|
|||||
|
| Porn Users Forum » CA News 2/19/16 - Porn makers win battle against use of condoms |
| 1-11 of 11 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
| 02-19-16 10:25am - 3229 days | Original Post - #1 | |
|
Monahan (0)
Active User  Posts: 348 Registered: Jan 17, '07 Location: SF Valley, CA |
CA News 2/19/16 - Porn makers win battle against use of condoms California stops rule for condoms for porn productions. Believe it or not, protective eyewear was also part of the regulation. Here's a link to the article in today's paper: http://www.dailynews.com/social-affairs/20160218/porn-industry-wins-battle-against-california-regulators-over-condoms-eyewear-on-film-shoots | |
|
||
| 02-28-16 05:51am - 3220 days | #2 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User  Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
That is great news! I'm not sure why the regulators wanted to do this. It would be like requiring mainstream stunt performers to never work without helmets and eye protection. These professionals are paid to compensate for the risks they are taking for our entertainment. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 02-28-16 07:55am - 3220 days | #3 | |
|
Drooler (0)
Disabled User  Posts: 1,831 Registered: Mar 11, '07 Location: USA |
The eyewear would have been worse. Reminds me of how even in softcore photo shoots, at some point the glasses NEED TO COME OFF. OK?? I wanted something new, so I left England for New England. | |
|
||
| 02-28-16 09:24am - 3220 days | #4 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
Haha, yeah, I couldn't help picturing everybody equipped with swimming goggles. Hell, Brazzers likes doing comedy scenes, they should have produced a scene showing what 100% compliance to the letter of the law would look like. Would have been hilarious and a great demonstration as to how stupid the law was. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 02-28-16 10:10am - 3220 days | #5 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User  Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
I don't think it will come as much of a surprise to regular posters that I'm pro condoms so I feel sad that condoms won't be mandatory in the industry. I agree with everyone else that eye wear and I even heard that they talked about mouth dams but condoms should be mandatory and see below why.(excerpt from another site on STD in the industry. I have made much of several studies over the last few years and I have touched on HIV testing but this time I am going to spell it out, plain and simple. Starting with the studies….They were scientific and peer reviewed, they were sanctioned by universities, the last two being UCLA, search this site for direct links to the studies. The studies were pretty consistent, the found a rate of Chlamydia that is 64 times that of the same age group in the same demographic area. Let that sink in a minute…64 TIMES higher among porn performers in L.A. That means that if you had unprotected sex with a random person and unprotected sex with a porn performer you are 64 times more likely to be exposed to Chlamydia by the porn performer. For Gonorrhea, it is 32 TIMES more likely. I spoke to a LOT of performers for this piece and not one single performer told me that they had never gotten an STD on a porn set, most told me they had gotten many. In fact several mentioned going to Tijuana where they can get antibiotics with no prescription, particularly Azythromycin in a dose called a “Z-Pack”. They will “load up” and resell them to fellow performers so that they can take them prior to their regular STD tests and be assured that they will pass. One well known A List performer told me “People in porn take Z Packs like they are Ibuprofen.” One STD we don’t test for is Herpes. If performers who have Herpes were barred from performing an estimated 80% of performers would be out of a job overnight. That 80% number comes from the performers themselves, a prolific performer told me “I have it, everyone has it (Herpes), it’s everywhere in porn.” Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 02-29-16 02:21am - 3219 days | #6 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I too read Mike South's article (available here) but the only thing that concerns me in it is the improper use of antibiotics, as that is the way antibiotic resistant diseases are created. I'm neither shocked nor worried that the majority of performers are infected with non-HIV STDs. Frankly, the discussion of herpes in Mr. South's article is outdated, for if you count up both forms of herpes simplex (that's HSV-1 and HSV-2) then approximately 90% of the worldwide population is a carrier. If only 80% of pornstars are carriers, they are actually cleaner than the average population. Not to mention that herpes is actually a rather benign disease that is mostly responsible for causing some little red bumps, which can be hard to distinguish from all the other little red bumps on our bodies (pimples, ingrown hairs, bug bites, et cetera). Also, requiring just condoms wouldn't be effective. The condom certainly helps, but without the dental dam, you are effectively endangering all performers that perform cunnilingus. To really be as safe as possible, you would indeed need to require dental dams, rubber gloves, and for the more exuberant scenes, eye protection. But the fact remains that pornstars aren't average people. They don't have normal jobs. They are risk-taking entertainers. Stunt performers get bruised and scratched and beaten many times a year. Sometimes they even break bones, but they are pretty much guaranteed to be walking away from a day's work in some form of pain - and we love them for it. So to do we love our pornstars and the risks they take to entertain all us loveable horny people. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 02-29-16 04:52pm - 3219 days | #7 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
^Although I agree that a dental dam is the safest option. I think that getting a sexually transmitted disease in the mouth is quite, quite low in large part because the mouth is already filled with so many countless bacteria's that most virus rarely have a chance to infect the host. Of course since most performers have had more than one STI and we know that getting STI makes you more prone to get others than I guess it might be possible for performers to actually get infected in the mouth. It's true that porn performers aren't average people and porn is not what classifies as a normal job. The people performing in porn are still human beings entitled to a certain level of protection. I truly believe that if performers were given all the facts about the extremely high rate of STI infections and their consequences be they short or long term and were allowed to request a condom without any fears of being black listed than most would request that a condom be used. I'm not saying that the cases of STI's would disappear but I think the numbers would drastically go down and recurring infections would also go down. Long live the Brown Coats. | |
|
||
| 02-29-16 07:25pm - 3219 days | #8 | ||
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
A lot of people do believe that for the reasons you've stated. Unfortunately it often isn't the case because eating can create micro-tears which provide direct access to the bloodstream. Most people think vaginal and anal sex are the highest risk factors for transmission of STIs and so they only employ condoms during those activities. Risk factors obviously vary on a case-by-case basis, but often people are at their most vulnerable for transmission during oral, and yet protection is very rarely used.
I agree that the high rate of STIs and STDs within the industry is not discussed, not disclosed, and better education needs to be provided to the newbies. As porn becomes more and more mainstream, it needs to behave more and more like a responsible employer. Studios need to inform and train their employees, even if they are classified as independent contractors. Sometimes performers are only in the industry for a matter of months and may not be aware that they probably picked up a smorgasbord of STIs. That needs to stop. Cheating the tests with high powered antibiotics needs to stop. Unfortunately, condom use is a matter of consumer demand. So that will require a change of public opinion that happened for a little while in the late 90s, but has reverted back. Kink.com for awhile required condoms on the set no matter what the performers preferred. It was a requirement of working for them. Consumer demand is a powerful motivator though and even they crumbled under its weight. Here's another interesting article with an interview with Eric Paul Leue of Kink.com that discusses disease in the porn industry and brings up two interesting points. Firstly, that condoms aren't as effective at eliminating disease transmission as people think (70% effective for anal sex) and that PrEP is more effective (99%). Secondly, condom use increases transmission risks for women if they have unprotected sex after recently using a condom and it reduces the frequency that they can work within industry because of abrasion and micro-tears within the vaginal cavity. Numerous women in the industry prefer condomless sex because of this problem. We need better condoms. The Gates Foundation tried to speed that along, but the best estimate is we are still 10-15 years from those reaching the market. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | ||
|
|||
| 03-02-16 09:34am - 3217 days | #9 | |
|
TheBrickster (0)
Active User  Posts: 41 Registered: Dec 02, '15 Location: New Hampshire |
The hard truth is if California did require condom/safety measures on porn sets, most of the big studios would simply relocate, probably to Nevada or Florida, where most adult performers live (outside of California, of course). Listen to Buried At Sea. | |
|
||
| 03-02-16 05:59pm - 3217 days | #10 | |
|
pat362 (0)
Active User Posts: 3,575 Registered: Jan 23, '07 Location: canada |
^Actually the vast majority of performers live in and around Los Angeles. The ones that don't drive or fly in to LA to work. Florida does have a decent porn industry but it in no ways compares to California. It's the same thing for Nevada. The only difference is that some California studios have moved part of their operations to Nevada and talent will travel to Nevada more often to work because it is technically close to LA. When you add the obvious fact that it's illegal to shoot porn in any other State than California and New Hampshire and I don't think studios will ever move outside of LA. As to the myth that condoms are bad for business. Wicked Pictures has been one of the most successful studios for decades and their performers have been wearing condoms for decades. I know a vocal group of porn fans claim they will stop watching porn if there is a condom on a penis but I wonder if it's more rhetoric than truth. Long live the Brown Coats. Edited on Mar 02, 2016, 06:05pm | |
|
||
| 03-02-16 07:14pm - 3217 days | #11 | |
|
Toadsith (0)
Active User Posts: 936 Registered: Dec 07, '07 Location: USA |
I would love for some sources for the illegality of filming pornography. I know Florida has some strict obscenity laws so despite the large amount of filming done there, I could imagine it being illegal - or a grey area at best. Max Hardcore learned the hard way about Florida's laws. ATK Girlfriends moved their productions from California to Nevada and Hawaii to avoid the condom and eyewear issue - largely because their customer base strongly requests creampie finishes. I imagine they will be moving back for some of the smaller shoots. Phil Burress of Citizens for Community Values seems to be the oft quoted source that stipulates California and New Hampshire being the only two states where filming of pornography is legal. "They're paying people to have sex, and then they're videotaping it and … selling it -- that in itself is prostitution," he reasons. "So, California already has legalized prostitution." According to Wikipedia Indiana, California, New York, and Oregon have court rulings stating that pornography is not prostitution. I also know that there are a number of pornographic studios based in NYC. My guess is that if California manages to finally enact a similar law, some of the more opportunistic states (New Mexico comes to mind) will adjust their laws and welcome the porn studios with open arms to get a piece of those tax dollars. Because let's face it: New Hampshire is never going to be a porn capital. "I'm not a number, I'm a free man!" Second Grand Order Poobah in the Loyal Order of the Water Buffalo | |
|
||
| 1-11 of 11 Posts | Page 1 |
| Thread Nav : Refresh Page | First Post | Last Post | Porn Forum Home |
|
