Does TJ Cummings escort?

[josephga]

IMO gay for pay is nothing more than a role playing fantasy to feed that desire some gay men have for wanting to be with a str8 man. They are gay or bi just playing a role

[MscleLovr]

This is an intriguing thread, and I find this diversion interesting.

 

I particularly like the observations of EZEtoGRU. Perhaps that is because I have encountered various guys in his 'subsets' (such an apposite term given what I like to do to them). Currently I'm doing a very muscled guy in subset 3: he is adamant he's str8 but insists he likes the 'humiliation of my cock in his ass and my load in his mouth' (his words) - and he doesn't want to be paid.

 

I agree much less with what FTLdude wrote. I find young men, particularly in Europe, less ready to define themselves by their sexual activity and indeed their proclivities are fluid over time. For the last 2 years I've been 'dating' a 23 year old blond muscleboy who has a girlfriend, defines as bi but in bed with me is a total bottom. He adores getting fucked. We never go out together because he just enjoys gay sex in private. He socialises with his str8 mates and his girlfriend.

[seeker630]

I agree much less with what FTLdude wrote. I find young men, particularly in Europe, less ready to define themselves by their sexual activity and indeed their proclivities are fluid over time. For the last 2 years I've been 'dating' a 23 year old blond muscleboy who has a girlfriend, defines as bi but in bed with me is a total bottom. He adores getting fucked. We never go out together because he just enjoys gay sex in private. He socialises with his str8 mates and his girlfriend.

 

Just to seek clarification - wouldn't this mean he is bi by both his own self-definition & FTLdude's criteria?

[MscleLovr]

Just to seek clarification - wouldn't this mean he is bi by both his own self-definition & FTLdude's criteria?

 

Yes I feel it does...within the confines of my apartment. As a blond 'Adonis' he is utterly str8 to his friends and especially his girlfriend.

 

I'm not arguing with FTLdude. It's just that I've always found the Kinsey scale too linear for the myriad aspects of human sexuality and how it can vary markedly over time. I find it great that young men don't define themselves by their sexual activity, even tho I'm an out gay man myself.

[seeker630]

I make mistakes like anybody else, true. But I didn't make a mistake about this. What happened here is a confusion of a. the physiology of the human sexual response feedback system with b. the psychology of functional bisexuality. You're saying that I made a mistake perhaps because of the way some people think about straightness in terms of the perceived attitude or behavior of an individual. But that is not the true definition of heterosexuality. Heterosexuality is exclusive orientation towards the opposite gender. In other words. A zero on the Kinsey scale. If they are anything else then they may be straightish, but they are not straight. Men who have sex with other men and enjoy it are not straight. They are bisexual. They may choose to be in denial about it, but they are not straight. Doesn't matter how alpha or how masculine they act, how many women they screw, or how many kids they have--- they are not straight. There is perhaps a lot of latent bisexuality out there since some people discover things about themselves later rather than sooner, but that also is what it is---latent bisexuality, not heterosexuality.

 

I never said that all or even most straight men who escort with gay men or do gay porn are really gay. If you go back and read my posts earlier in this thread you will see that. But, just because a man can or actually does something doesn't necessarily mean that he enjoys doing it. (I can stick my finger up a straight patient's butt to do a prostate exam and give him an instant boner, but just because that happened doesn't mean that he's going to start shoving things up there from then on just for kicks.) In fact, what I actually said about TJ is that he was a very good escort because he is a straight man who admits that he doesn't really like gay sex stuff, but he has done it very convincingly in his gay movies and he has escorted with at least one person in this thread who indicated that the experience was very good. Proportionally, far more men spend money on hiring male escorts than do women; and, historically, the more popular male porn stars who have done both gay and straight porn know they can usually get more money for doing the gay stuff. So, for many its simply a matter of mathematics, although some like TJ and Peter North stopped doing gay hardcore simply because they no longer wanted to. Still, the psychotherapists who counsel heterosexual couples on how to have more intense sexual experiences have for years been telling women to do this same prostate massage thing on their men, but I'm thinking that most straight men probably aren't at all enthused by the prospect of anyone putting anything up their ass.

 

I agree with you that this get complicated, and thats because some people aren't comfortable with labeling themselves by drawing a hard line between heterosexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality.

 

Another way to look at is that not everyone agrees on the exclusivity of the definition of 'heterosexual'. (By the way - is your definition of homosexuality equally exclusive?)

 

I'm not sure who gets to be the ultimate arbiter but...does the label really matter?

[MscleLovr]

...does the label really matter?

 

It is increasingly my view that the label is irrelevant. It's what the young man in my bed does that is important :-)

[ozdean]

Gee I'd like to see a rematch. TJ would give Billy a run for his money now!!!

[EZEtoGRU]

I make mistakes like anybody else, true. But I didn't make a mistake about this. What happened here is a confusion of a. the physiology of the human sexual response feedback system with b. the psychology of functional bisexuality. You're saying that I made a mistake perhaps because of the way some people think about straightness in terms of the perceived attitude or behavior of an individual. But that is not the true definition of heterosexuality. Heterosexuality is exclusive orientation towards the opposite gender. In other words. A zero on the Kinsey scale. If they are anything else then they may be straightish, but they are not straight. Men who have sex with other men and enjoy it are not straight. They are bisexual. They may choose to be in denial about it, but they are not straight. Doesn't matter how alpha or how masculine they act, how many women they screw, or how many kids they have--- they are not straight. There is perhaps a lot of latent bisexuality out there since some people discover things about themselves later rather than sooner, but that also is what it is---latent bisexuality, not heterosexuality.

 

I never said that all or even most straight men who escort with gay men or do gay porn are really gay. If you go back and read my posts earlier in this thread you will see that. But, just because a man can or actually does something doesn't necessarily mean that he enjoys doing it. (I can stick my finger up a straight patient's butt to do a prostate exam and give him an instant boner, but just because that happened doesn't mean that he's going to start shoving things up there from then on just for kicks.) In fact, what I actually said about TJ is that he was a very good escort because he is a straight man who admits that he doesn't really like gay sex stuff, but he has done it very convincingly in his gay movies and he has escorted with at least one person in this thread who indicated that the experience was very good. Proportionally, far more men spend money on hiring male escorts than do women; and, historically, the more popular male porn stars who have done both gay and straight porn know they can usually get more money for doing the gay stuff. So, for many its simply a matter of mathematics, although some like TJ and Peter North stopped doing gay hardcore simply because they no longer wanted to. Still, the psychotherapists who counsel heterosexual couples on how to have more intense sexual experiences have for years been telling women to do this same prostate massage thing on their men, but I'm thinking that most straight men probably aren't at all enthused by the prospect of anyone putting anything up their ass.

 

I agree with you that this get complicated, and thats because some people aren't comfortable with labeling themselves by drawing a hard line between heterosexuality, bisexuality, and homosexuality.

 

If only the real world were as clinical and simple as you describe.......but it isn't. Under your definition of "Straight" citing exclusive orientation I would guess quite a small percentage of men would really qualify as "straight" using this threshold. Case in point, I hook up with three straight guys in Houston for a group scene on about a monthly basis. Two of them are married and the third I am not sure. There is very little verbal communication between us. We range in age from about 28 - 55yo. We get together in front of a TV, put on straight porn, drop our drawers, and have a group jack-off. During our sessions, we all spend as much time looking at the screen as we do at each others cocks. No-one ties to hide the fact that they want to visually check-out everyone's cocks. There is absolutely no touching of any kind. ......never has been and never will be. There is also no verbal comments about how great someone elses balls or cock look. For me, these guys are straight.......but do have a curiousity to see and compare with other cocks. However, none of them want to touch or suck or fuck. Are these guys straight, gay, or bi for you?? They are not engaging in any physical contact with a man but clearly they are interested in watching guys.

 

I agree with your words in your last paragraph but what you say in the prior paragraph is not supported by your closing comments. Sexuality is very fluid and putting strict definitions on it can be difficult. One thing that is certain is that some gay men seem to really have issues with others that are attracted to str8 or str8ish types. Many gays want to believe that sex with str8 guys (whether for pay or not) is simply not possible and they seem offended by the concept......to the point they convince themselves that it is an utter impossibilty. To the naysayers, just spend a day with me in Sao Paulo, Porto Alegre, or Montevideo and you will change your tune very quickly.

[Guest FTLdude]

If only the real world were as clinical and simple as you describe.......but it isn't. Under your definition of "Straight" citing exclusive orientation I would guess quite a small percentage of men would really qualify as "straight" ...

 

I agree with your words in your last paragraph but what you say in the prior paragraph is not supported by your closing comments. .

 

LOL. Ok, then. As mature adults we can agree to disagree, but you should be aware that what was posted in my previous comment is the science community's definition of heterosexuality, not mine. Anyone can use annectodal evidence and circular rhetoric to rationalize a theory; but that, by its very nature, isn't scientific, and is therefore unreliable as a data source to infer anything about a broader (and more significant) demographic. That's why this type of annecdotal stuff isn't used in any serious research unless the researchers have already decided beforehand what they want the outcome of their study to be. In other words: I am a man. I have had sex with many other men who I believe are straight. Therefore, many straight men also participate in gay sex. English professors would call this a logical fallacy and statisticians would call it bad mathematics because it is always likely to lead to skewed conclusions. In the case of this example, notice that the conclusion is based on the assumption that the men I had sex with were actually heterosexual in the first place. But I didn't really know this for a fact, did I? I assumed that the men are straight because they look and act a certain way. Do you realize that this is exactly the case in the examples you've given?

 

The real world actually IS as clinical and simple as I described. What makes it seem complicated is that there are many people out there who do not identify themselves as exclusively gay or straight or even bisexual, not necessarily because they don't know where they fall in the spectrum but because they may not be comfortable with labels. I'm not arguing for or against, and I'm not disagreeing with you for the sake of argument. Just trying to point out to you that it can be very misleading to draw conclusions about people in general based only on subjective experiences. The people who research this type of stuff understand this and that's why they use activity descriptors to capture data that identifies and categorizes behavior instead of using labels that attempt to describe people. Notice, for instance, that in the case of the CDC, they don't use any of these labels on questionnaires that people fill out when they do an STD or HIV test. They don't assess risk factors by asking the respondents whether they are 'gay' or 'straight' or 'bisexual'. Instead, they ask whether the respondent is a 'man who has ever had sex with other men'. Regardless of whether the respondent is comfortable with labels or not, he can answer this question in only one of two ways---'yes' or 'no'. This is 'real world' science. It draws hard lines and attempts to define and study activities, past outcomes, and future probabilities based on nondescriminatory delimiters. It doesn't care how you identify yourself. IT identifies YOU, not based on how you look or what you say but based on what you actually do. And, if you are a man who admits to having sex with other men it identifies you as a part of an entirely different demographic with a different set of risk factors than a respondent who had answered the question with a 'no'.

 

The circle jerk scenario that you described isn't uncommon among boys who're discovering and experimenting with their sexuality. But adult heterosexual men don't participate in such activities with other men unless they are at least a little bi-curious, and the ones who are truly heterosexual aren't even remotely interested in these types of activities with other men because it does nothing at all to excite them sexually. Statistical data does not concur with your conviction that only a small percentage of men would qualify as straight based on this threshhold. In fact, such data strongly suggests exactly the opposite of what you're saying. Historically, the gay and bisexual-leaning population has always been significantly smaller than the heterosexual population in pretty much every culture that has ever existed because most men are simply not into having sexual experiences with other men. This remains true even though there is apparently a sizable number of bisexual men who insist that they are straight. I didn't make this up. Its the way the world has always been.

[seeker630]

It is increasingly my view that the label is irrelevant. It's what the young man in my bed does that is important :-)

I agree whole-heartedly!

[JT Brooklyn]

Well I guess the original Interesting Subject "TJ Cummings" has had about all "said that can be said" about him.

 

It was an interesting Thread while it lasted! Especially the "Video" Contribution.....Merry Xmas to the Hunk Gay / Straight or Whatever!

[EZEtoGRU]

LOL. Ok, then. As mature adults we can agree to disagree, but you should be aware that what was posted in my previous comment is the science community's definition of heterosexuality, not mine. Anyone can use annectodal evidence and circular rhetoric to rationalize a theory; but that, by its very nature, isn't scientific, and is therefore unreliable as a data source to infer anything about a broader (and more significant) demographic. That's why this type of annecdotal stuff isn't used in any serious research unless the researchers have already decided beforehand what they want the outcome of their study to be. In other words: I am a man. I have had sex with many other men who I believe are straight. Therefore, many straight men also participate in gay sex. English professors would call this a logical fallacy and statisticians would call it bad mathematics because it is always likely to lead to skewed conclusions. In the case of this example, notice that the conclusion is based on the assumption that the men I had sex with were actually heterosexual in the first place. But I didn't really know this for a fact, did I? I assumed that the men are straight because they look and act a certain way. Do you realize that this is exactly the case in the examples you've given?

 

The real world actually IS as clinical and simple as I described. What makes it seem complicated is that there are many people out there who do not identify themselves as exclusively gay or straight or even bisexual, not necessarily because they don't know where they fall in the spectrum but because they may not be comfortable with labels. I'm not arguing for or against, and I'm not disagreeing with you for the sake of argument. Just trying to point out to you that it can be very misleading to draw conclusions about people in general based only on subjective experiences. The people who research this type of stuff understand this and that's why they use activity descriptors to capture data that identifies and categorizes behavior instead of using labels that attempt to describe people. Notice, for instance, that in the case of the CDC, they don't use any of these labels on questionnaires that people fill out when they do an STD or HIV test. They don't assess risk factors by asking the respondents whether they are 'gay' or 'straight' or 'bisexual'. Instead, they ask whether the respondent is a 'man who has ever had sex with other men'. Regardless of whether the respondent is comfortable with labels or not, he can answer this question in only one of two ways---'yes' or 'no'. This is 'real world' science. It draws hard lines and attempts to define and study activities, past outcomes, and future probabilities based on nondescriminatory delimiters. It doesn't care how you identify yourself. IT identifies YOU, not based on how you look or what you say but based on what you actually do. And, if you are a man who admits to having sex with other men it identifies you as a part of an entirely different demographic with a different set of risk factors than a respondent who had answered the question with a 'no'.

 

The circle jerk scenario that you described isn't uncommon among boys who're discovering and experimenting with their sexuality. But adult heterosexual men don't participate in such activities with other men unless they are at least a little bi-curious, and the ones who are truly heterosexual aren't even remotely interested in these types of activities with other men because it does nothing at all to excite them sexually. Statistical data does not concur with your conviction that only a small percentage of men would qualify as straight based on this threshhold. In fact, such data strongly suggests exactly the opposite of what you're saying. Historically, the gay and bisexual-leaning population has always been significantly smaller than the heterosexual population in pretty much every culture that has ever existed because most men are simply not into having sexual experiences with other men. This remains true even though there is apparently a sizable number of bisexual men who insist that they are straight. I didn't make this up. Its the way the world has always been.

 

Sorry that the logic you quote doesn't add up. To think that most guys who consider themselves as straight (but have in reality had at least one homosexual sexual encounter) are going to answer the question you pose honestly is, well frankly, rediculous. Also, where would my JO friends in Houston end up under this measurement scenario? You said that they seem bi-curious.....but in answering the question you cited, they would come off as heterosexual.....which I believe they are....but you do not. Sexuality is not as clinical and straight forward as you would like to believe. Sorry FTLdude, but nothing you have said hs changed my mind. Indeed, the opposite has occured. I am thinking the medical community (at least inasfar as you have quoted it) has its head in the clounds regarding measuring or determining sexuality. If that is the generally accepted view in medicine, all I can say is........ WTF???

 

Anyway, I have enjoyed our debate. As you say, we will just have to agree to disagree. I do think we (and others who have contributed) do agree that the labeling issue is not easy and we probably all make mistakes in that area. I think we have exhausted this one and diverted the TJ Cummings(who is he anyway?....I don't even know) thread enough. Happy Hoidays!!

[Rapaz]

So no one knows for sure if he escorts? lol.

[Guy Fawkes]

pssst... I have it on excellent authority that he does not. (Sorry!)

[+ Gar1eth]

pssst... I have it on excellent authority that he does not. (Sorry!)

 

Daddy-- for shame--reading the Forum. Aren't you supposed to be on vacation? Or are you like so many people in our over-connected world who even on vacation can't resist checking the office e-mail?

 

We all appreciate what you do for us here. Please have a nice vacation and come back refreshed!!

 

Gman

[Guy Fawkes]

I sir am watching: "Doctor Who at the Proms" while drinking eggnog (Found another quart in the Fridge door; Running out of things to "Add" to it) and acting like a displeased monkey (if you don't understand, don't ask you don't want to know!) Enjoying myself immensely... The music is most excellent!

 

http://crujonessociety.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/flach-tim-monkey-face-2410296.jpg

 

Daddy-- for shame--reading the Forum. Aren't you supposed to be on vacation? Or are you like so many people in our over-connected world who even on vacation can't resist checking the office e-mail?

 

We all appreciate what you do for us here. Please have a nice vacation and come back refreshed!!

 

Gman