January 14, 2009 | The Biz

Is gay-for-pay bad?

Once again the issue of gay-for-pay is making the rounds through the porn world, triggered recently by Fleshbot when they took Matt Murdock to task for using a girlie magazine to keep himself inspired while fucking Marc Stone.

"There is something about this we find vaguely insulting," Fleshbot opined. "We get it, gay-for-pay is here to stay, and it's not really something that we mind all the time. We're also sure that most straight guys in queer porn look at straight porn to get them hard and get them off, that's fine. But for Bateman to rub it in our face this way just really pisses us off."

Porn star Tré Xavier couldn't agree more. "If viewers make enough noise about their anger towards this as they have here (on the Fleshbot blog), maybe these producers will hire some gay or bi MEN. I emphasize MEN, because a real man is secure enough to admit that he is gay or bi, instead of the bullshit 'I'm straight, but I find gay sex fun, too.'"

Tré sees the whole gay-for-pay thing as nothing more than self-loathing and heterophobia. Gay men should be focusing on porn that celebrates guys into hardcore cock on cock action (gay or bi), and spend no time on men 'coerced' into something they claim to dislike.

Yet with the success of so many websites and studios that use straight men for gay porn, the whole gay-for-pay scene isn't going away anytime soon. And should it? Porn is based upon fantasy and some guys like the idea of getting into their neighbor's pants even (or especially) if he has a wife.