I do what I do for a number of reasons.
I'm a very sexually open person and naturally exhibitionistic, and to me, it seems like an extremely logical career choice. I know that it's cliche to advise people to do what they love, find a way to make a living at it, but it was very true for me. I love having the best job in the world, and I don't think there's anything wrong with making money with selling sex in some form or the other. I like the idea of "living forever", in a way, via the fact that my images will be out there for people to enjoy long after I'm gone. Some people like to "live forever" via their children, but I like to do it through getting people off.
I'm happy to be creating my own porn and promoting porn made by others that is different than what you can find in the mainstream. I like showing a wide range of human body types, gender expressions, and sexual styles, and I think it's a good thing that anyone nowadays can produce their own porn according to their own interests. Sure, the majority will probably always want the stereotypical "porn star", but I'm glad to cater to the bizarre minority of oddballs that like what I like.
On a tangent, you'd be surprised by what I consider "offensive" when it comes to smut.
I can't stand the emerging "porn for women" genre, because it takes female sexuality back about 50 years. "Porn for women" (heterosexual women only!) focuses on romance and soft-focus images of kissing, and puts forth the idea that in order for women to be aroused, a sexual situation must be framed in terms of love and affection and cuddling. Now, I like snuggling as much as any person, but it's intensely offensive to me to suggest that women are such delicate little flowers that they can't handle sex without it being about love. That, to me, is exactly the sort of mentality sex-positive feminism has been fighting against. I don't need romance and stupid contrived story lines to get wet- and I like to see *fucking*. ("Porn for women" rarely features shots of penetration and male orgasm and other things that supposedly frighten women.) Also, "porn for women" is just as bad as mainstream male porn is the type of body images it promotes- oiled up beefcake guys with muscles, who generally look like they were photographed more than 10 years ago for some gay porn mag. One of the big "porn for women" site owners once wrote on a webmaster board that she selects content for her site by buying generic couples/guy content and then taking out all the explicit photos and writing lovey romance introductions that "appeal to women". The whole thing is just dripping with the idea that women actually don't like or want sex. It all reminds me of an Onion article about a woman masturbating to the thought of having a husband, a house in the suburbs, and 2.5 darling children.