To those who think that the industry will move somewhere else in the US - the last I read was that the mandatory condom use would be tied to granting shooting permits. Why not stay and film? The only violation would be shooting without a permit, whereas if you move to Tampa or Vegas where shooting pornography is illegal, you have a whole 'nother, bigger mess of prostitution/obscenity charges and such.
Those are excellent points. I'll just add that shooting your movies in an other State, even Vegas, means that you'll have to either add travelling time or hotel room fees for the performers and staff since many of these people live in California. I don't know if many people working in the porn industry would move with the studios.
Still wanking after all these years. 8082 Posts 10/00
Posted - Apr 27 2011 : 10:23AM
Not really, most French porn (JTC, Dorcel, JBR Media, Fred Coppula and others) is still shot with condoms, even nowadays. Basic reason I think is that pay-TV channel Canal + and other pay TV-channels playing porn demand condom only movies, so it makes sense for a French producer to have condoms used in his movies, so he is able to sell to those channels as well as pay per view and DVD. And the French porn viewer don't seem to mind, but then again there are many safe sex campaigns promoting condom use, do you have that in the US? Edited by - Joey Starr on 4/27/2011 10:36:36 AM
Still wanking after all these years. 8082 Posts 10/00
Posted - Apr 27 2011 : 10:26AM
Personally I don't mind condom use in porn as I use condoms all the time in my sex life. It would be a good message to send to teenagers about safe sex to have condoms used in scenes. Every time I see a porn scene where a girl fucks someone she just met on the street without any protection, I find the situation most unrealistic (yeah I know they have tests and all that but of course that is never mentioned in the "fantasy"). Edited by - Joey Starr on 4/27/2011 10:37:31 AM
Still wanking after all these years. 8082 Posts 10/00
Posted - Apr 27 2011 : 10:30AM
Not to mention birth control issues, where condoms help too even if they are not a panacea. Why is the focus always on the girl's responsability not to get pregnant, never on the boy's? Edited by - Joey Starr on 4/27/2011 10:38:27 AM
Same with Reality Kings. I'm sick of seeing all of these great Latin girls, most of them one stroke wonders, and then on goes the condom. I've soured on that label and quit on BAngBros years ago for the same reason. Does BangBros still insist on condumb porn?
The biggest nonsense is endeavor to force customers to watch, how the porn star are afraid to have sex (safe sex videos). "O this is porn queen C.C. She is afraid to have real sex. "Pregnancy, STDs ... I am afraid, afraid, afraid". She always want to be maximum protected. She is a good, docile girl. She always practise safe sex. Please, watch how she uses condoms." Condoms in porn ruin all the fantasy, because condom protection create a feel, that performers be afraid to have sex. Yes, unprotected sex is risky, but it create the feel of fun . Porn is not an educational material. Porn is an entertainment. As viewer I want to see my most daring fantasies in porn scenes, but not paranoia about safe sex. We can see and read it in everywhere! If people would practise only safe sex, it would be the end of world. Yes. We all know how much it is dangerous to have unprotected sex with many partners. For example. Gang bang. One girl and 10 guys. No condoms. But! Porn is for our fantasy. We can see this extreme stuff. It is not allowed, it is risky, but this brave and naughty girl does it. Real pleasure! If guys would use condoms, it would ruin all fun. Why they do it, if they are afraid and use condoms? Where is naughtiness? Where is natural feeling? Where is risk factor? What is extreme? I want to see courageous naughty girls, who absolutely ignore all safe sex rules. I want to see gangbangs, orgies, DPs, DAPs, creampies. Condoms is not for porn. If people want to have sex with condoms they can do it at home.
We all know that porn is not the chess tournament. Tests are not protection. It is just a checking system. Besides, even condoms cannot protect against everything. Risk always will be here. I think that every performer need to understand the risk factors in porn and accept it if they want to work in porn. This work is not for every one. Consumer do not need to feel sorry because he want to see hot and risky acts. This industry is for entertainment like many others. I totally agree with Nikki Sexx. She wrote on her blog: "... condoms will do nothing for herpes, warts, etc. Those will continue to be transferable with or without condoms. No feeling of guilt is necessary, we all know the risks, and we accept them as is, no need for anyone to feel sorry when an NFL player has a career, or life threatening injury correct? They know and accept the risks of a contact sport, just as we do." Nice opinion!
Safe sex is taught in schools that have sex education (I couldn't give you a percentage of those that do) but we're so uptight that such programs are always criticized for promoting casual sex.
^ And in reality, from my experience, the sex ed available is not as comprehensive as it should be. It tends to focus on procreation, risks, etc. It doesn't tend to do anything to remove the guilt, shame, and other baggage (some) children grow up associating with sex. And that's just the straight kids...
I learned "abstinence is best" in the 90s, and my little brothers are still learning that here in California from what I hear. Luckily, the CDC has managed to convert the topic to HIV/AIDS which opens the door to actually discussing safe sex practices. There will probably never be a total focus on safe sex itself but the discussion of risks is at least healthier.
The condoms themselves don't bother me. Wicked is one of my favorite studios. If the industry chose to go all-condom, I'd be perfectly fine with it. I don't, however, agree with the government forcing the use of condoms on the adult film industry. I feel as though it's an invasion of rights to expression, wherein the presence of the condom necessarily alters the expression itself. I don't know if that argument would fly in the court system, but it's what I believe.
In that case, porn production (as a business) in the US will be all but dead. Congratulations. Maybe you feel good about it and maybe you don't but you've done more to kill it in these threads than all the Bible thumpers ever have. Edited by - randomprecision on 4/28/2011 3:15:46 AM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 28 2011 : 3:15AM
RP, how do you explain that the most successful porn website ever, BangBros, used condoms in almost every scene for their peak years of success? I think they may have cut back on their use more so now, but that's probably due to increased competition from the tubesites.
If you throw enough shit at a wall, some of it will stick. That's how I explain it. I'd be willing to bet the use of rubbers wasn't one of the selling points they used. They're called BangBros. Not CondomBros. How successful do you think they'd have been with the latter name? Anyway, I'm not debating the thing on business terms. I don't care. I've said I'm not buying it. I don't care if you want watered down porn. I don't care if you make porn and you still think you're going to make money. We'll see. Give it ten years with condoms in every scene and see how many people are buying it. And then when they're still not happy with the intercourse censored by condoms and they want to censor all the oral sex too. Let's see how that goes over. Edited by - randomprecision on 4/28/2011 3:26:39 AM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 28 2011 : 3:21AM
That completely avoids the question, but okay. That fact that they made money over fist makes these predictions that the entire industry would shut down very doubtful in my view. Certainly the raincoaters would hate it, and I'm pretty much Sweden on this issue myself, but the extremity of the reactions from many seems all out of proportion imo.
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Apr 28 2011 : 3:33AM
That is called a slippery slope argument, I don't find it convincing. By that same logic, because people have to wear seat belts in Canada one day we're all going to be in gulags. I would probably agree that government regulation would not be a good thing, but I doubt you have to worry about that, I think any US politician would be prevented from bringing in such a law because: A) There is no real political benefit to doing so because... B) It would look like they were 'legitimizing' porn by trying to regulate it. Better to give the whole thing a wide berth.
I didn't have to answer you at all. If you're going to ask incredibly stupid questions and demand the answer that you want, I'd be fine with just ignoring you.Did I say that? I said it would be all but dead. A few people here and there would still be blowing their money on shitty censored porn. Oh well. Not everyone has the sense to vote with their wallet. This is not the time when the porn biz wants to piss off the customers it has left. Anyway, the fact that for many years, you haven't been able to go near a TGP or simply type "porn" into a search engine without getting hit over the head the entire time by BangBros advertising might have a little something to do with the fact that they were able to lure enough people in to make money in spite of the fact that they were selling an inferior product. Advertising works. Big fucking deal. Again, put rubbers in every porn scene for ten years and see how it goes.Oh really? If you don't give a shit then butt out.
No. It's called a fact. I've been telling you for years they would find a way to screw up porn and you didn't believe it then either.No. Not all of you. Just the ones who finally draw a line in the sand somewhere and end up breaking the law by even daring to protest. The spineless shits who bow to every injustice will always get along just fine no matter what. There are over a billion people living in China right now (some would say happily), for example. Most of them on their knees. I guess if you don't notice you're on your knees you're pretty happy. Anyway, when one step leads to another and another and another, you will eventually find yourself in an unpleasant situation. I don't care if you believe it or not. But it's as plain as day.You're looking at it all wrong. There has to be a political benefit. Otherwise it wouldn't keep coming up. Somebody wants this. Why?
I think I have said it before, if porn goes condom-only I will stop watching new porn and recycle my old porn. Should be enough to keep me happy until the end. Condoms suck!
I think my fear would be that it goes more underground or overseas. Seems to be a fair amount of porn being shot outside of California now already. Haven't really heard about many legal issues about them, but I still believe porn production is still only "legal" in California. Maybe some would do more online or overseas, but I doubt that'd enough. Places like Vegas or Florida are tempting, but tempting fate is a dangerous game. Not everyone is comfortable going to jail or being in one, even if briefly. I worry more would be produced overseas or underground, lessening the ability for everyone to be tested or tested safely. The risk is already there, I'd hate to see that risk severely widen.
I watch porn for the fantasy and (yes) the risk. I wish I could go out to the club in Miami, find a girl, and screw her bareback, but I wouldn't be able to sleep right after I did it. Therefore, you live through these actors and what they can manage to pull off that the average Joe can't. Watching a dude with condom just brings you out of that fantasy and reminds you of crap you have to deal with when having sex. It's almost the same as watching Naomi on the toilet cleaning out her asshole for an anal scene. I know it happens, but I don't want to see it. Moreover, it also throws the actors timing off when they shoot their wad. I also happen to watch censored and uncensored JAV and I can tell you mosaics and condoms are no fun. The only reason I put up with it is: 1. The novelty of foreign Japanese girls. 2. The lack of American and European Asians that have that JAV look.
Moreover, when I get sick of it, I have the choice to go back to watching uncensored American/Euro porn. Like other posters have said, if porn in California went all condom, I would stop buying( I have a huge stash and already favor Euro girls to boot). Evil Angel would still be doing quality Gonzo with no condoms, so I would still be happy. I understand actors are concerned about safety, but no one forces them to do it. Plenty of ladies (and men)with and without a college education make do by doing jobs other than porn. If you are uncomfortable about the risk, don't subject yourself to working in an industry you do not feel comfortable about simply for the money. How about they try and improve testing to test for hepatitis, improve actor's professional work ethics, or test for drugs as well, instead of trying to impose change on the fans. Edited by - moebius22 on 6/5/2011 12:22:03 AM Edited by - moebius22 on 6/5/2011 12:28:11 AM
That sounds good to me, along with improving testing procedures for all STIs. This mandatory condom effort doesn't appear to be about what would be best for the performers, though. Rather, it seems to narrowly focus on just one heavy-handed solution for a problem that could most likely be better addressed in other ways.
[Link]
trout bum Deactivated User
"I'm Not Here To Suck My Own Cock!" 2145 Posts 5/10
Posted - Jun 5 2011 : 8:48AM
At first condom only porn didn't bother me, but I've have grown to not care for it at all. I use to buy quite a few releases from Wicked, but their exclusive condom only scenes just don't do it for me. It is total turnoff. I fully respect pornstar's rights to go condom only, but if I am going spend good money on a DVD, I am not going waste it on ones that don't appeal to me. How about companies stating on covers if they are using condoms in the shoots?
I am conflicted because as much as I would prefer that condom use not be mandated I can also understand why pornstars would like to protect themselves if at all possible. This interview with Bobbi Starr for the BBC was quite sobering because Bobbi is a true professional and the way she mentions that "Well just chlamydia a couple of times, gonorrhea - nothing much. Anyway we test each month and when you are diagnosed you just take your medication and you are good to go. No problem" Who knows how serious her response was or even whether she was correctly quoted but getting STD's in my world would be a MAJOR PROBLEM so maybe the majority of people in porn do not see that as a "No problem" issue and I sympathise with them. The interview
I agree, this would have been the right thing to do. However, the industry had years and years to make the choice to self-regulate enough to control infections and health risks. They chose not to. Now the choice is not theirs.
Follow me on Twitter: @TiffanyDollxxx 150 Posts 5/11
Posted - Jun 5 2011 : 11:30AM
In France we have to use condom in porn movie not because of the law but because if you want to sell your movie to the French TV (Canal +) you have to shoot with. Fucking with condom is not so bad, actually in my private life I use this latex hood all the time but the problem is that French are hypocrite. Why? because French porn director ask just about HIV test. But we do blow job with out and you should know we can get Chlamydia and Gonorrhea (or anything else) in the throat. Also sometimes, the performer cut the top of the condom to be more confortable and feeling something when he is inside a huge porn actress vagina (like mine). And to finish the problem with condom is that is no so confortable in the ass, and to have to big and huge lovely cock inside the black hole can be painful... (maybe could be painful with out as well???)
In my world, there is little excuse for someone to only realize that they have a MAJOR PROBLEM after they've gotten themselves into a situation that they find unacceptable and intolerable. I assume most porn performers have weighed the risks (and the likely consequences) against whatever they expect to accomplish by doing porn. It is common sense. Even with testing, you aren't going to get fucked up the ass and swallow ten loads of jizz from random people on a daily basis for years without getting an STD here and there. So the impact of that when it does happen has to be less for someone who expected it. Occasionally (unfortunately) someone who fucks random people all the time gets HIV. This isn't a surprise either. I'm sure it's devastating but I'm equally sure it had to have at least crossed their mind when they were fucking a bunch of different people (in and out of the porn industry). I've had sex with a number of random strangers and I can tell you that this is something that you can't help but think about. So if you're doing it unprotected anyway despite knowing the risks, that means you are willing to accept the consequences. Or that's what it should mean. In this hopelessly warped society, we have to stop people from victimizing themselves.
This interview just increase respect for porn performers, who take the risk for our pleasure. STDs cannot stop true stars. The real porn is unprotected sex. I am certain that the real porn stars understand that the porn videos are filming for viewers and they are ready to accept professional risk. Risky behavior is a nature of porn. This is an industry for courageous people. I am ready to pay more for porn, but it should be real porn - without condoms. It is sad of course, that Bobbi had infections, but I do not want to tell lies. I am very glad that she did not stop and continue to work without condoms after treatment. It shows, how much she is strong and courageous. Much more. She increased risk and did bareback gangbang with double anal. I remember this cute girl went to Brazil for real bareback fucking. It was a real gift for her Brasilian fans. Excellent attitude to porn and fans. It mean that STDs will never win. Never. This is a best answer of Bobbi Starr. Brave fucking without condoms! Yeee! Yeee! Yeee! And yeee! Thanks, Bobbi! I have an idea. What about new foundation for the treatment of porn performers. I am certain that real porn fans can donate some money for this. Infections like chlamydia or gonorrhea are not so dangerous, but performers need to take the break anyway and they need to pay money for the medication. We can help them. Just like insurance for free.
I heard that sales fast come down in France. The only chance for some studios is "Canal +", but their rating comes down too. Even "Marc Dorcel" is doing cunning. I am not buying "Marc Dorcel", but some of my friends tell there are some box covers and photos without condoms, but the videos are done only with condoms. Is it true? I heard that many porn performers cannot find work in France. Does it is possible to earn normal money there?
Follow me on Twitter: @TiffanyDollxxx 150 Posts 5/11
Posted - Jun 6 2011 : 1:46PM
Yes sales come down, the rates come down in France and work as well so many performers have to work somewhere else (Hungary for exemple or USA), many French performesr are based in a foreigh country now. You may find pictures without condom sometime (often) but for the video is not possible because of Canal + law.
I can't tell if you're being serious or if you're just trying to be a smartass but either way, I don't know what makes you think people don't pay money for porn. There are many people who steal it but people who buy porn are already "donating" money to the performers. Where do you think the money to pay them comes from? Edited by - randomprecision on 6/6/2011 2:11:02 PM
Let me see if I've got this right. The porn business had a fair chance to obey the government's arbitrary, unjust orders and it didn't so now, because the people who make porn believed they didn't have to obey orders from people who had no business (and no right) giving them in the first place, the government is completely justified in forcing them to? Makes perfect sense to me. I'm amazed! People are actually, seriously trying to tell me that oppression is justifiable by the mere fact that people have attempted to defy it. By that logic, every single thing every dictator in history did was completely justifiable. I'm sure they all felt they had good reasons. Edited by - randomprecision on 6/6/2011 2:44:14 PM
No, you're being a moron. The government has every right to dictate and legislate a SAFE working environment for EVERY industry. The porn industry had the chance, for decades, to step up and put real measures in place to control workplace hazards. They did not. Now the government is saying, "Hey, you didn't pay attention to the rules that are for EVERYBODY, so now we're going to make rules just for you and bitch-slap you when we catch you not following them. Oh, and we're going to make sure that we check on you a lot more often until we actually believe you're going to play by the rules." A safe working environment is not arbitrary or unjust. And no, it doesn't matter what the performers want. Although, I'm pretty sure that if you ask the performers if they WANT to catch all manner of infections and deal with drugged-out-of-their-mind co-workers and the various other unsafe nonsense that goes on, you're going to hear a lot of "No". The performers do want a safe environment. That doesn't mean they "want" condoms, they probably don't, but they do recognize that there aren't any other alternatives being offered.
I can watch maybe one or two Wicked features a month but condom only porn is still not going to get the bulk of my purchases anytime soon. And I don't think the 'government' has a right to dictate anything on its own. If the legislators sat down and passed a law with these exact stipulations in place then it's almost fine 'cause I'd still fervently oppose on both an efficacy and liberty argument, but I absolutely abhor the idea of affirming some unelected bureaucrats to write a bunch of rules and then specifically target industries they dislike. F that. Fact is that performers voluntarily agree to the risk and that is that. I doubt lab technicians working with blood would, understandably so, but blood is not semen. It's not one of the main attractions for the entire industry. It's stupid to mandate condoms and I feel it's a violation of property rights.
I frequently see techs working without gloves, eye protection, and outside of ventilation hoods. There are often many JCAHO inspection violations, aside from tech safety. The hospitals get fined out the ass when they get caught. Some labs get closed/lose accreditation until they improve. Don't fool yourself, semen carries infections quite nicely. Almost all blood-born pathogens are/can be carried in semen.
You get an independent expert to agree that the performers have been given an accurate understanding of transmission and an accurate assessment of the risks for all STD's, not just AIDS, and you'll have informed consent. Otherwise, you've got nothing.
The free market will decide. I for one will then seek out European stuff (if it is still legal to buy non-condom porn). Many people will still buy the condom-only porn, I mean there's always been a market for that Vivid shit.
sadly this is how modern governance works. Leglislatures create some agency or task an existing agency to carry out a policy with vague parameters and do very little if any check ups. The unelected bureaucrats really run everything. Elected politicians are merely window dressing.
I agree. The market has decided in the past and will do so again. You will either see porn producers/actors producing porn legally or illegally in other states or going over seas. The only ones who will be hurt are the actors the condom only porn market cannot support. I assume the coalition of working/retired porn actors and public health officials pushing for this either do not care, or they erroneously think they can impose change on public taste by way of legislation. As long as you have companies like Evil Angel (who also operate overseas), making high quality product, with no condoms, pretty girls willing to do anal/DP, customers will follow.
Well people have been saying most of that for years. For some odd reason, Porn seems to think it's exempt from most State Government rules and regulations. California porn is (more or less) considered a legal business, subject to the same rules and regulations as any other business. Now unless a higher court somehow says differently, it always will be. No one ever said it'd always be fair or just.
Yeah. I'm a moron. I never figured you for a groveling bootlicker. How stupid could I have been?There sure are alternatives. Nobody has to make porn in the United States. Edited by - randomprecision on 6/8/2011 10:37:59 AM
I don't believe the government has any right to impose this kind of law. Then again, big brother hasn't done anything worth a fuck in the last ten years anyway. Between passing Obamacare without a fair vote on a society that doesn't need or want it, to forcing mandatory condom use on an industry that doesn't want or need it. Protesting and complaining about it is pointless. The government has already made a habit of pushing the public around while claiming they know what is best for us. It's time to start thinking about alternatives and how to find loopholes in their poorly-structured, idiotic rules. There are always loopholes.
Chloe Temple Interview
Posted - Apr 27 2011 : 2:10AM
