Gay for Pay? Or Was It Really?

[Studlover (imported)]

(This was/is America. It reminds of a French film I just saw about Nazi Germany and how they dealt with French Gays during WW II. Think about this).

We've all heard the term, "gay for pay". It came in to major use in the 90s, but the idea behind it has been around for a much longer time. My personal view is there are truly very few true "gay for pay" guys out there. And...from my view point, those who pose in magazines and perform in gay videos do not qualify...but rather use the title to deal with their own issues of sexuality. To me real "gay for pay" are those guys down on their luck, on the street and doing what he must to survive...nothing more...but once back on his feet...he never indulges again.

But the point of this is not about the issue of "gay for pay" per se. Rather it's looking back and perhaps gaining a better insight as to how things were and how that shaped were we are today.

Many of the popular and not-so-popular physique and male magazine models of the 40s, 50s and 60s went on to marry and have children. No questioned their motives or the whys when it came to their "modeling" careers. It's just the way things were and what was expected. It really had nothing to do with what their true sexuality may be.

These models of the past knew full-well that the majority of buyers of the magazines were guys who preferred guys. And these models had no problem with displaying their bodies to be lusted over and jacked off on in the pages of the physique, muscle and skin magazines. I am sure most found it quite flattering and quite an ego trip.

These models of the past had no problem being naked and playing around with another man...touching another man. Even in poses that left little to the purpose of the pose, the guys performed and performed well.

Yet many of these same guys would marry and have children. Were they "gay for pay"? They knew that "queers" and "fags" were lusting over their images. But then again at the time the term "gay for pay" would not have been part of the every day speech since gay meant happy, joyful, full of glee. It was not associated with homosexuality.

At that time, you just married, raised a family and had your "secret" life with your buddies or anonymous strangers in the darkened parks or bookstore backrooms or a public restroom. You did what was expected not so much because that's what you wanted, but because that's just the way it was.

We must also remember at the time homosexuality was illegal, dangerous to life, limb and property. Employers were quick to fire someone who was even just suspected of being "one of those". You could be booted out of your apartment, your house if you were suspected of man-on-man sexual relations. You ran a danger of being beaten to within an inch of your life...even by police officers. In too many cases, you could end up in prison for years just for having loved another man. Also far too often, you could be killed for being a homosexual or even just suspected of homosexual leanings.

Make a pass at the wrong person and you were certain to be beaten, run out of town or hauled down to the police station for "questioning" .

Yet these photographers and models persevered and worked any way. They blazed a trail down unchartered paths which today allows us the freedoms we now enjoy...even if there is still a long ways to go.

Yet there are many, especially of our younger members, who chide and chastise those early men because they married and fathered children. But I think is because of a lack of understanding of how it was. We can not look at the past and judge it based on today's standards. We must judge it based on what was the rule, the standard of that time.

So were these early models nothing more than "gay for pay"? I think not. They were true pioneers and true heroes who led us to the point we are today.

Question is are there any of today's community willing to follow in their footsteps and bring about a brighter and more equal tomorrow for gays in the future?

Studlover

[JeffEunuch (imported)]

I agree. There are very few men out there who engage in M2M sex who aren't at least bi. However, there's nothing wrong with pretending to be str8 or being bi and doing what nature intended us to do - siring kids and doing so in a M/F relationship. I've done it even though I've always preferred men as sexual partners. However, I was also lucky to have an understanding female partner who liked gay guys and even initially suggested to me that we have threesomes with other guys. She also liked watching men have sex. Having said that, it didn't work. I'm just too much into guys as mates and sexual partners.

[tugon (imported)]

Each decade sees a greater acceptace of gays. Each generation needs to thank the previous generation for the work that has been done. We still have a long way to go.

I remember the abuse suffered at a Catholic High school during the early 70's. It was not yet a tolerated life style in small town Ohio. I could certainly understand in those days wanting to hide that part of your life. I was fired from a job in 1979 and the store manager bragged the next day that he got rid of the fag. I could have had a much easier life if I dated girls and later married. Of course I would have lived a double life as did some of the men I have dated.

All in all I think each generation has done what they have needed to do to survive and find what happiness they can. I can not judge an older generation for the choices they make any more than I would want the current generation of gay men to judge me. We have not walked in each others shoes and lived in each others times.