Right, time to settle a debate. I've been told on more than one occasion that my website looks gay, largely because of the supposedly "pink" colour.
Which it isn't, it's lilac.
Anyway, I changed the front page a bit, to include a excellent picture of me (a rare phenomenon), which was taken by Claire, a fellow joinee, just after the football this weekend. However now my friend Donald says it just makes the front page look even more gay.
Should I change the colour of my website? I have to say I quite like the lilac, but I don't want visitors to get the wrong idea or anything.
I'd be interested to hear your views. On my website colour, I mean. Not on homosexuality; this blog is getting controversial enough among fellow Christians…
Monday April 17 2006 at 9:59 pm |
Maybe #C8A2C8 would be a little more lilac-y and less pink-y
Monday April 17 2006 at 10:05 pm |
Mmm it is pretty, but perhaps a little pink. Good pic though! xx
Monday April 17 2006 at 10:09 pm |
I really love the picture, but I think it’s fair to say that it *is* slightly reminiscent of a style of gay art best explempified by Jimmy Summerville at the end of the movie “Orlando”… a bit cherubic! Maybe toning the saturation down to be more grey would help. Like the Wedgewood versions of blue and green, just a lilac equivalent. If you lighten it too, it will also help improve the contrast which is great for accessibility for people with poor vision or rubbish monitors!
Monday April 17 2006 at 10:22 pm |
Well I’d do you
Monday April 17 2006 at 10:41 pm |
Gay.
Tuesday April 18 2006 at 12:39 am |
Nice shot!!
Mate, it doesn’t matter how many times you say lilac, it still won’t change the fact that it is pink.
I don’t mind the colour actually, but I do think when it is in combo with the seductive boy band CD cover pose you could be on your way to becoming Scotland’s newest gay icon {;-P
Tuesday April 18 2006 at 8:20 am |
I hadn’t noticed before, but now you come to mention it….. Lara could be right. If you were looking for an icon and stumbled accross the site home page …..!?! How about blue like the blog!
Tuesday April 18 2006 at 9:14 am |
Colour = not gay. Photo = not gay. Colour + photo = GAY. One of them will have to go.
Tuesday April 18 2006 at 1:17 pm |
Totally and udeniably GAY, that is of course in the sense of happy, should have taken a picture of you stepping from a closet…good to see your site, I remember you from Highland theological college many moons ago.
You probably won’t remember me (will anyone in 100 years for that matter), I am now the Pope of Dingwall having secured the position through self declaration…
Will tell others about your GAY site, does anyone have the email address for Peter Tatchell?
Tuesday April 18 2006 at 1:36 pm |
Hmmm……..Well being an Australian and knowing how important appearances are to the aussie male and the general reponse to issues of homosexuality… i’d say definately Gay. The colour not the pic, the pic looks great…………perhaps you could try something a little more bold like orange or a deeper purple???
Tuesday April 18 2006 at 7:41 pm |
Right, the consensus seems overwhelmingly towards it being gay.
I've changed it to a slightly off-white with a hint of bluey grey suggested by Donald – with Neil (Collins)'s darker lilac as the secondary colour for some text boxes.
Phew. Thanks for your help and advice everyone!
Thursday April 20 2006 at 9:14 am |
well I really would not have thought it was gay at all … even after reading all the “advice” you have been given I still do not think it is gay! But well I am very much a total pink (and simon) girl (tehehe) so maybe I am being very biased towards the two “gay” factors mentioned on here … so I could be very wrong! But I will not admit it lol
hahahahaha!!
x x x x
Sunday April 23 2006 at 2:17 am |
Still Gay. More the photo than the colour now though.