you actually referenced Dawson and WM Thackeray together in a sentence.
All I meant to imply was that he impresses me as an opportunist, a la Becky Sharp. I'm a well read guy, and 'Vanity Fair' was the first point of reference that popped into my head. Perhaps 'Barry Lyndon' might be nearer the mark.
You all realize that there are a lot easier ways to make the not-very-large amounts of money these guys make for the videos.
I understand that the pay isn't chicken shit, by any means.
CF's "Deans List" guys all have two things in common: they're very good actors
Precisely!
I think what you are doing is what I did at first: engaging in a lot of projection/wish fullfilment. I used to think that any guy who did all the stuff that these guys do would have to be at least bi. I also used to think that, like me, everybody who was gay knew so since at least early adolescence. I have since come to understand that the latter supposition is anything but the case, making the former a faulty assumption, too.
I am having an increasingly hard time with labels like 'gay' or 'bi', or, for that matter 'staight'. They are useful tools, but I certainly don't think that they should be taken as irrevocable or absolute. I think that people are merely sexual at baseline. One need only look at prisons or the military to appreciate the extent to which sexuality is capable of adapting itself to the prevailing social milieu.
At 18-22, these guys are by definition oversexed. Hell, even a grapefruit would look good to them under the right circumstances. And in late adolescence, the age cohort to which I believe the Corbin Fisher models belong, for many sexuality isn't yet written in stone. So if somebody comes along and offers you a significant sum to play with a guy on camera, why not? Hell, it beats flippin' burgers!
I would go so far as to suggest that the degree to which these guys do EVERYTHING only reinforces their primary heterosexuality. They willingly do things which I would think twice about, because as a gay man I attach a varying levels of significance to different intimate acts. To these guys, kissing, sucking, rimming, fucking are all pretty much of a piece: the acts themselves don't really mean anything to them.
Now I'm sure there is definitely a subset of models who are 'curious', and who come from rural or repressive backgrounds where 'exploring' isn't simply a question of getting on the Metro North and going down to Chelsea, as it was for me. So they seek out CF and SC; and the paycheck provides them with a nice rationalization. I suspect that 'TJ', 'Brent' and possibly 'Cade' fall into this category.
However, I think most of them are straight as advertised. Once the cameras are off, and they are back in a milieu with available women, they don't give man sex a second thought.
Yeah, I'd like to think that Logan will end up playing for our team. He's totally my type, etc. But all his sucking and rimming and assfucking and cum-guzzling notwithstanding, I suspect when the cameras are off he's really into chicks
I realize I am engaging in egregious stereotyping but Logan doesn't act 'gay': he acts goofy (which is why he's so damn sexy). In fact, I got a much stronger reading on my gaydar from TJ, whose voice and mannerisms seem a tad delicate, affected even.
In many ways he's my favorite model because he's just so much fun: the way he pronounced 'frottage' made me LOL! I haven't figured out if he's a bright goofball or a total airhead. He reminds me of some guys I've known and, trust me, they were no dummies.
