User talk:PeaceDeadC

I think the draft Tom Katt is ready to be moved to the main space. Otherwise, tell me what to edit.

Hi,

The Gay Pornography section needs to be a complete and exhaustive list of all studios that appear in the major indexers (GEVI and IAFD). This is a mandatory requirement for every new professional pornographic actor article. A few important notes on this section:

• We're looking specifically for studios, not distributors.
• Compilations can be ignored.
• GEVI is preferred when building the list, since it usually shows both the studio and distributor, which makes the process much cleaner and faster.

I've added the ones included in PBC's list, which are not all of them. Should I give you a list of the rest of studios so they can be incorporated?

The studio dictionary behind Template:GayPornographicCareerList is a very large but scalable database, and properly filling out the list is a separate task when creating articles, especially for performers with big filmographies.

Best way forward:

Just go ahead and add the remaining studios directly into the list in the article. The template will automatically highlight which ones are still missing or unrecognized.

A couple of quick reminders:

• Add only the actual studios (the production companies), not distributors.
• Double-check against the categories By website and By studio if you're unsure about any entries.

If you run into any questions or get stuck, feel free to ping me.

Just added all of them, including missing ones. As far as I'm aware, the dictionary can only be edited by whitelisted users.

I've been a casual reader of the Wiki for a while, been thinking of contributing... but one thing that's always bothered me is the insistence on listing every straight guy who's ever recieved money to do gay porn as "bisexual", both in the article lead and the biobox. This is just ridiculous and delusional. Porn actors are sex workers, not everything, or even anything they film is necessarily a representative of their personal sexual orientation. Is the idea that male gay for pay porn stars just never existed? Not once? The "bisexual" category on this Wiki defines bisexuality as "sexual or romantic attraction to people of one's same sex and of the opposite sex." so it's not just the Wiki simply classifying them as bisexual because they've done both gay and straight porn or something, the Wiki insinuated that they are bisexual people, which they're not. As a long time fan of gay porn and also a lot of these guys, I know a lot of information about them, and a LOT of these performers are simply straight, as they've also stated. I'm fully gay but I had sex with girls in high school (because I was trying to maintain a social image) does that make me bisexual? I don't think so. It's a shame, because this Wiki tries to be so detailed, but this is just purposeful false information. I'm sure even the admins know a lot of these guys are just straight. I'd offer to edit all of that (or at least to remove claims of bisexuality) but the bioboxes seem to be permalocked sadly.

The development stage of a man's sexuality can be the complete opposite of the final result. From the age of 5 I knew there was something I liked about men that I did not like about women. This would later be my 100% homosexuality. When I actually reached the age of sexuality, I couldn't keep my dick soft. I was experimenting with a local friend, she was as horny as me. Although we were frequently naked and my dick was bursting at the seams, we never actually fucked, maybe we were too young. As the years went by this hornyness could not be found with a female. There is absolute zero about a woman that would get me aroused. So as a 100% homosexual and sex addict, I later worked as an escort across three decades. I was really good at what I did. I even recorded some gay scenes when I was young. Working for an agency, they would constantly seek to get me to meet women offering more money than usual. I always refused, there is zero attraction to women and I would not be able to get aroused. Straight men are not performing monkeys for the gays and likewise gay men are not performing monkeys for women..... unless they are..... wait for it.... bisexual.

Hi Drki,

Thanks for the feedback.

Quick clarification: decisions on sexual orientation parameters (including P347 in PBD and related categories on PBC) are handled by the Verification Committee. They make recommendations based on data from their closed database, using criteria that have full admin consensus.

You're right about our definition of bisexuality. We stick strictly to "sexual or romantic attraction to people of one's same sex and of the opposite sex," and we will continue to do so.

Do G4P performers exist? Yes. The phenomenon certainly exists. Just none of them have been added as articles here. Their share among all performers is very small. As a rule, such people do not produce much gay content and, in our terminology, articles about them tend to have low notability, although there are exceptions.

As for your question whether everyone who has performed in both hetero and gay scenes is automatically labeled as bisexual, the answer is no. There is no automatic process. The Verification Committee reviews each case individually and issues recommendations based on specific criteria established by the administrators. There is no automated labeling on PBC.

Welp, in that case the committe is faulty.

"The phenomenon certainly exists. Just none of them have been added as articles here. Their share among all performers is very small." Really? Are you sure? Lmao. 85% of performers listed as "bisexual" on here are just G4P and the "bisexual" designation is based on nothing. There are also sources where they themselves blatantly say they're straight (as if it's not obvious) in interviews and social media posts.

In fact, G4P performers either match or outweigh actual bisexual and gay men in certain markets. There are so many Czech gay for pay porn stars that it's a whole ecosystem in and of itself. Do you rally think all those Belami guys are bisexual, for example? Do you think Max Born is bisexual?

Sexuality ≠ sexual identity, and PBC's criteria for sexuality-related categories will always be based on established facts rather than original research. You're free to disagree with what is written on PBC. Critical thinking should be applied to anything you read on the internet, and that's generally a good practice.

If I ever have reason to doubt that Max Born is bisexual, I will make the appropriate change to his article.

If you have any other questions about how PBC operates, feel free to ask. I'll be happy to answer them.

Analysis of the "Gay for Pay" (G4P) Phenomenon in Adult Entertainment The label "Gay for Pay" (G4P) functions less as a legitimate expression of sexual orientation and more as a manufactured industry trope. While bisexuality is a documented, valid orientation, the term G4P is frequently deployed—often in preference to "bisexual"—to navigate the complex social dynamics within gay male subcultures and the commercial adult entertainment industry. The Marketing of the "Straight" Identity The prevalence of the G4P label is largely driven by studios seeking to capitalize on the market demand for the "straight-acting" or "straight-identifying" male. This archetype remains a powerful fantasy for many gay consumers. To maintain this allure, studios often employ aggressive marketing strategies. Historically, production houses like Broke Straight Boys fabricated narratives involving wives or girlfriends to reinforce the illusion of heterosexuality. Even when studios engage in genuine dialogue with performers regarding their sexual preferences, the emphasis on the performer's attraction to women is often highlighted to curate a specific audience appeal. Performers and the Construction of the G4P Persona The tension between personal identity and professional branding is evident in the experiences of high-profile performers. For instance, Johnny Rapid was marketed as "gay for pay" by industry platforms despite his own open acknowledgement of his bisexuality—a reality that remained consistent even as his professional focus shifted toward performing with men. Similarly, performers like Paddy O’Brian frequently maintain a "G4P" persona, despite extensive, documented sexual history with men both on and off-screen. For many performers, adopting an exaggerated masculine aesthetic while denying a gay or bisexual identity can serve as a defensive mechanism to protect their public reputation or ego within the industry. As a former professional in the sex industry, I observed firsthand that self-identifying as a man with a partner and children often served a dual purpose: it sustained client interest by fostering a sense of "safe" interaction, while also mitigating the risk of emotional entanglement or obsession from clients, many of whom were themselves navigating their own complexities regarding sexuality and relationships. A Critique of Sexual Categorization The insistence on the "G4P" label highlights a significant disconnect between commercial fantasy and the spectrum of human sexuality. Drawing on the Kinsey scale, it is evident that sexual orientation exists along a continuum. There is a frequent irony in gay subcultures that stigmatize bisexuals, despite the fact that a vast majority of men exist somewhere between the poles of exclusive heterosexuality and exclusive homosexuality. Ultimately, the term "heterosexual" should be defined by the absence of sexual activity with other men. When a performer spends years or decades engaged in same-sex sexual activity, the "G4P" label becomes a performative construct rather than a statement of truth. The persistence of this trope speaks more to the anxieties of the industry and its consumers than to the actual sexual identities of the performers themselves.

Alright 86.176.33.150 thanks for the ChatGPT slop. Everything here is a wishful thinking headcanon. Not only are most "G4P" performers genuinely straight, a lot of straight men in the industry will LIE about being bisexual, because of the "queerbaiting" backlash against G4P performers and content in recent years. And as a matter of fact, their straightness isn't even advertised anywhere and you have to dig information to find out about it in 80% of cases, so clearly it's not "marketing", as claimed. And also, just because you couldn't get it up for a woman doesn't mean there aren't gay men who theoretically could and have if they needed to, let alone straight men who work in the porn industry getting it up via pills and pumps half of the time. Lmao.

And @PeaceDeadC, "Sexuality ≠ sexual identity, and PBC's criteria for sexuality-related categories will always be based on established facts rather than original research." So you're defining sexuality based on who somebody has sex with, obviously, nullifying the whole "romantic and sexual attraction" definition, since it is preposterous to assume sex workers in general harbor attraction towards everybody they have sex with, but especially so in this context. These are forced, wishful thinking narratives on behalf of catty gay men that don't align with reality. And Max Born isn't bisexual for example because 1) he's cearly straight if you have any sort of gaydar or functioning read on men and 2) he has talked in a sort-of famous interview about how much he hated doing gay scenes and how his first gay scene was his least favorite thing he'd ever done. And that's just one example.

@Drki Not convincing. If the purpose of your posts was to change my mind on this issue, you have not succeeded. If the goal was simply to continue an open-ended debate, I would suggest doing so on forums specifically intended for exchanging opinions.

As far as PBC is concerned, the question of which criteria are used to determine sexuality is settled for me personally, and for the other project administrators as well, since there is an established consensus on the matter.

Thank you everyone for sharing their views in this thread.

Images are not currently showing up. You're probably aware.

This is due to the CDN not yet having received certificates. The images are accessible via HTTP, but the server is blocking them due to security policy.

When will this be fixed?

I hope soon 😂

😭

For one of the pages I'm making, I found a biography for the law firm he works at. Am I allowed to include that in the personal pages section?

Just treat it as a source and cite it properly so everything stays clean and verifiable.

Here's the best way to do it:

Use the Cite web template right in the article text where the info appears. Wrap it in <ref>...</ref> tags so it automatically shows up in the References section at the bottom of the page.

That way it’ll generate a nice numbered footnote and keep your page looking professional.

tips:

• Fill in as many parameters as you can (title, publisher, date, etc.).
• Make sure the page you’re editing actually has a References section (required for biographical articles).

Example:

Code

He works as a partner at Example Law Firm.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.lawfirm.com/bio/john-doe |title=Biography of John Doe |publisher=Example Law Firm |access-date=2026-05-10}}</ref>

Result

He works as a partner at Example Law Firm.

Thanks for the clarification. Do you mind explaining how to upload photos in the Draft main space? I did try reading the guides but didn't have much luck

There’s actually no such thing as a “Draft main space”. Mainspace (regular articles) and Draft space are two completely separate namespaces. Photos and other files live in their own special namespace called File.

If you want to read more about how namespaces work, here’s a good overview: Help:Namespaces

I looked through it and couldn't figure out how to upload an image. Could you walk me through that?

Sure.

Before you upload anything:

Read the policies first, this is important so your image doesn’t get deleted later:

• PBC:Images
• PBC:File names

Make sure the photo you want to upload follows those rules.

How to upload the image:

1. Go to this page: Special:UploadWizard
2. Click the big button that says “Select media...” and choose the image from your computer.
3. Fill in the required information on the next screens: File name: Give it a clear, descriptive name (follow the PBC:File names guidelines). Description: Add a short description of what the image shows. Other fields as needed (Categories).
4. Review everything and click “Upload”.

Once it finishes, you’ll get a link to the new File:Your Image Name.jpg page. You can then use it in your draft like this: [[File:Your Image Name.jpg|thumb|left|Caption goes here]]

I read the article, but it looks like my picture was deleted, did I do something wrong?

PBC:MSIZE

Good afternoon, you recently deleted my article for Mack with active duty. This is my first time writing an article, so i would appreciate any clarification. How do I fix the article?

Never mind, I read your previous posts, please delete this post if you are able. I can not do it for some reason.

I have failed to find any actor's article that features a biographic rundown. Is it discouraged or is it just that nobody has come around to it? Just wanted to know before adding my own descriptions.

Hey, biographies are totally welcome!

The main thing is how you write it. If you're just copying a random paragraph from some blog or unofficial site it's probably gonna get flagged or removed during patrol because we actually do check sources here (see PBC:Verifiability).

Keep in mind that writing a bio for a porn actor is very different from writing one for someone like Meryl Streep on Wikipedia. The sourcing standards and available reliable material are way lower here, so it’s trickier. As long as you make sure an admin/patroller can actually verify what you wrote against proper sources and it doesn’t come across as original research, you should be good.

So no, it’s not discouraged at all. It’s actually encouraged. It’s just that not many people do it well.

Hi, How do you link the Porn Base Data info to a Draft Article?

You can’t. Draft articles cannot be linked to PBD item. The draft namespace is unmoderated and intended for temporary content. Templates like Biobox or Preamble are configured to pull data from PBD item only when the article is in the mainspace.

Ok, thanks for letting me know.

Hi admin, thanks for this great encyclopedia! A solution to these privacy requests could be to hide personal details for non-registered users or click-to-view toggles (like "email hide"). Over the years, several ex-models have been complaining that their real-life name was disclosed over here (most recent example : pbc.xxx/wiki/Topic:Zc8k1m1kzrnkoqhi) ; i understand their concerns because people grow and change over time, and the ability to forget past experiences is indispensable for well-being. Unless the purpose is to shame them ad aeternam for something they don't feel confident anymore with? Thanks for reading

Hello.

At the moment, this issue is not on the agenda of the administrative committee. There is a clear consensus among the administrators on this matter and it is fully reflected in the current PBC policy.

It would limit robot indexation on the web, satisfying the requests when they demand it. If this encyclopedia contributes to ex-models being hurt (family, career damage, or even suicide), wouldn't you feel sad and partly guilty for it?

PBC:CENSOR

When trying to insert them, their link appears instead of the animated picture. Is there a special procedure for them?

Category:Animated_WebP_files <- Animated WebP is not supported by default in MediaWiki.

Then what format to use? GIF isn't supported.

PBC:Video

I know criteria on this website revolves around quality, but 80s-90s pictures can't rival current ones in resolution and detail. That's why I ask for there to be a more lenient rule regarding vintage media, as it's essential in gay porn history, and it seems to be under-reported here. I also ask because my efforts to upload images of 90s films and actors have been struck down even after enhancing and upscaling pictures (maybe that's not the reason, and if it wasn't, I'd like to hear really why). Thank you.

Hey, it's just gotta fit the site's standards so everything stays clean and searchable.

Quick heads-up: our criteria already cut vintage material some slack. For frames/screenshots from those old movies, the minimum resolution is set at DVD quality (720x480) because that's literally what most of those films were mastered in back then (with a few rare exceptions). So it's not like we're holding them to modern 4K levels.

On the upscaling/enhancing thing if you don't have access to pro-level tools, it's honestly better not to upload the edited versions at all. Originals always win priority here, and upscaling can get messy real quick (artifacts, weird textures, etc.). We only recommend it in extreme cases, and even then it has to look natural. Another big thing that trips people up (and might be why your uploads got rejected) is the file naming. We have a pretty strict system to keep things organized and let the site's templates/automation work properly:

For performer headshots: It has to be exactly like Mark_Montana.jpg. No "MarkMontana1.jpg", no random numbers etc.

For movie covers:

• Front cover: Bro_Buddies_(Falcon_Studios).jpg
• Back cover: Bro_Buddies_(Falcon_Studios)_back_cover.jpg

You can drop the studio name if the title is super unique, but keep the format clean. It's a simple templating thing. If the names are off, the upload often gets auto-flagged or rejected even if the pics are solid.

Alright, thanks!