I'm definitely not honest with myself, though usually in unrelated matters, so perhaps I need handholding here. Taking the statement in reverse, non-lesbian porn is unenjoyable because either

-A. It doesn't show women recieving oral sex, or

-B. It doesn't center on female pleasure.

Is that more substantial than just a preference in content? Is being in the minority of video viewership and recieving minority market attention the embedded misogyny? Or is it more about the participants/subjects than the viewers, as the other poster suggested? What connection am I missing?

No you pretty much laid it out in you comment, I think it tracks.

Having a misleading UI and making not-unprobable assumptions about viewers feels less problematic though?

I don't think I particularly matters where the situation lands on the "scale of problematicness", but youre correct it does exist and it isn't at the far end of the spectrum. Nonetheless, it is a symptom of a greater social issue (patriarchy), and it warrants discussion and criticism.

The porn industry is made up of corporations, which will tend to reproduce the same heiarchies that exist in society, since that's what's most profitable. It isn't inherently problematic to objectify people in a sexual context, however it isn't applied equally, and is reproduced in the user controls on most porn sites.

They just assume everyone is a straight male or a gay male, so the choice that gets presented is "gay stuff" or "everything else". This is reflected in user stats, but it is also going to be self fulfilling. It would make more sense to be able to select one or more options of the broad "straight/gay/les/other" if pornhub existed in a relatively equal society. I don't expect them to do this, but I do expect my online community to be able to discuss it and how it both reflects and reproduces harmful social constructs.

Idk if that clarifies anything, but I think you and I are in the same ballpark?

OK and they don't have to cater in a misogynistic way, but they do, and I'm criticizing that decision.

The study referenced only refers to pornographic videos, which is interesting, but doesn't consider a wider spectrum, such as pornographic literature, comics, games, and audiobooks. Women historically read or listen to more pornography than watch.

My earlier comment referenced why some straight women watch lesbian porn, but there's some who enjoy gay male porn as well, partially because the men are more vocal and reactive compared to men in typical straight porn, who are essentially nearly silent vessels for the male viewer to project themselves onto. Given this, it's not difficult to see why little of "straight" pornography appeals to straight women.

Comparing the innate misogyny of most porn to being right handed isn’t appropriate. That sort of analogy, comparing something harmful to something benign, is the core of the problem - it serves to normalize misogyny.

We don’t need to go beyond the topic to illustrate misogyny and harm. For example, a porn store or site displaying simulated violence or underage scenarios to sell it products would be more appropriate. Prioritizing those categories is similar to prioritizing misogynistic lesbian porn over ethical lesbian porn, for example.

Ol' mate forgot straight women exist and use the internet lol