ONTD

6:34 pm - 11/08/2012

Two Porn Stars Offer Different Opinions on California’s Measure B


On Tuesday, California overwhelmingly passed the controversial Measure B ordinance, which will require all adult industry performers to wear condoms during scenes shot in Los Angeles County. Most of the porn industry, including the adult industry’s biggest male star, James Deen, are against the measure. We talked to Deen about what the future holds for the adult industry, “condom officers,” and leaving Los Angeles.


What is the feeling right now in the industry?

Well, there’s a lot of confusion, first and foremost. But I mean basically people don’t know what to do. They’re not sure where the industry’s going to go. And in the industry we’ve kind of created a community in Los Angeles. And if the community is to migrate, then we can migrate. We’re all looking to our attorneys and to our government and our representatives if there is anything we can do to find out exactly what the laws are. They’re written in a vague way. Are examinations going to be mandatory now, or are we going to be wearing gloves on set? I mean, what about goggles? What about kissing and fluid exchange? Is kissing no longer allowed in pornos? Like, what degree of severity is this measure actually going to require? After that, is it worth it?

How much is it going to cost the industry, and is it worth it to register our businesses out of town and then go shoot outside of Los Angeles County? Is it worth it to migrate to Las Vegas, which is said to be welcoming with open arms? Florida, and I believe Arizona as well, said something about wanting the billion-dollar industry. That’s going to be a huge hit to Los Angeles.

The measure is written in a vague way. It’s built under the guise of protection ... which is of course why it won, and it’s a very hard thing to fight. Because you know, if you’re an average person, you say “condoms,” “safe sex”—you want to protect people that are in the sex industry. They don’t understand how the sex industry works. They don’t know the vigorous testing procedures and protocols we have and how safe we are. And so, for all they know, we’re just a bunch of people engaging in crazy sex, which is not accurate. And so if you just say “Slap a condom on,” it sounds good to most people.


Is that why you think it passed?

I absolutely think it passed for that reason. I mean, there’s no logical reason, because this measure does not affect anybody except the adult-film industry and the taxpayers, in the sense that tax revenue, this money, you need to pay. So now we have to have multiple, for all intents and purposes, “condom officers,” whose job is to sit on an adult-film set and watch porn.


Is that really what’s going to happen?

That’s one of the things that was mentioned. I’m not a lawyer, so I am not the correct person to ask exactly what the law says. But the only way that it can be enforced is if somebody actually does watch porn. Somebody needs to sit there and either review all the content that’s being shot, or they need to sit on set and verify that people are actually adhering to this measure. And so that is, as far as I understand, a $52,000-a-year government job. And so that money has to come from somewhere. Los Angeles taxpayers are going to be paying multiple people $52,000 a year to have this job.

One thing people were saying before this passed was that it could force porn production underground and have rogue companies filming people who are not being tested.

I mean, anything is possible. At the moment, these are the safety issues. You have a condom as being 87 percent safe. You have to remember, safe sex is an illusion. Abstinence is the only safe sex. There’s only safer sex. If you meet a stranger in a bar and you have sex with them, a condom is your best protective measure. You’re dealing with a small community of people that is engaging in sexual activity with one another, and we’re all regularly tested, in addition to the fact that we have a database that has everybody’s tests on file to verify this for whoever it is that’s showing up with the test results is actually tested and those test results are accurate. So it eliminates the faking of tests or any sort of things like that.

We’re dealing with an 87 percent safety rate with a condom. You also have to remember, adult films are not real sex. It’s entertainment. So just because we’re engaging in physical sex doesn’t mean it is normal sex. We’re going to be—to be crude, you have women being pounded by large or above-average-size penises for a nonstandard amount of time. For hours. From anywhere from 30 minutes to up to three hours or more. So now you add latex into that, the ultimate probability of friction burn, vaginal and anal tears, and things like that. And when you’re dealing with something with an 87 percent safety rate, you’re going to now have a higher probability of transmitting any sort of STD or STI because you now have more issues in addition to that.


If you all start using condoms, is there any reason for the testing and the database to stop?

I see no reason for it. I, personally, if I’m going to go do a condom-only scene, and my fellow performer is not tested. I’m not going to do the scene. I trust a test from somebody that is being regularly tested on a regular basis that is in my industry. I trust that test more than I trust a condom.


But even with a condom you would still hope that this is being upheld?

I would, still, personally, as a performer, I would personally require a test in addition to a condom.


In the event that you’ve got rogue companies doing condomless sex scenes out of Los Angeles, do you see any reason why they wouldn’t self-police again?

Realistically, what’s going to happen, I don’t think there’s going to be so much underground porn shot as much as you’re going to have the adult-film industry leave Los Angeles. So, realistically, I don’t foresee any of the underground, rogue, condomless, untested porn being shot.


What about the idea that the lack of condoms in porn sends a message that unsafe sex is OK?

I think it’s the same argument that watching a movie with somebody in a car-chase scene promotes somebody driving aggressively. Adult films are entertainment films ... I would agree that it’s a good idea on adult films to put a disclaimer saying “This is not real sex. This is an entertainment movie. Use a condom to protect yourself. Engage in safe sex.”


Why do you feel that people reject condom porn?

I don’t know. I have no idea.


Do you watch it?

As a viewer of pornography I’ve never cared one way or the other if somebody uses condoms in a movie or not. But I’m part of that 60 or 70 percent of people that doesn’t care. The industry’s sales went down by over 30 percent. So 30 percent of the viewers do care.


You’ve mentioned in a Reddit AMA that you use condoms in your personal life. What’s the difference?

That’s correct. The industry is very strict and has rigorous protocols for testing. Somebody needs to be tested every 14, 28 days ... And in addition to that there’s also a physical inspection done by a third party, which would be the producer or the safety officer or whoever is qualified to do the physical inspection, checking for sores, open wounds, things of that nature. Because of these safety precautions, we have had zero HIV transmissions in almost 10 years. This is a scientific phenomenon, according to medical professionals. There is no other community in the entire world that has anywhere near that ratio. The closest is Cuba, which is hundreds or thousands. We have zero. Zero HIV transmissions. Our system works. We are very safe, we are very careful, and to say our system is not working is very insulting.

The reason why I use condoms when I am engaging in sex with people that are not in the industry is because I don’t know what they are doing. If I want to have sex with somebody and I am willing to take that risk, and I will trust a condom—which is only 87 percent safe—I will trust that condom to not break, to not get them pregnant or allow me to contract anything.

Sex is scary and sex is dirty, and there’s no such thing as safe sex. Just safer sex, and within porn, within the adult-film industry, we have managed to find a way to make it the safest sex possible. You cannot get safer than the adult-film industry, and because of that, like I said, what I imagine will happen with Measure B is either it’s going to be appealed to a federal level and they’re going to deem it an unconstitutional law, which it is, and a violation of the First Amendment. And they are going to overturn it and things will go back to normal. Or we’re just going to pick up and move.




(Published on Oct. 18) The porn industry has campaigned against Measure B, the L.A. County ballot initiative that would require performers to use condoms. But porn star Aurora Snow says it’s necessary.

I would prefer to have both condoms and testing in porn. It doesn’t have to be one or the other; it makes sense to have both. This is not what a girl in the industry is supposed to say, but it is what a lot of us think when quietly eyeing Los Angeles County’s ballot initiative—known as Measure B—mandating condoms in adult films.

Safety isn’t sexy. Wearing a helmet while riding a motorcycle makes me feel like a dork, but I do it because I know what’s at risk if I don’t. No one feels or looks sexy wearing a safety hat or knee pads. That’s what the condom is for the porn industry, it’s our safety hat.


No one wants to wear the safety hat, it’s uncomfortable, it doesn’t look pretty and it may make the day longer. Condoms are known to rip. Who knows how many condoms one scene will take. If it’s a three guys-on-one-girl scene and the condoms keep ripping it could go from a two-hour scene to a four-hour scene. Only one porn company that I know of is and always has been all condoms: Wicked. They have been doing what other companies fear: selling safe sex.

I have done the majority of my six-hundred scenes without condoms, but I predominately use condoms in my personal life. In real life, I ask that my partners both wear condoms and get tested. Yet when I go to work I follow the standard procedure of working without a condom and taking my fellow actor’s most recent test at face value.

Every month when I get tested, I wonder if I’ll have to come home to my guy and say, “Please don’t be mad at me, but we have to go see a doctor because you might have been exposed.” Because even though I primarily use condoms in my personal life, like most people I know, I don’t use them with oral sex. While it’s not as easy to catch something through oral, the possibility remains, and due to the nature of my work the risk is high. Luckily, most STDs that float around the world of porn—most often referred to as the “industry flu”—can be cured with a single shot of antibiotics. Because these STDs are so easy to get rid of, most performers have a certain level of comfort with them. It’s almost common. There are other not-so-easily cured STDs that aren’t tested for in the adult business. We test monthly for gonorrhea, chlamydia, and the big one, HIV. There are zero requirements to be tested for anything else, but there are other risk factors, such as herpes, HPV, and syphilis. Thanks in part to the recent syphilis outbreak, there may now be a standard monthly syphilis test.

When I heard about the syphilis outbreak, my first feeling was one of relief. For the first time ever, I was so removed from the Los Angeles porn scene that I didn’t have to check my calendar and start calling every partner I’d had in the last two weeks to see whether I was at risk. There have been several HIV scares when I had to make those phone calls and figure out for myself how close I was to patient zero. There are no groups within porn protecting performers; it’s always been up to performers to keep track of their scene partners, to check tests for themselves, and to make those phone calls no one wants to make.

It isn’t safe to rely on someone else to keep me safe on set. I showed up one day with a fresh test, still a newbie to porn and very trusting. What happened? The other girl in our scene couldn’t seem to “find” her test. She was a big star at that time, and she was an exclusive performer for this company. The director did his best to persuade me and the male performer to work with this prized performer despite her lack of a test. When we both refused, he yelled at us, but didn’t fire us. That could have happened. Instead, we shot the scene without the untested girl. That was the first time I understood porn directors aren’t looking out for me, so I have to.

While that situation doesn’t happen often, it does happen. Here is another example. I arrived on time for work. I sat through an hour and a half of hair and makeup, went through wardrobe options with the director, and then shot glamour photos for the box cover. Before any bodily fluids are exchanged, performers share their test results. I showed the male performer my test results and waited patiently for his. Somehow he never produced them and got ready for the scene anyway. I persisted in asking for his test. His answer, “Baby girl, you know me. We work together all the time, you know I get tested baby.” That answer didn’t go over well with me. I sought out the director and asked for the test results. No one could produce a test and the scene was canceled. I didn’t get a kill fee, neither did the male performer, the director lost out shooting a scene that day, not to mention the location fees he paid. Will they hire me again? I don’t know. That’s a risk I take when I speak up for my own safety concerns. Unfortunately, the idea of losing money is sometimes enough to make a performer overlook little things like double-checking a scene partner’s test. And, of course, the money at stake sometimes has made other performers fake, doctor, or bluff their tests.

Knowing that a person I am working with is tested doesn’t always mean they are STD free. Not everyone that works in porn has sex within the industry, nor do they always use condoms in their private lives, which increases the STD transmission risk from performer to performer between tests. Some of the industry men I know often date three or four girls at a time: there is the main squeeze, the distant girlfriend, the mistress, and the random one-night stand. I have been one of those girls, and not known I was one of a crowd. With the high sexual activity of performers both in and outside of the business, when an STD scare happens it can be lengthy due to reinfection rates from partners that have been treated still having sex with those that haven’t. Even though telling someone you gave them an STD is the right thing to do so they can be treated for it, it is a talk most people would rather avoid. This is a part of being in the adult business; it’s the less glamorous side.

Bringing something like condoms into porn may contribute to ruining the fantasy, because in fantasy land no one has to think about safety. But if I were your girlfriend, your sister, your mother, or your daughter, what would you want the law to be?


Full Articles at Sources 1|2
Page 1 of 5
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] >>
zoaster_toaster 9th-Nov-2012 01:32 am (UTC)
I just wonder how the hell they're gonna enforce Measure B and apparently certain parts of LA county are exempt from it.
tw_31988 9th-Nov-2012 02:25 am (UTC)
I wonder what happens with amateur xtube porn stars. they're normal people who upload their shit to xtube. are they forced to do this as well?

OT, have you ever gone bareback, ontd?

i haven't in a while, but when i had a bf, i swear that shit was my morning breakfast.
canuckgirl33 9th-Nov-2012 02:48 am (UTC)
I don't think amateurs will be exempt, especially if they can prove they are not shooting in L.A.
evangelion 9th-Nov-2012 03:43 am (UTC)
amateurs aren't making money off of it, signing contracts, etc. should be fine.
evil_slayer 9th-Nov-2012 05:52 pm (UTC)
If bareback means no condom, yes, my boyfriend got tested, I got tested, and that's it. With my previous boyfriend I did the same.
The only thing that scares me nowadays is HPV.
mercibeaucul 10th-Nov-2012 12:48 am (UTC)
Looking back over my bareback to protected ratio, to be brutally frank with myself it's genuinely a miracle I haven't contracted anything. Fuck ADHD, rampant sex drive and self-destructive tendencies. Fuck them to the bloody wall.
jef_martel 11th-Nov-2012 08:35 pm (UTC)
You've had the same icon for ages and i can't get over how much i still love it.

Edited at 2012-11-11 08:36 pm (UTC)
thewhowhatwhats 9th-Nov-2012 02:34 am (UTC)
from a different article:

"The new law requires porn actors to wear condoms and establishes a permitting system similar in some ways to how Los Angeles County inspects restaurants. Porn producers are required to purchase health permits from the county, which will do spot inspections on porn sets to make sure condoms are being used. The inspectors can close production if the filmmakers don't comply with the rules."


shahoney 9th-Nov-2012 12:37 pm (UTC)
i wonder how they're gonna enforce measure B. period. like, will there be weekly "inspections" that the actors/actresses are wearing protection or something lol. doesn't make sense.
uwannalala 9th-Nov-2012 01:32 am (UTC)
Stupid Question... but if they don't like wearing condoms.. why don't they move production across state lines somewhere else? Or is it not that easy?

I'm annoyed by porn stars lately. My only experience with them out of porn is on Howard Stern so maybe thats why haha.

I just feel like he tries to have conversations with these women and they can't talk about ANYTHING without turning back to the dumb sexualized "just use me for by wet pussy.. OMG i'm so dumb haha" dialogue.

I like porn as much as the next person and i'm probably being uptight. I just want to encounter an intelligent porn star who can have a conversation.
angelmonster 9th-Nov-2012 01:35 am (UTC)
That's all people will do, go over state lines.
fireprince 9th-Nov-2012 07:12 am (UTC)
or just county lines, San diego is already home to a lot of porn studios.
evett 9th-Nov-2012 01:37 am (UTC)
I fast forward through the interviews because they are never interesting. you've heard one porn star's life story you've heard them all.

doing it rn to get to the "Dumber Than A Box Of Rocks" game.
jlb88 9th-Nov-2012 01:44 am (UTC)
Meh, I don't blame them for constantly being in that porn star state of mind for interviews. They're not politicians who have to sell their intelligence, they're sex objects who have to make their audience believe they are sexual 24/7.

Edited at 2012-11-09 01:45 am (UTC)
kamikashi 9th-Nov-2012 01:50 am (UTC)
i think that was one of the arguments against the measure. because bareback will sell more, theyll move production elsewhere which will mean the revenue and some jobs will be lost for LA.
notebook_attire 9th-Nov-2012 01:50 am (UTC)
stoya is moderately intelligent (however, a recent post made me "shake my hair cape" but she seems like she's open to fixing her blunders). kayden kross too.
thewhowhatwhats 9th-Nov-2012 01:55 am (UTC)
Howard Stern doesn't respect people who "suck cock for a living" in the first place, so he's not going to give much airtime to the ones who aren't there to talk about how far they can swallow a hotdog.
akasha6915 9th-Nov-2012 09:10 am (UTC)
I feel the condom thing has to do with both the performer and viewer who tend to not like to see them, at least what I am taking.

My main experience with porn stars, or porn performers, are the people i know who work in the industry, and the little bit of work I have done.

They could change areas in Cali, SF does house Kink.com and most filming is done in house there. There is a porn industry in SF, but not that huge. Things could move that way to the bay. Vegas seems open to them, and might depend on what of office and equipment would need moved to change states.

I think with intelligent porn stars, it tends to be some of the workers do not want to talk about work outside as much. People tend to be assholes to you, or guys think your super easy, so it tends to not go well.
agatharuncible 11th-Nov-2012 04:59 pm (UTC)
if I read James Deen's interview right, they're contemplating moving to places like Las Vegas, but at the same time it's an operation that requires some costs and the uprooting of everything/everyone so they'd rather avoid it.

that sounds judgemental... I doubt that all of them are like that. I don't watch porn so I can't name many actresses, but a few seem to be smart and articulate in interviews and articles. Sasha Grey, for example. Idk who the girl in this post is but she also sounds smart and able to have an intelligent conversation about this issue.

maybe a few of them end up relapsing into "OMG I'm so dumb" mode because they want to keep up their persona
tigersnap 11th-Nov-2012 06:33 pm (UTC)
You should look up Stoya. She's a really smart feminist minded porn star http://stoya.tumblr.com
a_klutz 13th-Nov-2012 10:11 am (UTC)
Oh god, I cannot STAND Howard Stern. He's a racist, privileged asshole and a patronising, condescending misogynist to boot.

He is so utterly revolting ugh
squirrels_oh_no 9th-Nov-2012 01:33 am (UTC)
$52K a year to be a condom officer?

I can do that job. Where do I apply?
ptizzy 9th-Nov-2012 01:35 am (UTC)
WHAT?! I missed that!

Sign me up too, shit!!!
to_our_savior 9th-Nov-2012 01:35 am (UTC)
mte
sauron 9th-Nov-2012 01:37 am (UTC)
ikr? where do i sign up?
cricketgrl 9th-Nov-2012 01:37 am (UTC)
If you're in LA goto Dragon Fly or Miss Kitty's on the weekends. You'll see Porn stars and their managers there that can easily give you a job.

Although last time I lived in LA there was less in your face Porn Pride compare to the early 2000's.
whitegirlthin 10th-Nov-2012 02:03 am (UTC)
omg I wish I lived in LA
redaodai 9th-Nov-2012 01:38 am (UTC)
Whip dem dicks out, I'm here to enforce.
lestat 9th-Nov-2012 01:42 am (UTC)
easiest money i could ever make
ex_vampirew765 9th-Nov-2012 01:47 am (UTC)
mte
frenchverbs 9th-Nov-2012 01:55 am (UTC)
LMAO!
pixiesilver 9th-Nov-2012 02:05 am (UTC)
i want that job
hemsworth 9th-Nov-2012 02:24 am (UTC)
RIGHT? shit, i'll take that job no problem
canuckgirl33 9th-Nov-2012 02:49 am (UTC)
What a waste of taxpayers money
boundarybreaks 10th-Nov-2012 02:53 am (UTC)
omg what?! do you just watch porn and look for condoms?
friarsfire 9th-Nov-2012 01:33 am (UTC)
Are there any female adult actresses that are against this measure? jw

Edited at 2012-11-09 01:34 am (UTC)
missedith 9th-Nov-2012 01:38 am (UTC)
http://stoya.tumblr.com

She's the woman in the first photo.
lestat 9th-Nov-2012 01:45 am (UTC)
i... what does condom wearing have to do with homosexuality?? i admit i skipped but. what?
thewhowhatwhats 9th-Nov-2012 02:03 am (UTC)
So much upper-middle class, snow white privilege.
kalie_m 9th-Nov-2012 02:21 am (UTC)
omg I'm dying. I have absolutely no clue what she's trying to say with most of that, tbh.
agatharuncible 11th-Nov-2012 05:02 pm (UTC)
lol that post is so terribly written. I really want to know *why* she disagrees with this law, not hear her ramble about asexuality and trans* people's chromossomes (wtf)
ethereal_limbo 9th-Nov-2012 12:57 pm (UTC)
yes, a lot. lol at OP linking aurora snow. she is legitimately the first porn actor who i've seen being for this measure (ie. an outlier).
justrachna 9th-Nov-2012 01:34 am (UTC)
Condoms should be mandatory in porn. It's up to the workplace to provide a safe environment and it's clear that testing is no longer doing that. What's the big deal about showing condoms anyway? I don't buy this it is not sexy bs.
ericasays 9th-Nov-2012 01:34 am (UTC)
I can see why condoms aren't sexy, they take away the fantasy factor of it all... but man, it's just too risky to not test and protect highly sexually active people.
jilicious 9th-Nov-2012 01:37 am (UTC)
i love your icon
ericasays 9th-Nov-2012 01:39 am (UTC)
merci!
evangelion 9th-Nov-2012 03:55 am (UTC)
did you read the article? https://aphss.org/ makes sure performers are test verified.
libre_m 10th-Nov-2012 04:31 am (UTC)
This.

Also, how is it any different from any other Workplace Health and Safety measure. If you have sex professionally, then you have to wear a condom, just like if you work on a construction site, you have to wear closed in shoes. It's part of your business now and any argument against it is defeated by the fact that apparently, it's wrong to want to further minimise risk of sexually transmitted diseases. Sure, testing is good. It's great the industry has that. But condoms + testing is better.

Beyond that, do we really think that the exitement of pornography will really decrease that much if the actors have to wear a condom? Really? All of a sudden porn won't turn you on any more? You'll still have extra-special massages, sexy nurses, naughty schoolgirls (and boys), etc. They'll just wrap it up before playing with it.
brokenseas 9th-Nov-2012 01:35 am (UTC)
Yeah....the girl, imo, probably gives a more real look at the industry. Where some people dgaf and put their partners at risk, while others are made to feel "difficult" when they are asking for basic protections on set.

I do understand why the performers are upset that it's being decided by outsiders, but I'm sure she's not the only out there with these kinds of concerns.
manaconda 9th-Nov-2012 01:42 am (UTC)
mte
nicholasdee 9th-Nov-2012 01:46 am (UTC)
yep, if the only thing that was availalbe was porn with condoms, no one would complain.

of course, thats not going to happen cuz there will still be shit filmed elsewhere, but if that is the majority available it can change perceptions
volkanator 9th-Nov-2012 04:08 am (UTC)
they should start a billboard campaign of sexy men about to roll a condom on their dicks going "being safe is sexy. we use a condom, so should you."

like a hot guy with hipster glasses and a condom about to be rolled going "being smart is sexy. i use a condom so should you."

omg, where's the person i can go to with this so i can copy right and make boat loads of money off this campaign
akasha6915 9th-Nov-2012 09:13 am (UTC)
This, I would love to see, since it would be better encouragement to have safe sex.
iluvdykes 13th-Nov-2012 07:05 am (UTC)
You guys got to put this shit on youtube asap. I volunteer to edit it.
war_machine_rox 9th-Nov-2012 01:36 am (UTC)
So the guy is against condoms and the woman is for. Sounds about right lol

But I don't really understand it tho. Shouldn't everybody's safety be important and condoms would help with that? They aren't 100% proof but I still wouldn't take the chance.
ediesedgwick 9th-Nov-2012 01:44 am (UTC)
There are women against it too
war_machine_rox 9th-Nov-2012 01:49 am (UTC)
Oh that doesn't surprise me at all :(
angelmonster 9th-Nov-2012 01:37 am (UTC)
I honestly didn't know this was so controversial. If starts don't want to do bareback, well, no one is forcing them.
tigersnap 11th-Nov-2012 06:45 pm (UTC)
No one would hire them tho
scheisse 9th-Nov-2012 01:38 am (UTC)
just wear a goddamn condom. is it really that big of a deal? jfc.
ptizzy 9th-Nov-2012 01:39 am (UTC)
This, ty
between_lights 9th-Nov-2012 03:08 am (UTC)
mfte. idk why they're acting like their rights are being soooo violated, jfc. this law is basically the equivalent of health codes that require people who work with food to wear rubber gloves.

idc how much testing is done, there's still a risk and this law is trying to make your workplace/general professional field safer through preventative means. not to mention it has the potential to help promote safer sex practices to viewers who might otherwise not use condoms for whatever dumb reason. this is a GOOD thing, y'all.

Edited at 2012-11-09 03:11 am (UTC)
zoombinilover 9th-Nov-2012 10:02 am (UTC)
It's not just the use of a condom. As Deen says, some of it's unclear as to what other protection they'll need and what constitutes as exchange of bodily fluid. In addition, there's been a lot of concern about the constitutionality of the measure.

From the Huffington Post--

The Free Speech Coalition sent a letter Wednesday to the LA County Board of Supervisors saying that they will challenge the law in court, according to adult film industry new source AVN. The group's CEO, Diane Duke, said that the law is "unconstitutional on the grounds of forced expression, but also falls within the jurisdiction of the state of California rather than local government." She asked the Supervisors to "suspend the implementation of the law until the courts have rendered their decision on the aforementioned issues."
shepherds 12th-Nov-2012 08:11 am (UTC)
It's not about condoms though. It's about increased criminalization of an already targeted industry.
ptizzy 9th-Nov-2012 01:38 am (UTC)
We'll all still wank off to porn regardless.
mhfromnh 9th-Nov-2012 04:56 am (UTC)
we just wanna see stuff going into other stuff.
uwannalala 9th-Nov-2012 01:39 am (UTC)
He actually has some intelligent points.

I wonder if someone who had sex with someone with aids in say.. the last 10 days can spread it to a new partner? Because then the testing every 14-28 days obviously wouldn't matter.

Then again, why am I to decide if someone should put themselves at risk or not.

Then again, if it's a professional career there should be regulations. OH IM SO CONFUSED!!!
publicfrenemy 9th-Nov-2012 01:48 am (UTC)
I might be wrong, but I think there's also a period of time before the test becomes 100% accurate as viruses incubate, or something.

I know this from getting tested after the dissolution of a long term relationship in which I thought we were monogamous. Can't be too safe. Anyhoo, my doctor said I needed to get tested again after six months to be sure.
ediesedgwick 9th-Nov-2012 01:53 am (UTC)
The test the general public takes has an incubation period of up to six months, but the one porn stars take is different so the waiting time is much, much shorter.

Edited at 2012-11-09 01:54 am (UTC)
sonadoras456 9th-Nov-2012 02:06 am (UTC)
I think it's like a 12 day test or something? The test they take is an RNA test which is testing for the DNA aspect of HIV. The test everyone else takes is a 3 month window-Oraquick (the mouth swab) or the blood test you get at your doctor.
whysosadiddy 9th-Nov-2012 01:48 am (UTC)
I'm pretty sure they can spread it. Also I'm pretty sure HIV doesn't always immediately show up in blood tests and this can result in false negatives. I could be wrong though.
ledgers 9th-Nov-2012 01:39 am (UTC)
RIP to the Valley's economy.
cricketgrl 9th-Nov-2012 01:43 am (UTC)
ikr? Bye bye to those cutesy Hollywood apts in Park LaBrea.

Edited at 2012-11-09 01:43 am (UTC)
calichaos 9th-Nov-2012 02:47 am (UTC)
what which ones!?
canuckgirl33 9th-Nov-2012 02:52 am (UTC)
THIS
toxic_illusion 9th-Nov-2012 02:55 am (UTC)
Time to start selling raspados.




Valley roll call?!?!?!?!
cricketgrl 9th-Nov-2012 01:40 am (UTC)
At the rate of HIV that has traveled in that industry I'm glad they mandated it. I know many of their viewers may not like it but I think it's so important for all participants involved.

I'm sure they'll just move the industry to Nevada or Oregon if worse comes to worse.
ncc_gqmf 9th-Nov-2012 02:55 am (UTC)
Yeah, for all Deen's "zero HIV transmissions"... haven't there actually been quite a few of those? Not to mention the syphilis outbreak.
evangelion 9th-Nov-2012 04:13 am (UTC)
One actor tested positive. They had a system in place, AIM, which was a database that recorded people's std tests. apparently they were pretty shitty at their job or something, i'm not 100% on the details.

from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/derrick-burts-hiv-in-pornography-the-naked-truth-2167532.html:
The source of the infection was swiftly traced, the clinic said, to a "known positive" male actor he had worked with in Florida in a gay shoot in which condoms were not used for oral sex. Although straight porn performers must show negative HIV test results before filming, the gay sector does not have the same restrictions.

from what i read of measure b when doing my ~responsible voter research~ it doesn't call for condoms for oral so the scare that launched this whole thing would still be capable of happening. also, they have a new system in place which has been good so far. one scare in 10 years is pretty fucking remarkable. any other industry tends to have a higher fallacy rate.

the call for condoms is a good thing but it should come from within the industry. now they're just going to go out of county lines. it's a county measure so driving to the inland empire or somewhere else close by won't be too hard - but with heavy incentives from vegas, flordia, etc. it's possible to uproot the whole entire industry which is going to do nothing but hurt the los angeles economy. with so much of our film/tv going out of state thanks to incentives, i know many gaffers, etc., and others who have moved to porn since hey it's a paycheck for similar work. now we're losing that too.
Page 1 of 5
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] >>
This page was loaded Sep 3rd 2014, 12:52 am GMT.