of the budgets they have been entrusted with!

            I would rather see charities do this work. – what does virgin or Ser I know about prevention, maybe this is your chance to get involved eh Samuel?

  6. Who in there right mind would pick up a copy of GT when Attitude magazine is sitting on the same shelf?

    Insubstantial lightweight fluff that would be defining our culture were it not for the excellent team at Attitude who never fail to deliver substance and depth, and who do gay culture a great service.

    Tris Wotzit delivered the final blow after being moved into the GTeditor’s seat having already killed off Pink Paper.

    Sheer lunacy, and a price the now editor-less “Team GT” have paid ever since.

    1. Yet I am forbidden to buy Attitude at my nearest store as it means bringing it into work where my manager stated ‘I don’t want to see that magazine again as it is pornograhic’. Seems no matter what we do its always wrong……….

      1. I don’t see how that can be the case, especially as it’s the first major gay magazine to stop accepting ads for telephone-sex sites etc. It sounds to me as though your manager is being discriminatory.

  7. I spend so much time telling people that being gay is not a lifestyle choice. And then we get GT & Attitude being all about lifestyle.. Bloodybuggerybollox

    1. What do you mean? Theyre just magazines aren’t they?

    2. Spanner1960 26 Jan 2013, 8:26pm

      Being gay is not a lifestyle choice, but it is a lifestyle nonetheless.
      There is an entire industry that caters for gay men and whatever they get up to, where they go, who they meet, what they wear.

      One cannot deny that virtually all gay men, in part, follow that path.

      1. Virtually all gay men? Bollocks. What a narrow circle of acquaintance, and with what limited tastes, you must have.

  8. it’s guys with their clothes off for a good cause. honestly, whats with the haters? even if it wasn’t for charity it all seems in good fun. as an older “gay” i can still find some substance in the magazine. as for attitude magazine it all seems a bit elitist and geared to the image conscious and trendy fashion types. to each his own i guess.

    1. barriejohn 21 Jan 2013, 5:30pm

      I have no complaint about the nudity, etc, but devoting an entire isssue to this campaign seems somewhat bizarre to me. It is some time since I looked at a copy of Attitude, but my opinion was the same as yours: it seemed like a style magazine, almost exclusively aimed at the younger end of the market. I gained the distinct impression that it was in an attempt to compete with the likes of Attitude that Gay Times took a turn for the worse, but that was a few years ago now, so I can’t argue with @Samuel B.!

  9. Rudehamster 21 Jan 2013, 9:39pm

    We’ve been very lucky with our male diving team. They’re all good looking and very pro-gay, which is a huge reminder to their fans to follow their lead.
    Chris is really lovely, but the dark horse of the team and the one with least publicity, so I’m glad he’s breaking his duck with this photoshoot and interview.
    As for Tom, well he’s everyone’s boyfriend, grandson and best friend. Even if he were to come out as gay, he wouldn’t lose any fans because he’s loved to bits the world over.
    Setting aside the homophobia within sport, which is just as rife in diving as it is in any other sport, I agree with Chris, it is difficult decision and one that despite being personal, is often led by the worry of a drop in public perception, sponsorship and finance.
    Sadly, the huge companies sponsoring US athletes are also funded by the loudmouthed Republican & Christian lobbies, who demand that vicarious ‘condoning’ of homosexuality is not part of their financial support.

  10. I like looking at beautiful men, especially naked ones.
    I also like looking at Michelangelo’s David. As do millions of others.
    What, pray, is the difference between admiring Chris Mears’ naked body and a 500 year old statue of a gorgeous, and equally nude, young man?

    1. Spanner1960 26 Jan 2013, 8:29pm

      The difference is one is art and the other is erotic titillation, and should be kept in appropriate publications.

      The question one should ask is “Would you read it openly on a bus?”
      I would (and did) with the old Gay Times, but I wouldn’t with this trash.

      1. Who decides which is which? You?

        You might also ask yourself whether Gay Times is likely to continue as a profit-making venture – which, after all, is necessary for its survival – with such a tight-lipped and joyless following. I would suggest not, judging by the evidence, but perhaps you know better.

      2. Rudehamster 1 Feb 2013, 2:35pm

        Miserable old sod.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.