For a long time doing this I was absolutly straight and today I know guys who are absolutly straight but do the same work. I would actually say what has happened is that sexual interactions have been removed from the equation in determining how masculine or straight you are espeially if you work in this industry. Being gay or bi implies that you have the desire to sleep or fall in love with the same sex. This is a job and in any profession youre going to get paid to do something you dont want to do. Thats why its called work and you get paid.
I completely agree with you Jason that a person's perceived masculinity does not necessarily represent their actual sexuality, however I disagree that a completely heterosexual male could be a performer in the gay for pay industry. I totally believe in Alfred Kinsey's "Kinsey Scale", of rating all human beings on a 1-6 scale, from exclusively heterosexual or homosexual to the degrees in between.
Rating Description
0 Exclusively heterosexual
1 Predominantly heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual
2 Predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 Equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 Predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 Predominantly homosexual, only incidentally heterosexual
6 Exclusively homosexual
X Non-sexual
While I do believe it is possible for a "0" Exclusively heterosexual model to perform in a scene where he only receives head or masturbates with another model, the model's who flourish in the industry need to be at least a 1, 2 or 3.
I discussed my theory with Sha at the NYC Pride event and he agreed with me, that even the "uber straight"
Jimmy Johnson could not be completely heterosexual and appear in as many gay sex scenes as he has performed in.
I use myself as an example, as I am a "6", and I know that no matter how much money I was offered I could not perform in a "straight for pay" sex scene with a woman. It's not in my DNA, and conversely there have to true "0"s who could not perform on
Broke Straight Boys