• Hey, guys! FreeOnes Tube is up and running - see for yourself!
  • FreeOnes Now Listing Male and Trans Performers! More info here!

In adult films, condom question looms large

It’s just a 50-cent piece of latex, but depending on whom you ask, it will either kill or save the multibillion-dollar pornography industry.

California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board agreed in March to consider a request by anti-pornography activists and the country’s largest HIV/AIDS nonprofit to require actors to wear condoms in sex scenes in pornographic features.

The petition has created sharp divisions in the San Fernando Valley, the area in and around Los Angeles where most of the country’s legally distributed pornography is produced. That’s where a new adult video is shot every 45

Advocates say the industry is already breaking the law by creating a hazardous workplace — one where performers are at risk of contracting HIV infections and other sexually transmitted diseases. They want adult entertainment businesses to observe the same pathogen exposure regulations that protect California’s medical workers.

“The evidence is on film,” said Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. The agency turned to state regulators for help after a judge dismissed its lawsuit seeking to force Los Angeles County to require condoms in adult films in December.

“What documentation is clearer than the product itself?” Weinstein asked. “When it’s a pair of Nike shoes, you don’t know that an 8-year-old in that sweatshop in Indonesia made it, but when you slip the DVD into the machine, you know that they’re violating the law.”

But many producers and performers say they follow a rigorous testing system precisely so they can perform without condoms, arguing that consumers don’t want to see them.

“I really hope that it does not go all-condom, because this is entertainment,” Sunny Lane, an actress who says she has appeared in more than 180 adult films, said in an interview with NBC station KNBC of Los Angeles. “This is hot. It’s passionate. You want to have fun.”

The controversy has been on the front burner since 2004, when a male adult film performer tested positive for HIV and was found to have spread the virus to three women he had performed with. The latest wave of activism gained impetus last June when the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation, which tests performers for the industry, confirmed that an actress who has not been publicly identified had tested positive.

Will porn still call California home?
Executives of adult entertainment companies say most studios would leave California if the proposal is approved because they would lose too much business under a strict reading of California workplace safety laws.

“Condoms are only part of the issue,” said Steve Orenstein, president and chief executive of Wicked Pictures, the only studio in the San Fernando Valley that enforces a 100 percent condom policy in its productions. Clinic-style regulations imply “goggles and rubber gloves,” he said, which “I imagine you agree [is] a bit too restrictive.”

Orenstein called on regulators to work with industry leaders to establish rules that would acknowledge circumstances “specific to adult productions” — that is, demand for explicit depictions of sex acts. Otherwise, he said, “many companies talk about plans to shoot in other states if they needed to.”

But Shelley Lubben, a former adult film actress who runs the anti-pornography Pink Cross Foundation, said that wasn’t likely.

Under a 1988 state court ruling, California is the only state where production of hard-core pornography for profit is explicitly legal — in other states, prosecutors and courts have equated paying performers to engage in sex with prostitution. That means the studios are “not going to run away,” Lubben said.

If it’s Orenstein who’s right, the stakes for Los Angeles and the greater San Fernando Valley could be enormous. While it’s impossible to precisely calculate overall revenue for legally distributed pornography — many studios are privately held and don’t report such figures — the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation estimates that the industry generates $12.6 billion a year, as much as 90 percent of it in the Valley.

And even though that’s well down from the industry’s heyday of the 1980s and the early 1990s — before free Internet pornography and easy pirating of studio films began gobbling up profits — it’s still 20 percent more than what the industry’s legitimate Hollywood cousins made in 2009, which was a record year.

Fear of HIV galvanizes activists, performers
Jessica Drake, a prominent adult film star, said that “for me, personally, using condoms is the right choice.” And while she said it was possible that the use of condoms “might hurt our sales,” she said she had heard no objections from her fans.

Drake’s career would appear to bear that out. Even going all-condom, all the time, she is one of the most popular actresses in adult films today, winner of two top honors at last year’s Adult Video News awards — including Best Actress — and a member of the industry’s Hall of Fame.

Even so, Drake has appeared before state lawmakers to testify against requiring the use of condoms, saying it was “a matter of personal choice — my body, my choice.” In an interview, she objected that reports of the positive test last year were “sensationalized by the media” and were being used to club the industry into submission.

“Even one positive HIV test is a very serious matter,” Drake said, but “the general public heard words like ‘outbreak’ and ‘epidemic,’” even though it was the first publicly reported HIV infection in five years in an industry whose workers engage in hundreds of sex acts a year, some of which most people would readily characterize as extreme.

If anything, she said, that case proved that “our testing system does work” because it “prevented further exposure.”

For allies, same means to different ends
For the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the morality of pornography isn’t the issue.

“To be clear, AHF is not against pornography,” the foundation said in filings last month with the California occupational safety board. The issue, it said, is “whether or not the current regulations are sufficient to protect these young people ... as they do every other workplace in the state.”

At public events where the foundation campaigns for the condom regulation, Shelley Lubben is likely to appear as a passionate spokeswoman. She speaks out from her pespective as a former porn star whose life was nearly destroyed by the industry.

That is only part of the story, however. For Lubben, the morality of pornography is very much the issue.

The Pink Cross Foundation doesn’t call itself a religious organization in its nonprofit tax registration, but it clearly is one. It solicits donations of Bibles and other religious materials to distribute at adult industry conventions, like the Los Angeles Adultcon last week, where it set up a booth “to reach out to thousands of people with the love of Jesus Christ,” it reported on its Web site.

In an interview, Lubben said plainly that she’d “love to see porn come down.”

“America just sees the finished product, so we’re just exposing this terrible evil and slavery,” she said, adding that she was taking on the pornography industry because “God gave me this vision.”

Lubben acknowledged that the AIDS Healthcare Foundation had different long-term goals, but she said she was happy to work with anyone who could advance the Pink Cross mission.

“We believe the beast can be stabbed in seven different places and bleed to death,” she said, listing issues she uses to try to persuade people both inside and outside adult entertainment to turn against the porn industry — such as alleged sex slavery, exploitation of underage women and the instability of easily broken short-term contracts for performers.

Right now, the issue that’s working is workplace safety, and, through it, Lubben has “found a common denominator” with the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

“It doesn’t matter what my motivation is,” she said. “It’s a high-risk occupation — there’s bodily fluids everywhere..”

AIDS group emphasizes science, not religion
The AIDS foundation did not respond to a request for comment on its work with the Pink Cross Foundation, in which it would seem to find an unlikely ally. Weinstein’s organization describes itself as an “independent voice” on AIDS and HIV policy, operating clinics in numerous non-Christian countries and working with the United Nations, the World Health Organization and other secular government organizations worldwide.

In advocating for widespread distribution of condoms, it has argued that "governments are obligated to follow scientific evidence in order to set up effective public health policies to fight AIDS and not rely on religious beliefs.”

“They’re aware of our agenda,” Lubben said, “but we agreed to agree in this area, which is a health and safe workplace area.”

Regardless how they got together, the combination of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s scientific credibility and Lubben’s high-voltage charisma has brought the adult entertainment industry to the brink of direct government regulation of its on-screen content. And if this initiative fails, Lubben will just keep chipping away.

“I love that they want to protect the workers,” she said of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. “But there are many other angles.”

Source
 

pornophile

Banned
Condoms in every porn vid?!?!


FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU....
 
Y'know. I'm not that obsessed with porn to really give a fuck. . .

Me too. Wear them, don't wear them; either way I don't really give a shit.
 
I don't really see the problem wearing condoms in adult movies... We all do it in our private lives when meeting a new partner... don't we? so everybody should be over this thing by now...
 
I like it when guys wear condoms in porn scenes. Its even better when the girl puts it on the guy. But 95% of the time they dont use condoms.
 
Doesn't ruin the fantasy for me when a guy wears a condom in a porn movie, but I don't like any restrictions or sanctions such as this one which limits an individual or groups way of making a living, as long as their actions don't infringe upon or harm others (I'm looking at you, greedy Wall Street).
 
Y'know. I'm not that obsessed with porn to really give a fuck. . .
Me too. Wear them, don't wear them; either way I don't really give a shit.
I don't really see the problem wearing condoms in adult movies...

I don't see it as a big deal either. I think some companies even make condoms that look almost invisible.

Porn certainly isn't what it used to be. Some companies are gone or had to transform into a completely different company with different strategies, all because of the internet, so I understand the producers fear of losing more money in an industry that is already on a steep decline, but the producers need to consider what's best for the performers, and not what's best for their pockets.
 
I agree it may hurt porn sales. I always enjoy multiple ejaculations/blowjobs/facials. Plus its fun to see pornstars swallow or cum dripping out of a vagina. I think the focus should be more on ensuring the pornstars are STD free.
 
I mean c'mon are you guys really that bothered seeing a girl get fucked with a condom?? Seriously!! I mean if they want the money shot he pulls out pulls it off and boom, there it is! No big deal whatsoever!!

And if a girl wants to take part in a creampie movie well they might have to film it in Nevada or Arizona but really in the 99% of mainstram porn it shouldn't be that big of a deal
 
It really is a tough cookie. I personally don't like to see condoms in my porn. I use them in my real life, so don't really want to see them in my porn. Porn is my fantasy, so don't want to see the two mix. However I do see the the point the AHF is making. You have to have the health and wellbeing of the performers foremost in mind. It is a serious situations AIDS/HIV and must be dealt with accordingly.

I agree it may hurt porn sales. I always enjoy multiple ejaculations/blowjobs/facials. Plus its fun to see pornstars swallow or cum dripping out of a vagina. I think the focus should be more on ensuring the pornstars are STD free.

I totally agree. Rigorous screening as they do now is imperative and will continue. STDs of any kind are not cool and we want to see our favourite stars continue to perform and not have careers cut short. Though as the article says, wearing condoms is apart of this protection. It is a prickly pear that I don't think will be resolved anytime soon.
 
I don't really see the problem wearing condoms in adult movies... We all do it in our private lives when meeting a new partner... don't we? so everybody should be over this thing by now...

Wouldn't that be akin to eliminating car chases in movies, and then saying "I don't see a problem with it. After all it's not like we zoom around and chaise after and away from people in real life when going down the road".

Or them eliminating punching in boxing and then saying, "It's not that big of a problem, we almost never punch each other when we meat each other in real life."

Porn or pretty much anything involving entertainment rarely follows real life accurately.

Millions upon millions of people in this country watch American Football every year where people intentionally collide violently with each other for competition and entertainment. In many other sports a great many players build up lingering permanent injuries while people in the crowd and at home watching stand up and cheer loudly (including most politicians and people condemning no condoms in porn.) We watch movies where stuntmen put there lives on the line time and again. I would say that most likely those are more dangerous than porn. Is there really any moral, legal, or ethical high ground any of those people can take while doing things like that. It seems like hypocrisy and trying to enforce your own brand or morality on people.
 
I see no reason to have condoms in porn. One case of HIV in five years is extremely good for a business that is entirely about people fucking so this can't really be about HIV. Imagine if in your place of work, someone came in and said you had to do something differently to protect you and your co-workers from something you don't really need protection from and the result would be a blow to your industry that would ultimately reduce interest and profit, (which is already being reduced thanks to online tube sites) which means less $ for pornstars. If pornstars felt they were at any kind of risk I would imagine they would only do condom scenes of their own volition and the industry would naturally head in that direction. Regardless of what AHF are saying, they have the same goal in mind as that crazy jesus bitch. And plus what about things like lesbian porn? If AHF's intentions are to do everything possible to prevent STDs then in lesbian porn will they have to use female condoms and put regular condoms on dildos and always use dental dams? If it's about overall workplace safty and the health of the performers then they can't just restrict to protecting against HIV. What about herpes? That can passed even with condoms. Ironic that the porn industry is being scrutinized for "Being an unsafe workplace that has to be reformed due to AIDS." when compared to the rest of California and most likely the rest of the world it probably has the lowest AIDS/HIV per capita. However all this is irrelevant, condoms will never be made mandatory for porn as greedy politicians making $ off the $ porn makes > religious assholes trying to enforce their dieing out ways of 'thinking'.
 
Millions upon millions of people in this country watch American Football every year where people intentionally collide violently with each other for competition and entertainment. In many other sports a great many players build up lingering permanent injuries while people in the crowd and at home watching stand up and cheer loudly (including most politicians and people condemning no condoms in porn.) We watch movies where stuntmen put there lives on the line time and again. I would say that most likely those are more dangerous than porn. Is there really any moral, legal, or ethical high ground any of those people can take while doing things like that. It seems like hypocrisy and trying to enforce your own brand or morality on people.

The problem with your thought here is when a football player or stuntman has an injury doing what they do for a living is that the injury only affect them. If a porn star gets a std well we've seen how fast that spreads through the industry before its caught. So I can see where you are coming from but a physical injury and HIV are totally different
 

John_8581

FreeOnes Lifetime Member
It's mandatory at the Wicked Pictures website for the guys to wear condoms throughout the scene, until the money shot comes; then they disengage it, and then they cum on the girl's tits, ass or face. ;)

And they do it for what busaguy's says -- prevention of std and preventing HIV. :)
 

SpexyAshleigh

Official Checked Star Member
Wouldn't that be akin to eliminating car chases in movies, and then saying "I don't see a problem with it. After all it's not like we zoom around and chaise after and away from people in real life when going down the road".

Or them eliminating punching in boxing and then saying, "It's not that big of a problem, we almost never punch each other when we meat each other in real life."

Porn or pretty much anything involving entertainment rarely follows real life accurately.

Millions upon millions of people in this country watch American Football every year where people intentionally collide violently with each other for competition and entertainment. In many other sports a great many players build up lingering permanent injuries while people in the crowd and at home watching stand up and cheer loudly (including most politicians and people condemning no condoms in porn.) We watch movies where stuntmen put there lives on the line time and again. I would say that most likely those are more dangerous than porn. Is there really any moral, legal, or ethical high ground any of those people can take while doing things like that. It seems like hypocrisy and trying to enforce your own brand or morality on people.

The problem with your thought here is when a football player or stuntman has an injury doing what they do for a living is that the injury only affect them. If a porn star gets a std well we've seen how fast that spreads through the industry before its caught. So I can see where you are coming from but a physical injury and HIV are totally different

not to mention, football players wear protective gear, helmets, padding and get the best personal trainers and sports doctors to treat them. Pornstars not wearing a condom is like a football player stepping onto the field with zero protective gear....or like a construction worker going to work without a hardhat, police office going without a bullet proof vest, etc. I think that if the rest of the general public needs to wear protection to protect themselves "on the job", then why should pornstars be treated any differently, ESPECIALLY if their decision not to wear a condom virtually affects every person they fuck, and every person that those people fuck and so on and so forth. :2 cents:
 
Top