Do you Refuse to Watch Porn Where Condoms are Used?

Reply Tue 17 Jan, 2012 10:02 pm
LOS ANGELES — Actors in adult movies filmed in America's pornography capital would be required to use condoms under an ordinance granted final approval Tuesday by the Los Angeles City Council.

The measure, adopted 9-1, next goes to the mayor for his signature. Before it can take effect, however, the City Council has ordered police officials, the city attorney and others to hold meetings to figure out how it might be enforced.

The council's second and final vote to approve the law was taken without public discussion on a day when most of the porn industry's major players were in Las Vegas preparing for Wednesday's opening of the Adult Entertainment Expo, their industry's largest trade event.
Several industry officials condemned the move as being an unneeded exercise in political correctness that cannot be enforced.
"The only thing that the city could potentially achieve is losing some film permit money and driving some productions away, but you can't actually compel an industry to create a product that the market doesn't want," said Christian Mann, general manager of Evil Angel Productions, one of the industry's biggest makers of porn films.
Like others in the business, he said large numbers of consumers, especially overseas, consistently refuse to buy films in which condoms are used.

Veteran porn actress Tabitha Stevens said she has worked with and without condoms during her 17-year career. Although Stevens, who also produces films, said she prefers to work with condoms, she doesn't believe their use should be mandated by a government authority.
"If you want to wear them, wear them. If you don't, don't. That's up to the talent to decide. It shouldn't be up to the government to decide," she said by phone from Las Vegas.
Stevens and others also said the industry's self-imposed testing standard, in which major companies require that actors be tested every 30 days for sexually transmitted diseases, is working well. They say there has not been a confirmed case of HIV related directly to the porn industry since 2004.
Advocates of the new law said the testing isn't sufficient and the condom requirement adds another level of safety.
"We are not opposed to testing, but testing is not prevention in the same way that a barrier protection is," said Ged Kenslea, spokesman for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which supports the condom requirement.
He also accused the adult film industry of not being forthcoming in reporting all cases of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV, gonorrhea, chlamydia and others.
Kenslea scoffed at the idea that the industry, about 90 percent of which is believed to be based in Los Angeles' San Fernando Valley, will pack up and move because of the restriction.
"The industry is not going to go away," he said, adding that other parts of America aren't as tolerant of hard-core-sex films and that the industry's infrastructure, from writers, directors and actors to production facilities, is already based here.


For me the answer is usually, and I am vigorously opposed to this level of government regulation of the porn market place. I really have to wonder about the delusion level of the LA law makers, as it will be easy enough to stay located in the valley but to film outside it till such time as the porn industry finds a location that wants them. This industry is highly mobile.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,858 • Replies: 8
No top replies

Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2012 09:39 am
You're correct that a city ordinance wouldn't do much to stop the production of condom-less porn. That's why federal action is required. I can't understand why the federal government hasn't issued a regulation regarding this practice, as it seems to be a clear workplace hazard. If workers at an industrial facility were exposed to a fatal disease as part of their employment and a safe and reliably effective protective measure were available to prevent the transmission of that disease, I am sure that regulations would be put into place to protect the employees by mandating that protection.
Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2012 10:28 am
having had experience in the porn industry I will tell you this......

there are LEGITIMATE companies that require vigorous testing, constant medications and other examinations on an extremely tight basis.

Then there are others who will hand you a 20, tell you to go get fucked and pull out a camera..

Enforcing condom use honestly does nothing for the industry. Half of the still shots you see in magazines, movie covers and advertisements are performed one of two ways .... BEFORE the actual shoot ( where no condom will not be required) or in a hotel where some passer by was offered a buck for a photo. Those shady people are not always registered, not always under the umbrella of another company and not always locatable. And they make up a HUGE percentage of the industry sadly

The legitimate companies already have many layers in place to keep people as safe as possible . You can wear a condom all you want. Throwing on a condom does not eliminate the passing of disease in an industry where oral sex is a must between hundreds of people though.
0 Replies
Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2012 10:33 am
If the US Government passed a law requiring condoms then the industry would die.....given the size of the industry this is not economic activity that the US can afford to piss away in one of its morality tantrums.
Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2012 10:54 am
that is not true.

As i said, a large portion of the porn industry comes from unregulated common joe's like you and I .

You can rent a hotel room ( and this is COMMONLY done) offer any woman or a man a few dollars for still shots of them nude, have them sign a simple waiver.. then sell those photos for big bucks. Those photos are then cropped for close ups on the crotch, facial expressions, or body editing to create a whole new UNreal person and then sold again and again.

Do this with a few people over the course of a day and you have a LOT of money.

Take those shots with no way to identify the person? And little to no regulation applies..

You see those still shots on porn pages? I will bet you 100 dollars 80% of them are NOT on that page and are created from instances just like the one I named above.
Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2012 12:11 pm
hawkeye10 wrote:

If the US Government passed a law requiring condoms then the industry would die.....

That's highly unlikely. During the Comstock era, pornography faced more stringent barriers than that and it still managed to survive.

hawkeye10 wrote:
given the size of the industry this is not economic activity that the US can afford to piss away in one of its morality tantrums.

I imagine that the domestic porn industry employs maybe a couple thousand people. If they all lost their jobs and all domestic porn production was moved overseas, it would hardly register on the national economy.
0 Replies
Reply Thu 19 Jan, 2012 12:13 pm
You make a good point, and because of everyone making porn now the industry is a shell of what it was. I have not paid for porn in years, as there is plenty of free stuff online. Perhaps the only thing government can do is to criminalize all depictions of non-condom sex, and I have actually come accross advocates pushing for that. However currently that is a step too far. In ten years it might not be.
Reply Tue 24 Jan, 2012 11:31 pm
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Actors in adult movies filmed in Los Angeles will be required to use condoms under an ordinance signed into law by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and porn industry leaders say the regulation could lead them to abandon the nation's porn capital.
The law, signed Monday, will take effect 41 days after it is posted by the city clerk, something that could happen as early as this week.

Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/news/article/LA-mayor-signs-law-requiring-condoms-in-porn-films-2683666.php#ixzz1kRf4d5lB
0 Replies
Reply Fri 7 Aug, 2015 09:04 am
I do. When watching porn I'm masturbating and enjoying a sexual fantasy. So the last thing I want is to be reminded of STIs as with condoms.

Ron Jeremy said in his entire porn career he never caught anything. First time he did was with someone not in the porn business.

Professional sex workers be it porn or prostitution (where legal) are assets. As such I'd rather be exposed to their fluids than anyone else's. They're tested regularly and if infected they don't work any more. It's major business liability to let known infected people work. No one'll trust you to keep them safe when others find out so you tend to protect your personnel.
0 Replies

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
  1. Forums
  2. » Do you Refuse to Watch Porn Where Condoms are Used?
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/21/2020 at 07:25:53