article: porn star Tom Katt in denial.

[DiamondDog]

I don't agree with his opinion that he was "always heterosexual" or his religion.
But I found this article to be interesting so I posted it here.

http://www.dallasvoice.com/artman/exec/view.cgi/10/1317

Gay adult-video legend Tom Katt reclaims Christian faith and retires from erotica. Re-emerging as David Papaleo, he identifies as straight but is sickened by right-wing Bible-thumpers who preach anti-gay hatred. Papaleo’s next stop — the pulpit

In the mid 1990s, Tom Katt began regularly appearing in gay porn videos. The versatile bodybuilder made at least 15 sex flicks in his first two years. Handsome and talented, he started earning a lot of money. And for what it’s worth, Tom Katt became famous — in the world of erotica.

Over the years, steroids and growth hormones augmented his physique. Cocaine and pot made the good times seem happier, but the party train kept crashing. Inside, he felt something was missing. And in 2003, he walked away from the biz. Katt, who now goes by his birth name, David Papaleo, had found God.

Last month, Papaleo appeared on “The Gravedigger Show,” an Atlanta-based Christian TV program where he renounced the adult video world and said he was heterosexual.

On Internet discussion boards, fans of the porn legend posted messages: some were outraged, some felt duped and some encouraged his spiritual adventure. Through a Christian bodybuilding website, Dallas Voice e-mailed Papaleo and requested an interview. Two weeks later, he called and said he wanted to discuss his newfound faith, his sexual identity and a spiritual message for gays and lesbians. This is Papaleo’s first newspaper interview since his conversion.

Mom, church and death
The first four years of Papaleo’s life were spent in suburban Atlanta where his parents raised three kids.

When he was 4, his parents divorced. For the next seven years, David lived in a rural area of Massachusetts with his mother and stepfather. Although he also lived with his brother and sister, only David and his mother attended a nearby Catholic church.

“But my mom was what you’d call very clinically depressed,” Papaleo, 36, says after finishing a shift as a personal trainer at a suburban Atlanta gym.
He faced death and grief at an early age: When Papaleo was 11, his stepfather killed his mother.

“A lot of people blame God when bad things happen. I was pissed off at everybody — everybody in my family for letting it happen. And I walked away from God. I didn’t want anything to do with him,” Papaleo remembers. “If he was going to let that happen, then I’m staying away from him. Of course, this was the judgment of an 11 year old.”

Growing up and getting big
Papaleo moved back to his dad’s home near Atlanta, and he carried around a lot of anger. Homework wasn’t high on his list of priorities, and he was a loner. In high school, Papaleo joined the wrestling team, but he couldn’t tap into the notion of “team spirit.”

At 16, he discovered bodybuilding, and results came quickly. Lifting weights allowed him to release pent-up emotions, and it was something he could do alone.

“I developed a strong distrust of being able to count on anybody. Bodybuilding was something I excelled at that was under my full control,” he remembers.

In 1986, he competed in the Teenage Mr. Atlanta contest and placed third. Papaleo was hooked. He graduated from high school in 1988 with the dream of becoming a professional bodybuilder. To make money, he unloaded trucks and worked as a personal trainer.

Porn = money
“I always dated girls,” Papaleo says, remembering his early adulthood. “But I didn’t play the field too well. If I dated someone, it would be for two or three years.”

Through a friend of a friend, he got his first offer to appear in an adult video — from Fox Studios, a gay erotica company that specialized in bodybuilders.
“When I realized I could make in one day what I’d make in three months. It was like, ‘Sure, where do I sign?’” he remembers.

Papaleo was 21 when he made his first film. And back then, he was competing in at least three bodybuilding competitions a year.
“That was the beauty of doing porn,” he says. “The movies and personal appearances at clubs enabled me to spend all my time just getting ready for competitions. And preparing for competitive bodybuilding takes up all your time.”

At 24, he won his first big regional title at the 1994 National Physique Committee Eastern Seaboard Bodybuilding Championships.
For a while, everything ran smoothly. Because he had a title under his belt, Papaleo could demand more money as a personal trainer — his porn rates increased as well.

His family eventually figured out that he was moonlighting in gay erotica. Papaleo even showed them a few magazine covers. But in 1996, the sale of adult videos became legal in Georgia. A video store opened up near one of the Atlanta-area gyms where he trained. In the store’s window hung a life-sized cut-out of Tom Katt promoting Falcon Studios’ “Total Corruption 2.”
“It didn’t make me cringe with embarrassment,” he says. “In fact, the porn stuff never seemed to faze my family or friends at all.”
But once his Tom Katt cover was blown, most of Papaleo’s personal training clients dropped him.

Steroids, boyfriends and the Bible
For his first 17 bodybuilding shows, Papaleo competed as a “clean” contestant. After winning the Eastern Seaboard title, he started hitting steroids.

“Ironically, all the years I competed taking steroids, I never won,” he says.
Only 5-foot 7-inches tall and at one time bulking up to 255 pounds, the steroids detracted from his aesthetic appeal. He was too big, too thick.
From 1997 to 2003, Papaleo would live in Los Angeles for a few years, then return to Georgia. After a couple of years, he’d move back to Hollywood.
Dating sex workers isn’t for everyone, and Papaleo’s sexual identity was murky at best.

“During the period of the movies, I had two boyfriends and a couple of girlfriends. I felt I had to stay away from women because, ‘hello,’ I was doing gay porn — no woman was going to have anything to do with me,” he says.
For a while, he identified as bisexual.

“But when I leaned more towards trying to date a guy, it just didn’t click. When you’re in a relationship with somebody, it can’t just be a physical thing. You have to have an emotional-spiritual connection or it’s not going to work. And I never really found that I could have that connection with another guy,” he says.

During this period, he said he wasted huge amounts of money and didn’t have much to show for it.

“I made a lot, and spent a lot. I thought I was having the time of my life. But I started partying with my money — constantly altering my mood with chemicals to convince myself I was having such a good time,” he says. “But deep down, I was miserable, and I knew it.”

When he was a kid, Papaleo crossed Jesus Christ off his list. So over the years, he investigated other faiths: Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism. But in 2003, he found himself drawn back to Christianity.

“I didn’t hit rock bottom, and I didn’t turn to a particular church. I just started praying. I prayed and asked God for help,” he says. “I asked him to help me with what my life was becoming, and what my life should become. He truthfully helped me in my heart and showed me that what I was doing wasn’t correct.”

So he began studying on his own.
And get this.

“I remember being on a … [porn] set, and the guys all laughing at me because I was reading the Bible,” Papaleo says.

God, love and gays
He didn’t blow all his money. Moving back to Georgia in 2003, he focused on his spiritual awakening and realized that blaming God for his mother’s death was immature.

Papaleo seems genuinely passionate about studying the Bible. And he’s still not affiliated with a particular church.

“I’ve been very unimpressed with a lot of churches. Many of them don’t study or teach the Bible in the depth that it should be taught. A lot of churches pull one or two verses out of the air and make up their own interpretations of it instead of really studying the book itself,” he says.

The debates over morality and sexuality identity have fueled his research.
“What I found is that so many people — including myself at one time — believe those crazy so-called Christians who say, if you’re gay or bi, God doesn’t want you. That’s a big piece of crap,” he says. “They are misconstruing and give twisted interpretations of Biblical scriptures. I’ve extensively studied the scriptures they try to base that on, and it’s just not true.”

Papaleo has a boiled-down thesis regarding the “men not lying with other men” verses.

“If you look at it historically, culturally and you’re not pulling things out of context, the Bible says ‘don’t to go against what is natural.’ If you are naturally heterosexual and you’re having sex with men, well, first, you’re treating that guy unfairly,” he says. “But the Bible’s not saying heterosexual is natural as far as from nature’s point of view — it means going against what’s natural for yourself.”

As far as same-sex relationships and marriage, “They’re not wrong,” he continues. “The most important thing is to love God with all your heart. The second thing, is to love your fellow person that same way. I don’t know how loving someone of your own sex in that manner is considered wrong.”

So now you’re straight?
“Yes, I identify as heterosexual. There was a time I thought of myself as bisexual, and I never hide that fact,” Papaleo says.

A couple of years ago, after moving back to Georgia, he met a woman. On their second date, he told her about his history as Tom Katt. Although it seems like heavy news for a second date, she seemed to accept it.
“Being completely honest and transparent about things is an important part of the way I live now. I have to be completely up front about everything,” he says. And last month, the woman’s name became Mrs. Papaleo.

Yo, Reverend! Weren’t you a porn star?
Although Papaleo’s gone back to competitive bodybuilding, the main thrust in his life is studying the Bible. Last week, he and his wife relocated to Florida so he could enroll in a seminary. Does he hope to be Reverend Dave one day?

“I believe he’s pulling me toward the pulpit,” Papaleo says.
But what if he makes it to the pulpit and someone turns on a DVD player showing Tom Katt in all his former glory?

“If someone wants to draw attention to that, I’ll help them put the spotlight on it. I am not ashamed. If they’re going to judge me, I’ll tell them to read Matthew Chapter 7 a few times and get back to me,” he says. “God is the judge. For someone to judge me, that’s wrong.”

He might not be ashamed, but Papaleo doesn’t have anything positive to say about working in adult video.

“I don’t think that erotica or sexuality is a bad thing. I believe that sex is the strongest physical expression of love to another person. But porn is not an expression of love. It’s empty and cold,” he says.

“There’s nothing at all wrong with sex,” he continues. “God made sex, too. He gave us these things for a reason. When it’s not an expression of love, that’s when you’re demeaning it into something less than it was meant to be.”
Can sex be an expression of love at first sight?
“I don’t think so,” he laughs.

His message
As Tom Katt, he participated in many gay pride celebrations. And when you have a pride parade, you have Christian fundamentalists preaching against gays. And that might be the battlefield where he launches his crusade.
“So many people are shunned or feel like they’ve been pushed away from God — that God doesn’t want anything to do with them. I want to tell as many people I can that that is an absolute lie,” Papaleo says. “God loves everybody. He made you the way you are. All he wants is for you is to turn to him and to love him the same way he loves you. Don’t let anyone tell you you’re less than anything in God’s eyes.”

[tink1978]

Diamond Dog that was a great article.

Thank you for posting it.

Amanda

[Dr.StrangeLove]

Really interesting, I guess without knowing much I'd buy that he's straight, but then we're getting into what makes you straight vs gay vs bi terratory...If one has lots of sex with men, even if its just for money, doesn't that make him bi...after all he had the capacity, doesn't that make him at least a little bi? I just think this is another example of why these labels are stupid...they don't mean anything if a straight guy can be a gay porn star.

[flexuality]

Interesting article. :cool:

[DiamondDog]

Really interesting, I guess without knowing much I'd buy that he's straight, but then we're getting into what makes you straight vs gay vs bi terratory...If one has lots of sex with men, even if its just for money, doesn't that make him bi...after all he had the capacity, doesn't that make him at least a little bi? I just think this is another example of why these labels are stupid...they don't mean anything if a straight guy can be a gay porn star.

It's not that those guys are REALLY heterosexual there's a concept in gay porn called 'gay for pay' where supposed "straight" men have gay sex. LOL

It's all based on this sad fantasy that many gay and bi men have about getting that hot "straight" guy, or that ALL men want sex with another guy but they just don't know it or they're in denial.

This article explains it more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay-for-pay

Here are some gay for pay porn sites:
www.brokestraightboys.com/
www.newyorkstraightmen.com/
http://seancody.com/page.php?frame=home

I post on gay/bi message boards and it's hilarious how much everyone's obsessed with getting a "Straight" man when in reality heterosexual men don't want sex with other men.

What they really want is someone who's ultra masculine, almost a neanderthal.

Someone who'll cock slap them and call them a 'fag' after they've gotten off.

[Dr.StrangeLove]

Yeah, I've seen some of that stuff, I'm not into it...I like the guys to be into it, that gay for pay stuff is just awkward seeming. I'm really into male male intimacy though, so I don't really like any porn where the actors don't seem into it. So are those guys just gay/bi guys pretending to be straight or do a lot of them really identify that way?

really I was more just talking about Tom Katt. I mean i've never seen his videos, but it sounds like he was a pretty big star, like a real gay porn star. And as a gay porn star he had boyfriends. I mean at what point do you lose the ability to really identify as straight anymore...I mean he's probably had more gay sex than a lot of us will ever experience...so at what point does sexuality become like virginity...after you have enough sex with people of the same gender don't you lose the ability to call yourself straight? I mean if I were straight I don't think I'd want to accept him back onto the team...It would tarnish everything straightness stands for...lol

on the other hand, maybe it really was just a good gig, while on the job he was gay, had a couple of boyfriends for convienience sake and is now back on track spiritually and whatnot so he's totally done with that. I mean what would his motivation be for trying to go back into the closet? I mean it seems like kind of a hassle once you've already come out. In any case I appreciate the message he's trying to get out about christianity and homosexuality...unfortunately I'm 99% sure it will fall on deaf ears.

[flexuality]

I mean what would his motivation be for trying to go back into the closet? I mean it seems like kind of a hassle once you've already come out. In any case I appreciate the message he's trying to get out about christianity and homosexuality...unfortunately I'm 99% sure it will fall on deaf ears.

*chuckles at "going back into the closet"**

I kinda wondered the same thing....and put it down to the fact that porn is just acting anyway....albiet bad acting lol!

I, too, appreciate what he's trying to do as far as the Bible and "anything other than straight" too.....and I agree that mostly it'll fall on deaf ears....

[DiamondDog]

Yeah, I've seen some of that stuff, I'm not into it...I like the guys to be into it, that gay for pay stuff is just awkward seeming. I'm really into male male intimacy though, so I don't really like any porn where the actors don't seem into it. So are those guys just gay/bi guys pretending to be straight or do a lot of them really identify that way?

It's all just an illusion that they're hetero. Sure, some of the guys who do ONLY solo scenes or beefcake could be hetero but the guys doing gay sex scenes with other men aren't hetero.

For some guys, I do think they can separate having gay sex from actually being gay or bi, and that's where the denial sets in and why lots of these men who identify as "straight" but do gay porn have issues like Mr. Tom Katt. I'm just glad I don't have to play that little game in my own head.

They're playing into the homophobic fantasies I mentioned in my other post, the idea of that hot hetero guy you always wanted but know you can't ever have.

Those men are gay and bisexual but just billed and advertised as being heterosexual.

This isn't a new thing either I've read gay porn magazines from the 1970s where they talk about "gay" for pay actors who are "straight".

Think about it....why would heterosexual men want anything to do with having sex with other men?

Flex-some bisexuals do go back into the closet. I have male friends who are bi but tell everyone that they're "gay". Things get really confusing when they mention how beautiful women are or say how a woman has a nice ass or talk about their type of women.

[Dr.StrangeLove]

For some guys, I do think they can separate having gay sex from actually being gay or bi, and that's where the denial sets in and why lots of these men who identify as "straight" but do gay porn have issues like Mr. Tom Katt. I'm just glad I don't have to play that little game in my own head.

For real, me too. Life's easier when you stop thinking that hard about labels and identity.

[TaylorMade]

OR maybe, just maybe... he actually did have sex with other men for money. :rolleyes: What happened to taking someone at their word and not having them on a virtual couch all the time? We become just as bad as gay people or straights who say we're in denial.

If it turns out he's bi and lying to himself, that's for HIM to figure out.

*Taylor*

[DiamondDog]

OR maybe, just maybe... he actually did have sex with other men for money. :rolleyes: What happened to taking someone at their word and not having them on a virtual couch all the time? We become just as bad as gay people or straights who say we're in denial.

If it turns out he's bi and lying to himself, that's for HIM to figure out.

*Taylor*

I don't believe in what born again Christian people call sexual conversion or the whole "ex" gay bullshit that they try to sell that's really brain washing.

Sure some hetero guys do actually try sex with men but it's usually not done as adults and it's something that they'll try once and say well that wasn't for me.

Hetero guys certainly don't become male prostitutes, gay porn stars, and make an entire career out of having sex with men.

Anyone who says they're "gay for pay" is usually a homosexual or bisexual in denial.

Especially if they can get hard and get off on their own accord in the midst of sucking, fucking, or getting fucked by a guy.

No straight man gets off by being fucked by a guy, sucking another guy, fucking a guy, or being blown by another guy.

That's Bi at the very least.

It's like "gay" for pay porn stars think it's more acceptable to be 'gay for pay' and claim they're straight.

I think he's full of it. He made the choice to be in gay porn, use drugs, be a male prostitue, and become self loathing. No one made him do it.

And as for becoming heterosexual? That's a crock too. If you are gay or bi, you will ALWAYS gravitate back to cock. Plain simple fact.

I think it's probably just a marketing gimick since lots of gay and bi men revere straight men and see heterosexual men as the ultimate symbol of masculinity. :rolleyes: LOL

Like just look at how the bullshit concept of being "straight acting" is used by many gay and bi men, even ones on this site, to say that they're "masculine". :rolleyes:

I'm not straight-acting. I have sex with men and there's nothing heterosexual about it.

I'm bi. I am who I am.

I'm not acting this way or that to try to be/hide my sexuality from myself or others.

Queer, switch hitter, guy on the fence, fence sitter....whatever you want to call me.

Dr.Strangelove-my point is that those guys who have gay sex but still say that they're "straight" are in denial about their real sexuality.

[TaylorMade]

I didn't mention ex gays... that's not part of the position I'm taking, DD. I'm taking the position that if he says he's straight at this point of his life, I'm not gonna judge and undercut his own self-perception. If he's lying to himself, that's for HIM to deal with, not us on the sidelines. And besides... if he is about acceptance, I don't think he's down with the ex-gays.

What I am saying is... who are you to arbitrate someone's sexuality? Who died and made you the judge as to who is bi,gay, or straight? Your attitude here is no different than the gay people you've condemned for telling you that you are gay and in denial.

Sexuality (as others have mentioned on this site) has the potential to be quite fluid. For some the concept of Hetroflexibilty is valid. To set rules over sexuality is what we're trying to escape from here... but as it's been said, it seems we're replacing one dictator 3000 miles away for 300 one mile away.

Just because YOU run your sexuality a certain way, doesn't mean we all should do such and those who do not are either in denial or not "real bisexuals."

It seems self righteousness isn't confined to one side of the fence here.

*Taylor*

[flexuality]

No straight man gets off by being fucked by a guy, sucking another guy, fucking a guy, or being blown by another guy.

That's Bi at the very least.


I would just like to point out something here.....it actually is very possible for a "straight" man to orgasm with another man and NOT be gay or bi...look at abuse.

This idea that if one 'gets off' on it (ie, cums) that they MUST be gay or bi is one of the myths that surround abuse that make it so hard for people who have been abused to come to terms with their own sexuality.

The myth is that if you 'got off', then you MUST have liked it, when that is simply not true. Physical stimulation can cause orgasm whether one "likes it" or not.

[TaylorMade]

I would just like to point out something here.....it actually is very possible for a "straight" man to orgasm with another man and NOT be gay or bi...look at abuse.

This idea that if one 'gets off' on it (ie, cums) that they MUST be gay or bi is one of the myths that surround abuse that make it so hard for people who have been abused to come to terms with their own sexuality.

The myth is that if you 'got off', then you MUST have liked it, when that is simply not true. Physical stimulation can cause orgasm whether one "likes it" or not.

That was the next point I was about to make. Thanks, Flex. :)

*Taylor*

[DiamondDog]

I would just like to point out something here.....it actually is very possible for a "straight" man to orgasm with another man and NOT be gay or bi...look at abuse.

This idea that if one 'gets off' on it (ie, cums) that they MUST be gay or bi is one of the myths that surround abuse that make it so hard for people who have been abused to come to terms with their own sexuality.

The myth is that if you 'got off', then you MUST have liked it, when that is simply not true. Physical stimulation can cause orgasm whether one "likes it" or not.

Well like I said, he certainly wasn't forced into having sex with men and it clearly wasn't abuse, molestation, or rape.

It's not like he was in prison and forced to only have sex with men, and he wasn't raped or abused or forced into having sex with men while doing porn or being a male escort in L.A.

Anyway this whole thing reaks of the ex gay or should we say ex bi arguments.

I don't see how it doesn't have anything to do with the whole "ex" gay issue.

Papaleo is using the argument that he once was gay or bisexual and now that he's "saved" as a born again Christian that he's somehow now heterosexual because of being "saved" and being married to a woman. :rolleyes:

In this article he seems to be saying things like "oh my bad childhood made me have sex with men", "I was on drugs when I had sex with men", or "I was a whore and had sex with men for money; but now I'm heterosexual like I was all along and I'm saved by Christ and that's what 'made' me heterosexual".

These are all tactics that born again christians use to argue that being gay or bi or anything but heterosexual is a choice when it's clearly not.

The terms heteroflexible and homoflexible are just other words for being bisexual.

Anyway he seems like he's in denial about his sexuality and uses the argument that lots of "down low" and closeted men who are bi use in that they only fall in love with women but just want sex with men, so they see themselves as being "straight" because they don't fall in love with men or that they're "straight" because they're married or partnered to women.

[mindfinding]

Its good to see that he heard God and listened. It'll be interesting to see where this takes him. Thanks for posting the article.

[TaylorMade]

Well like I said, he certainly wasn't forced into having sex with men and it clearly wasn't abuse, molestation, or rape.

It's not like he was in prison and forced to only have sex with men, and he wasn't raped or abused or forced into having sex with men while doing porn or being a male escort in L.A.

Anyway this whole thing reaks of the ex gay or should we say ex bi arguments.

I don't see how it doesn't have anything to do with the whole "ex" gay issue.

Papaleo is using the argument that he once was gay or bisexual and now that he's "saved" as a born again Christian that he's somehow now heterosexual because of being "saved" and being married to a woman. :rolleyes:

In this article he seems to be saying things like "oh my bad childhood made me have sex with men", "I was on drugs when I had sex with men", or "I was a whore and had sex with men for money; but now I'm heterosexual like I was all along and I'm saved by Christ and that's what 'made' me heterosexual".

These are all tactics that born again christians use to argue that being gay or bi or anything but heterosexual is a choice when it's clearly not.


I hate to say it, but your argument doesn't track. If he is taking the position of acceptance by God, no matter your sexual orientation, why would he want to renounce his sexuality if he WERE bisexual?

Seriously...you're reading your notions into the story... as evidenced by your editorializing of the headline and your subsequent posts. It seems you really want to put him in a box, and his words aren't allowing for it.

You're refusing to let his subsequent actions speak for themselves and making a snap judgement.

*Taylor*

[flexuality]

My point wasn't that it was abuse...my point was that it is very possible to 'get off' strictly by physical stimulation....one doesn't have to 'like it' in order for that to happen. I just used abuse as an example of that.

I got a very different message from reading that article than you seemed to have....not that either one is wrong...just different.

I didn't get the impression at all that he was saying he was "saved" from being gay or bi, but rather that he wasn't being true to himself sexually. He seems to support all sexualities. He states quite clearly that he doesn't see same sex relationships as being wrong.

He has also been reading the bible for himself, rather than getting the 'church' view of it....that is something I can really appreciate, because that is how I read the bible too. I find it encouraging that he seems to be seeing the same thing that me and Sol see....that the bible is not against same sex relationships, it just warns of not being true to one's self.

[TaylorMade]

The terms heteroflexible and homoflexible are just other words for being bisexual.

Anyway he seems like he's in denial about his sexuality and uses the argument that lots of "down low" and closeted men who are bi use in that they only fall in love with women but just want sex with men, so they see themselves as being "straight" because they don't fall in love with men or that they're "straight" because they're married or partnered to women.

Your statments are no different to Dan Savages own biphobic statements, DD, except you're using them against someone who currently identifies as straight, and forcing them into a mold of your own choosing. Seriously, how is this different from...

This? (http://www.villagevoice.com/people/0617,savage,72995,24.html)


And before angry bisexuals start pounding away at their keyboards, consider this: My current position on bisexuals winding up with opposite-sex partners (you're mostly straight) is a hell of a lot more charitable than my previous position (you're cowards, liars, cheats, etc.).

*Taylor*

[DiamondDog]

Your statments are no different to Dan Savages own biphobic statements, DD, except you're using them against someone who currently identifies as straight, and forcing them into a mold of your own choosing. Seriously, how is this different from...

This? (http://www.villagevoice.com/people/0617,savage,72995,24.html)



*Taylor*

He can call himself "straight" all he wants but he's just fooling himself if he believes that he's heterosexual or always has been.

I've seen this argument tons of times from closeted bi and gay men who are married or who are in complete denial about themselves.

I even said when I first posted this article that I don't believe him about how he's "straight" and has "always been this way".

He's trying to argue that he was somehow forced into having sex with men but if you've ever seen his videos it's clear that he's enjoying himself and isn't forced into anything. ;)

Anyway I don't see why stating the obvious that if someone identifies as heteroflexible or homoflexible that it's just another word for being bisexual, how that's "forcing someone into a mold"?

I wouldn't say that I'm being like Dan Savage.

If you've read my previous posts on this topic about the whole ex gay topic, the "gay" for pay topic, or the arguments used by closeted and down low men you'll see how Papaleo's arguments for his sexuality don't hold water.

I don't care if you think that I'm "forcing him into a mold" since he's compartmenatlizing his sexuality and his life, and this is something that guys who are in denial about being gay, bi, or queer do and they wind up doing some fucked up shit.

Anyway, let's just say that Papaleo is "straight" (I'm not saying that he is).

If he is hetero why'd he get into gay porn in the first place? Why'd he stay in it for years and become a male escort? Why'd he make such a big deal about once being bisexual and then becoming "straight" once he found the confining dogma of born again Christianity, instead of retiring from the porn biz and just quietly fading into the background? Why did he have sex with a high number of men as sex partners, probably a higher number than most gay men ever will in their entire lives?

Maybe it's just all a gimmick so that people will try to buy up his videos? I bet he's still accepting all of those checks. ;)

[TaylorMade]

He can call himself "straight" all he wants but he's just fooling himself if he believes that he's heterosexual or always has been.

I've seen this argument tons of times from closeted bi and gay men who are married or who are in complete denial about themselves.

I even said when I first posted this article that I don't believe him about how he's "straight" and has "always been this way".

He's trying to argue that he was somehow forced into having sex with men but if you've ever seen his videos it's clear that he's enjoying himself and isn't forced into anything. ;)

Anyway I don't see why stating the obvious that if someone identifies as heteroflexible or homoflexible that it's just another word for being bisexual, how that's "forcing someone into a mold"?

I wouldn't say that I'm being like Dan Savage.

If you've read my previous posts on this topic about the whole ex gay topic, the "gay" for pay topic, or the arguments used by closeted and down low men you'll see how Papaleo's arguments for his sexuality don't hold water.

I don't care if you think that I'm "forcing him into a mold" since he's compartmenatlizing his sexuality and his life, and this is something that guys who are in denial about being gay, bi, or queer do and they wind up doing some fucked up shit.

Anyway, let's just say that Papaleo is "straight" (I'm not saying that he is).

If he is hetero why'd he get into gay porn in the first place? Why'd he stay in it for years and become a male escort? Why'd he make such a big deal about once being bisexual and then becoming "straight" once he found the confining dogma of born again Christianity, instead of retiring from the porn biz and just quietly fading into the background? Why did he have sex with a high number of men as sex partners, probably a higher number than most gay men ever will in their entire lives?

Maybe it's just all a gimmick so that people will try to buy up his videos? I bet he's still accepting all of those checks. ;)


You don't have much in the way of reading skills, do you? It seems you don't really want to discuss anything and merely want to stand in judgement over this guy and his past actions and current conversion.

I'm not gonna waste my time on your disengous questions on this topic, since you are (it seems) determined to put forth your pet issues and willfully ignore any legit challenges to your position. And many of them have been answered already, either by the article or the subsequent posts.

By the way, DD, are you still beating your boyfriend?
(NB: I am not insinuating that DD does do this, but what I am doing is invoking plurium interrogationum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_many_questions) to mirror the inherent flaw of his questioning tactics and the potential weakness of his points.)

*Taylor*

[teamnoir]

Straight? He's been fucked by a guy, given and gotten head from guys, fucked himself with a dildo, had a cum bath, and fucked men.......

If that's straight then fucking hell -- I'M straight!

while I don't normally favor calling someone's sexual self-identity into question, even I have to say that calling yourself straight with credits like that has to be a joke.

He's probably bisexual but he's not straight.

If he wants to call himself straight that's OK since I personally don't want a born again Christian who claims that he's been converted to heterosexuality representing bisexuality, and it will just confuse people about bisexuals and further prepetuate the "we're just confused" myth.

[JohnnyV]

Dunno, I have mixed feelings.

People get into porn for many different reasons, some of which have little to do with your innate desires. If he's recanting on porn and denouncing it, I have to infer that his reasons for going into it were complicated, and he possibly turned to it out of desperation. At the very least he was probably exploited while he was in that world.

I am an avid fan of porn, so I feel confident in saying that lots of men in erotic films look bored or forced when they are performing. It would not surprise me if many of the actors fell into the industry at a time when they were down on their luck.

Given all that, I don't think it would be fair of me to try to keep this man trapped in that period of his life, which he obviously wants to swear off and which brought him some deep sense of suffering. Judging him or making jokes about something that's very painful in his life, especially given his troubled state of mind and his turn to religion, would be ungracious. It would be easy for me to smirk and fall back on a safe sarcasm, given that I've never had my sexual practices recorded and projected to millions of people. But that would be hypocritical and mean, which I don't want to be, even in the comfortable silence of my own head as I am reading an online forum.

Diamond Dogg, to you I pose the following challenge: Why do you care what he says on a Christian TV show? Just as the person "outraged" about porn always has the option of turning it off, you have the power to turn off the Christian station that the man appeared on. Leave him to his world and let's focus on our own lives. Karma's sweet.

J

[Dr.StrangeLove]

Personally, I don't care what Tom Katt really is, who he chooses or chose to have sex with, why he's christian, or any of that. I find this very interesting, and a lot of good points have been made, but I don't see why people care so much if someone is critical of him online...after all he's the one who made the choice to become a high profile gay porn star and then tried to reidentify as straight. Having lots of hot gay sex in the movies kind of tends to impede one's privacy.

I also have to say that I think DD is probably right for the most part...I tend to think that actions define a person as much as how someone chooses to self identify. All the gay sex that this guy had (both on and off screen) makes it really hard for me to consider him straight, no matter how much I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt. I'd also like to add that I have a really hard time taking anything about sexuality, or for that matter anything at all, seriously if its coming out of the mouth of a born again christian...I've known far too many of them. In my world, you lose credibility when you adopt the belief that dinosaurs were created on the fifth day...just 24 hours before adam and eve. But then I'm an agnostic fundamentalist (I don't know if there's a god and neither do you!) so who am I to talk :tong:

Of course its not my place to judge, and I don't know anything about him, but this is the impression I get from the article DD posted.

[TaylorMade]

So, if someone comes out of a 20+ year straight marriage declaring themselves gay...can we doubt their new-found sexuality? After all, they have had years of straight sex, and maybe not just with their primary partner.

Actions define a person, don't they?

*Taylor*

[flexuality]

So, if someone comes out of a 20+ year straight marriage declaring themselves gay...can we doubt their new-found sexuality? After all, they have had years of straight sex, and maybe not just with their primary partner.

Actions define a person, don't they?

*Taylor*
hehe....that's the same question I was thinking!

[DiamondDog]

So, if someone comes out of a 20+ year straight marriage declaring themselves gay...can we doubt their new-found sexuality? After all, they have had years of straight sex, and maybe not just with their primary partner.

Actions define a person, don't they?

*Taylor*

There's a HUGE difference between being gay and married to a woman and not out, being closeted and not even realizing that you're gay, and being bisexual and having lots of sex with men and going back into the heterosexual closet with fake religious conversion and dogma by fundementalist Christians and saying "I'm 'straight' and I always have been".

I've talked to a lot of gay men who once were married and they talked about how they knew that they were gay but scared and closeted and how their wives' bodies and vaginas disgusted them and how they'd have to think about men constantly in order to achieve an erection, keep it, and to ejaculate.

I somehow doubt that Mr. Papaleo had to think about women constantly in order to get hard, give/recieve head, get fucked, be a power bottom, fuck men, and do other types of gay sex. Sure there's always the viagara theory but if he really is heterosexual he'd be repulsed by men and wouldn't have had so much sex with men, or had any sex at all with men.

Yes karma is nice but I see Mr. or I should say Rev. Papaleo as prepetuating the myth of sexual orientation "conversion" through Christianity which is what the "ex"-gay movement is about. I know he says he's NOT born again Christian but he is and by saying that he was once bisexual and is now heterosexual he's supporting the ex-gay movement and the false concept of heterosexual "conversion" through fundementalist Christianity.

I see this as a bad thing as it gives depressed and self loathing queer people the idea that there is something inheriently and morally wrong with them and that they can be "cured" by "ex" gay brainwashing and fundementalist Christianity.

[Azrael]

I see this as a bad thing as it gives depressed and self loathing queer people the idea that there is something inheriently and morally wrong with them and that they can be "cured" by "ex" gay brainwashing and fundementalist Christianity.
Absofuckinglutely *golf clap* :bigrin:

[TaylorMade]

There's a HUGE difference between being gay and married to a woman and not out, being closeted and not even realizing that you're gay, and being bisexual and having lots of sex with men and going back into the heterosexual closet with fake religious conversion and dogma by fundementalist Christians and saying "I'm 'straight' and I always have been".

I've talked to a lot of gay men who once were married and they talked about how they knew that they were gay but scared and closeted and how their wives' bodies and vaginas disgusted them and how they'd have to think about men constantly in order to achieve an erection, keep it, and to ejaculate.

I somehow doubt that Mr. Papaleo had to think about women constantly in order to get hard, give/recieve head, get fucked, be a power bottom, fuck men, and do other types of gay sex. Sure there's always the viagara theory but if he really is heterosexual he'd be repulsed by men and wouldn't have had so much sex with men, or had any sex at all with men.

Yes karma is nice but I see Mr. or I should say Rev. Papaleo as prepetuating the myth of sexual orientation "conversion" through Christianity which is what the "ex"-gay movement is about. I know he says he's NOT born again Christian but he is and by saying that he was once bisexual and is now heterosexual he's supporting the ex-gay movement and the false concept of heterosexual "conversion" through fundementalist Christianity.

I see this as a bad thing as it gives depressed and self loathing queer people the idea that there is something inheriently and morally wrong with them and that they can be "cured" by "ex" gay brainwashing and fundementalist Christianity.



You didn't read the article. He isn't for any of those things! He is for an accepting vision of Christianity that takes gays and lesbians just as they are. In case you missed it:


As Tom Katt, he participated in many gay pride celebrations. And when you have a pride parade, you have Christian fundamentalists preaching against gays. And that might be the battlefield where he launches his crusade.
“So many people are shunned or feel like they’ve been pushed away from God — that God doesn’t want anything to do with them. I want to tell as many people I can that that is an absolute lie,” Papaleo says. “God loves everybody. He made you the way you are. All he wants is for you is to turn to him and to love him the same way he loves you. Don’t let anyone tell you you’re less than anything in God’s eyes.”

This is from the article. That does not sound like a ringing endorsement of ex-gays to me. Read your sources, DD. Not your prejeduces.

It seems you saw "Christian" and instantly made your judgement, which makes you no better than the people you condemn. Stop equivocating. Stop judging... open your mind to the possibility that sexuality is fluid and that as people grow older, they come into themselves . If you can't accept that, then you are just as bad as they are. Just as intolerant, just as ignorant, just as spiritually immature.

*Taylor*

[Azrael]

“If you look at it historically, culturally and you’re not pulling things out of context, the Bible says ‘don’t to go against what is natural.’ If you are naturally heterosexual and you’re having sex with men, well, first, you’re treating that guy unfairly,” he says. “But the Bible’s not saying heterosexual is natural as far as from nature’s point of view — it means going against what’s natural for yourself.”

Umm, yeahh. I know this shit is somewhat subjective, but from my own research this ain't so. Sure, I'm crazier than a shithouse rat, but I think DD's on to something. Of course, he's my buddy so this could be a small amount of personal bias, this I must consider.

[TaylorMade]

“If you look at it historically, culturally and you’re not pulling things out of context, the Bible says ‘don’t to go against what is natural.’ If you are naturally heterosexual and you’re having sex with men, well, first, you’re treating that guy unfairly,” he says. “But the Bible’s not saying heterosexual is natural as far as from nature’s point of view — it means going against what’s natural for yourself.”

Umm, yeahh. I know this shit is somewhat subjective, but from my own research this ain't so. Sure, I'm crazier than a shithouse rat, but I think DD's on to something. Of course, he's my buddy so this could be a small amount of personal bias, this I must consider.

People are still arguing over what the bible means, though...and from his own words to tease out a definition that isn't there in the article, and throw in his own prejeduces... I know he's your friend, but in this case, he's seeing something that simply isn't present in the article.


*Taylor*

[Azrael]

Meh. Point taken. NBD.

[Dr.StrangeLove]

So, if someone comes out of a 20+ year straight marriage declaring themselves gay...can we doubt their new-found sexuality? After all, they have had years of straight sex, and maybe not just with their primary partner.

Actions define a person, don't they?

*Taylor*

I think it depends on the person and the situation, but generally speaking I think there's a big difference between coming out for the first time and redefining oneself after already being out for a long time. Like DD said, a lot of those people are completely sexually unattracted to their partners but stay married and closeted out of the fear of being open. I think others who come out as gay after long marriages are probably bisexual to some degree, if they've sustained an intimate sexual relationship for a long time and ever had enjoyable or passionate sex. Before my wife and I got married I told her I thought I was gay and didn't know if marriage was right, but she and I have always had a really passionate sexual relationship so eventually we decided to try a poly marriage and its been good...we still have passionate and loving sex, but I could easily identify as gay...to me having a passionate sexual relationship with a woman makes me bi, no matter how prodominantly gay I am. If Tom Katt enjoyed the sex he was having with guys I think that makes him at least bi. And I don't think its an unfair assumption to believe he was enjoying himself at least a little...I mean Falcon was one of the studios he worked for, and that stuff is usually pretty hot, passionate and very very gay...one can usually tell when a porn actor isn't into the sex, and falcon doesn't put those people in their movies. Personally I think there's something about this whole thing that seems disingenuous, but as I said before, I don't presume to know anything about it, I just find it interesting to talk about.

[DiamondDog]

You didn't read the article. He isn't for any of those things! He is for an accepting vision of Christianity that takes gays and lesbians just as they are. In case you missed it:



This is from the article. That does not sound like a ringing endorsement of ex-gays to me. Read your sources, DD. Not your prejeduces.

It seems you saw "Christian" and instantly made your judgement, which makes you no better than the people you condemn. Stop equivocating. Stop judging... open your mind to the possibility that sexuality is fluid and that as people grow older, they come into themselves . If you can't accept that, then you are just as bad as they are. Just as intolerant, just as ignorant, just as spiritually immature.

*Taylor*

Yeah he says he's for inclusion of GLBT people but it doesn't mesh with his fundementalist Christianity and his "ex"-gay philosophies that one can be converted to heterosexuality from bisexuality/homosexuality by religion which is pure nonsense.

No, I didn't see "Christian" and make judgement. I saw "Born Again" Christian and "ex-gay" and made a judgement! :)

I don't care about being spiritually immature since I'm a die hard agnostic.

Yes, sexuality is fluid but it's not that way from converting to born again Christianity, going through the whole "ex-gay" psychological brainwashing, and it's imossible to "convert" a homosexual or bisexual person from their true sexuality into heterosexuality by religion, prayer, and dogmatic psychological brainwashing like the fundementalist Christians and Mr. Papaleo believe.

He can say that he's "always been heterosexual" or that he was converted to heterosexuality by Christianity all he wants but nobody will take him seriously or believe him.

I feel bad for him, the closet of denial is a lonely place.

[TaylorMade]

You once again proved you have not read the article with an open mind or in its totality and are reading your prejeduces into it.

I saw Born Again Christian.. Ex gay is NOWHERE in the article. RIF, DD...

BTW, he's not denying his past...or pretending he didn't think of himself as anything other than straight.


So now you’re straight?
“Yes, I identify as heterosexual. There was a time I thought of myself as bisexual, and I never hide that fact,” Papaleo says.

When you want to beat someone up, read EVERYTHING ABOUT THEM. He didn't mention a single thing about ANY ex-gay organization or of any sort of wide-reaching conversion of other peoples sexuality. His rhetoric is about a more open Christianity, one that would render those organizations superflous. Other posters seemed to be capable of grasping this.

From what I can tell: you read Born-Again Christian, and assumed what his beliefs were. I showed you statements contradicting this. You continue to hold these assumptions with nothing butressing it but your own prejeduces.

http://static.flickr.com/40/76670805_f662fce4e2_o.jpg

I believe this is the problem here.


*Taylor*

[flexuality]

Born again Christians and fundamentalist Christians are NOT the same thing.

To paint all Christians with the same brush is like saying that all bisexual men love anal sex.

He never claimed that he was "converted to heterosexuality by Christianity".....I think you, DiamondDog, claimed that.

[DiamondDog]

Born again Christians and fundamentalist Christians are NOT the same thing.

To paint all Christians with the same brush is like saying that all bisexual men love anal sex.

He never claimed that he was "converted to heterosexuality by Christianity".....I think you, DiamondDog, claimed that.

Says who?

ALL of the born again Christian types I've ever met are fundementalist and they're all into "saving" people and all that.

Even if they claim that they're queer friendly the "love the sinner hate the sin" mentality about queer people is bullshit.

Plus lots of Christians and churches ARE homophobic in varying degrees even if they don't exactly come out and say it.

You have to read between the lines to see that this is an "ex gay" issue.

If you look up the whole "ex gay" concept and actually read what he's saying you'll see that he'd be considered "ex gay" and a born again Christian.


“I didn’t hit rock bottom, and I didn’t turn to a particular church. I just started praying. I prayed and asked God for help,” he says. “I asked him to help me with what my life was becoming, and what my life should become. He truthfully helped me in my heart and showed me that what I was doing wasn’t correct.”

So he began studying on his own.
And get this.

“I remember being on a … [porn] set, and the guys all laughing at me because I was reading the Bible,” Papaleo says.

[flexuality]

Says who?

ALL of the born again Christian types I've ever met are fundementalist and they're all into "saving" people and all that.

Even if they claim that they're queer friendly the "love the sinner hate the sin" mentality about queer people is bullshit.

Plus lots of Christians and churches ARE homophobic in varying degrees even if they don't exactly come out and say it.

You have to read between the lines to see that this is an "ex gay" issue.

If you look up the whole "ex gay" concept and actually read what he's saying you'll see that he'd be considered "ex gay" and a born again Christian.

I agree with you that a lot of Christians and churches are homophobic...or at the very least ignorant and that they would LOVE to see this as an "ex-gay" thing.

What I repsect about what this guy is doing is that he's NOT making it into an "ex-gay" thing....he seems to be doing the opposite.


Papaleo seems genuinely passionate about studying the Bible. And he’s still not affiliated with a particular church.

“I’ve been very unimpressed with a lot of churches. Many of them don’t study or teach the Bible in the depth that it should be taught. A lot of churches pull one or two verses out of the air and make up their own interpretations of it instead of really studying the book itself,” he says.

I can appreciate this, as I am passionate about studying the bible as well....and I also am coming to similar conclusions....that churches are NOT teaching it the way it is written....they pull out whatever suits their sermon of the day and use it completely out of context.

I also do not go to any church, no do I get any information about the bible from any church.

He further goes on to say...


As far as same-sex relationships and marriage, “They’re not wrong,” he continues. “The most important thing is to love God with all your heart. The second thing, is to love your fellow person that same way. I don’t know how loving someone of your own sex in that manner is considered wrong.”

I'm not sure how what you're quoting supports your thinking on this....

His statement of:

He truthfully helped me in my heart and showed me that what I was doing wasn’t correct.
is not a statement against gays or being gay...it's not even a judgement...it's just a simple acknowlegement that for HIM, his life wasn't going the way he wanted it to....and at some level he knew that.

[hudson9]

DD -- Sorry, but I really think you have to check yourself here regarding prejudice against Christians.

There is no doubt that MANY self-identified "born again" Christians are homophobic, intolerant, judgemental, reactionary, even ignorant.

But MANY is not ALL. I identify myself as Christian, and also to varying degrees Bisexual. I do NOT believe that God hates homosexuality or homosexuals (or bi people), or that people are sinners by virtue of homomsexuality (rather, only by being human, which we all are "guilty" of), or that they need to be "cured" or anything else. And I am not ALONE in this. I may be in a minority (and maybe NOT), but the existence of even a minority of, shall we call it "gay-tolerant" Christians, challenges your blanket assumptions about Christians.

I also think it is not up to anyone to challenge someone else's self-identification of their sexuality. How someone feels at any given point in their life, is how they feel at that given point in their life. I will say that Tom Katt does NOT seem to be exhibiting any of the signs one would expect of someone being in denial. He is not blaming anyone else for his past, he's not denying his past, he's not directing any rage at anyone else, he's not being defensive or evasive. Whatever life experiences or psychological influences may have brought him to where he is now, this is where he is now. We are all the products of complex interactions between genetics, environment, and experiences, and none of us are static beings. It is entirely possible that Tom Katt may at some future point again feel "homosexual" or "bisexual" -- but right now, he's feeling "straight." If there are people who can't accept that, it may be because of their own issues rather than Toms.

[Azrael]

What I repsect about what this guy is doing is that he's NOT making it into an "ex-gay" thing....he seems to be doing the opposite.

Okay, that's a good point there.