Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 17 2009 : 6:24PM
Ever hear of Ed Powers? He has pumped out according IAFD, 713 titles. About a hundred or so titles in he began to shoot condom only. His Dirty Debutant series probably out sold everybody else in his heyday. The video stores, that I used to rent from, had row after of his stuff. He was/is so ugly that if you noticed that he was wearing a condom, well you just weren't paying attention. Every girl who ever made it in the porn business paid Ed a visit. As ugly as he was and in spite of his use of a condom, his stuff sold like hotcakes. Then there is Randy West. He shot similar stuff, but usually sprung for a camara man. His Up & Cummers etc. was better shot then Ed's. Randy let the girl decide if she wanted him to use a condom or not. Without question, condom or not (he did do his fair share of cream pies), his stuff was hot and sold as well as Ed's. Today, as it happens, I watched Randy and another guy do Allison Chaynes, in a 3-way, it was a very pleasant walk down memory lane, and both of the guys wore condoms. Fantasies can come true, they can happen to you... Edited by - Clam Digger on 6/17/2009 6:27:04 PM
This just sez those guys had/have a monopoly on that niche of porn. The attraction is the "fresh new girls". For the viewers, tolerating Ed, and condoms, and any other unpleasantries is just the price of admission to see the girls. I don't think it says anything at all about viewers' acceptance of condoms. If the porn is sufficiently unique, people will not be put off my condoms. If the porn is cookie-cutter with interchangeable performers, then condoms become one of the few things that differentiate one from another.
Ya it failed. Didnt pass OSHA for some MSDS reason, like a lot of otherwise more beneficial than a hazard items. They do have "better looking condoms".. Crown Skinless Skin. Clear and slightly pink tinged. Can't hardly even see them. I have some. Very unnoticable. Look em up!
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jun 17 2009 : 11:41PM
The ban on pornography did come about during the Meiji era but that action is widely viewed to be due to Western influence and anxiety among the ultra-nationalist conservatives of looking degenerate to Western allies and opponents. The Japanese left pushed for the removal of such laws after WWII but the Americans and the Japanese right ensured they remained in place. PS. Sorry for going OT.
Edited by - BlackSix on 6/18/2009 12:02:49 AM
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Jun 18 2009 : 12:02AM
Although the vast majority of porn viewers would rather not see condoms in porn, I don't think the lack of condom use is solely all about the consumers. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I don't think that most performers, particularly male performers, are in love with the idea of wearing condoms themselves either. Think about it. If given a choice, most guys will go without a condom if we are reasonably sure that there's no risk of catching anything. It doesn't matter whether or not we're wrong or stupid in that belief. Just thinking that we're safe is enough for most guys to go without a condom. If that weren't true, then we wouldn't have so many unintended pregnancies all over the place. Again, maybe I'm assuming too much. But I really doubt that the guys in porn want to wear condoms anymore than the viewers want them to. Thus, not only will trying to require condom use in porn be greatly unsuccessful (as it has always been all the other times it was tried before), but it will likely just piss off male performers just as much as the viewers.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 18 2009 : 12:54AM
^I'm not sure you are correct there, as these guys mostly fuck like they are on a GM assembly line. But it would be interesting to hear from some of then for their opinion on the matter.
I consider condoms to be anti-pornographic. (I don't use them myself, and I do risky sex.) When I buy porn, a major selection criteria is that the product be condom-free. If I somehow inadvertantly buy or rent a dvd in which a condom is used, I immediately stop watching, make a note of the company who produced the dvd and actress in the scene, and never buy or rent anything from that company or anything involving that actress ever again. Companies are free to produce dvds with condom usage, but I won't be buying or renting those products, ever.
As a performer, I don't care for them; but the decision to use them will usually come from the female talent or the producer. I did a scene with Amia Miley/Moretti where condoms were 'part of the fantasy' (porn star picking up two guys in an adult bookstore) and it just made the production twice as complicated, as the other guy couldn't keep it up. Hard to imagine, I know, but the enjoyment of the male talent, to the director, ranks just under the brand of toilet paper he buys. John
Given that rationale, you must not watch much porn.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 18 2009 : 6:10PM
Actually I think that attitude by a lot of directors is plainly apparent in the end result. They frankly don't give 2 shits about the female talent either. This people don't seem to understand much about real sexuality or eroticism... Excuse the rant, I kind of got off topic. Edit: To correct a really stupid typo. Edited by - Clam Digger on 6/19/2009 8:21:19 AM
Fat bottomed girls make the rockin' world go round! 1551 Posts 5/09
Posted - Jun 19 2009 : 2:08AM
I have no problem watching performers wearing condoms. This recent news about an actress with HIV is a caused by a working environment that is biased towards the producers. Sign a contract that says you have a right to use a condom...but you're told you won't get work if you do? What's up with that? Would that situation exist if actors had established safety standards? Some say that porn performers will never organize into a union. I say why not? If main stream actors can form the screen actors guild to aid collective bargaining, why can't porn actors do likewise? Men and women died trying to form unions during the 30's in our country. They died to overcome unsafe working conditions. If men were angels, we would not need unions. I'll get off my soapbox now.
I have been away from ADT for a week or more, I'm really not sure, and I only browsed the thread so far. But anyway, I have enjoyed some scenes with condoms, if everything else was working for the scene. But most of what I watch is condom-free, and I prefer it that way. Condoms are fine if the scene is edited so that we see the penis pulling out of her orifice as little as possible, but they would not look good if you want to have any oral between vaginal or anal positions, and I do like to see that. Also, even in condom scenes, it kind of defeats the purpose when they take it off to ejaculate on her at the end. Of course, companies that have traditionally shot with condoms have also tended to have cumshots on the buttocks, back, stomach, breasts, feet, etc., which I assume is probably relatively safe. But apart from my foot fetish, I like facials, and that would definitely defeat the purpose of condoms. Swallowing is okay with me too, but again, that would defeat the purpose of condoms, and while I'm not a big fan of creampies (although I'll watch them if I like everything else about the scene) they would obviously be out. Duh. I'd rather there be much more frequent tests. And maybe discourage performers from escorting or being promiscuous off camera, and discourage companies from shooting performers known to escort or being promiscuous off camera. If the porn talent pool were a closed system where everyone is monogomous with one significant other or only fool around with other performers, HIV and STDs wouldn't be much of a problem. That's a pipedream, but that would still be the ideal. Many performers are already monogomous or at least very selective when they're off camera, why can't the other performers do the same? Or be blackballed from the porn talent pool.
RandomPrecision Your comment that you can not beat off to looking at a guy wearing a condom (that sounds far more homoerotic than it was suppose too). You lack imagination and reflect a typical self centeredness that is literally murdering this planet. What is that word that I am looking for? Oh that is right... asshole!
That's your opinion and you're welcome to it but it changes very little. I still can't get off to shit that turns me off. Kudos to you if you can. Perhaps you can jerk off to Animal Kingdom and pretend it's human porn? What's wrong? No imagination? Edit - Unfortunately, I didn't imagine all those times when I tried to have sex wearing a condom and hated every minute of it and couldn't cum. You might try and imagine how I feel when I see a condom. Whether it's a lack of imagination or whatever, it's not a conscious, rational thing. It just is. If you have a better imagination than I do, then just thank your lucky stars and enjoy it. Edited by - randomprecision on 6/19/2009 7:36:57 AM
We didn't bring a compass 'cause we ain't got nowhere to go 173 Posts 4/09
Posted - Jun 19 2009 : 9:08AM
People who think they are in posession of the absolute truth often seem to have little respect for the opinions of others. Perhaps that's one of the reasons why so few performers are interested in participating in this discussion. Two statements by Belladonna: On Testing:On Condoms:Both taken from this Babeland blog post that was linked in the other thread.
Actually, I watch quite a bit and have done so for decades. The use of condoms is anti-erotic, from my point of view, so, when I want to watch porn, I'm selective about what I buy or rent. I'm certainly not knowingly going to spend money to buy or rent something that I won't enjoy watching.
^ Yeah but, never watching that actress again? I mean, suppose she does one condom scene and 400 non-condom scenes? Suppose you see the condom scene early on, and then you will never watch her scenes again? That doesn't sound weird to you? I mean, why? What does she have to do with anything? Or suppose girl XXXX is your favourite girl of all time. You've seen a whole ton of her scenes, and there are plenty more you'd love to see as well. You accidentally pick up the one and only scene XXXX did with a condom, and now you'll never watch her again? Never? So your fave girl is not only no longer your fave girl, but now she doesn't even exist as far as your porn watching is concerned. What will you do with the hundreds of DVDs you had of XXXX already? Will you leave them on the shelf to be never watched again? Will you sell them off? Will you give them away? Can I have them?
I am curious as to know if those who do not believe that condoms should be used in their favorite porn. How many of you are single males who have never kissed a girl before and live in your mother's basement watching porn when "mom is not around"
My opinion When condoms first appeared in this life i couldn't believe it tried it never could keep my hard on what's that shit? plastic between u and a woman? I'd rather masturbate! In porn scenes, big turn off also well...there's more to say, but anyway, most of u get my point..
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 20 2009 : 12:28AM
Masterbate, isn't that what you do when you watch porn? []
You're really funny. HAHA. Do you always treat people who has another opinion on things than you like that? I guess you are the one sitting in your mothers basement without any friends. I believe that making the testing system better and punishing the people who don't follow the rules is better than making scenes with condoms which a lot of people don't want to see. And please notice that a lot of performers like Belladonna don't want to do porn with condoms either.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Jun 20 2009 : 9:03PM
It occurs to me that this very thread might be submitted as evidence IN FAVOR OF regulating the porn industry's health practices. Look for yourself. Here are Consumers who demand risky sex for their own gratification with no more concern for worker safety than they would have for ants; producers whining that they would like to be safe but they just don't know how without losing their shirts; porn stars who don't know which to be scared of more: illness or unemployment; assurances to actors that if they aren't willing to risk their lives, there's plenty out there who will. Finally, a self regulatory apparatus that's looking more and more like an illusion manufactured expressly to permit dangerous practices to go on unchecked. It's all a perfect portrait of an industry helpless to take care of itself that can't or won't keep its employees healthy, potentially a disaster waiting to happen. If you wanted to, you couldn't make a better case for immediate and strict regulation than than you already have.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 20 2009 : 11:09PM
Non-comdom ADT'ers, the government has heard your lamentations aand is springing into action, behold: [ invalid url ]
If you'd read more than five of my posts, maybe you'd know me better than that. I have nearly 20,000 of them. If you want to level such an accusation, you should know the person you're making it against better than this. But then, you have only 74 posts so it looks like you just jumped in here and started making assumptions about people you don't even know. Nice. It's more complicated than whether or not I care for their safety. This is a product I pay money for and I have to think about my concerns and expectations too. I'm sorry if that bothers you but it's just reality. Where were your shoes made? Who made them? What kind of working conditions do they have there? The amazing thing is that the working conditions could probably be better without significantly affecting the quality or price of the shoes. That is a situation where the working conditions are needlessly bad simply because nobody cares. That is not the same for porn. If condoms ruin the scene for a given customer, the knowledge that it was safer for the sex workers to make it is not really much help. This is a different product. It's not a pair of shoes or a pencil or a car. This is a product that falls into the same category as fetishes, where one specific thing turns a person on and they can't get off to anything else. There's a big psychological factor in here that you are just ignoring. Do you honestly think anyone who cares about the performers wouldn't gladly tolerate condoms if we could? I know they're putting themselves at risk for STDs (I happen to think the risk for HIV is lower than you'd think because I do think testing works) and I wish I had an answer that didn't make me sound like a selfish prick. I would have been calling for condoms in every post since I've been here if I could get off to it. The problem is that I do care but I just don't see an alternative and it's very insulting to come on here and see people accusing me of not even caring at all. Yes. There are people who just don't care (or say they don't). If you choose to lump us all together, you have a serious comprehension problem. Either that or you just made a broad assumption without even bothering to really read what people wrote. I'll let the industry people respond to the part of your post that pertains to them (If they choose to). Edited by - randomprecision on 6/21/2009 3:55:05 AM
pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 5:26AM
Wow, you were around when condoms first appeared? You must be thousands of years old Methuselah.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 8:38AM
Almost a half-million dollars to research why guys don't like to wear condoms? Wow! Maybe next they can fund a million-dollar study to determine the mystery of why children like Halloween candy. It's the same thing I've said in this thread already. Men in general don't like to wear condoms. So it's obvious that men in porn don't like wearing them either. Thus, the solution is simple. Guys watching porn don't want to see condoms. Guys performing in porn don't want to wear condoms. Therefore, no condoms. Everybody is happy. Now where's my half-million dollars?
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 9:05AM
RandomPrecision wrote: There's a big psychological factor in here that you are just ignoring. Do you honestly think anyone who cares about the performers wouldn't gladly tolerate condoms if we could? I know they're putting themselves at risk for STDs (I happen to think the risk for HIV is lower than you'd think because I do think testing works) and I wish I had an answer that didn't make me sound like a selfish prick. I would have been calling for condoms in every post since I've been here if I could get off to it. The problem is that I do care but I just don't see an alternative and it's very insulting to come on here and see people accusing me of not even caring at all. _________________________________________ I’m not ignoring it. On the contrary, don’t tell anybody, but the fact is I don’t much like seeing condoms either. So, I don’t think you are being so much a selfish prick as you are stating your honest preferences. Where we part company is that you see no alternative to sex without condoms, while I see no alternative to safe sex. Please notice that I did not say there is no alternative to seeing condoms in porn. Indeed there is. Sex is also safe when practiced with a trusted partner such as a spouse or good friend. It is safe with anyone tested at a meaningful interval – ten days to 2 weeks, with a quarantine between tests (the AIM standard is 30 days with no quarantine). Beyond that, the exercise of a little imagination, ingenuity, and film making techniques that have been in common practice for a century or more, and anyone could make a sex movie that practiced completely safe sex without showing a single condom. When the producers moan about condom use killing their profits, what I hear is that they are too lazy or inept or don’t care enough to bother making a professional quality product. As long as there are producers who, for whatever reason, will not or cannot make a product that is safe for the actors, I fear they must be made to do so, and that means regulation. Once regulated and forced to do so, I think you will be pleasantly surprised to see many performances without a single condom in view that nevertheless are safe for the performers.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 9:14AM
^the real truth here is that most of the scenes shot today are crap and boring, and whether condoms are used or not, has nothing to do with that.
Can they shoot a real oral cumshot completely safely every time? If the answer is no then the product is diminished in the eyes of anyone who likes oral cumshots. If someone really likes oral cumshots to the point of near obsession, a porn flick without one is worthless. Yes. The testing could probably be better and it will probably get better. But condomless sex will not be completely risk free no matter how the testing is done. Even if the test itself is nearly foolproof, there's always the potential for paperwork screwups and all kinds of mixups. And there's always the risk that a performer will try and cheat the test somehow. Some things just aren't safe by their very nature. Occasionally, bad shit will happen. Hardcore porn is risky. It always has been. It's probably safer now than it has been since the AIDS thing hit.
Not a shred of evidence exists in favor of the idea that life is serious - Brendan Gill 723 Posts 4/09
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 10:20AM
I like the oral shots myself, but again, sitting here, I can think of ways to make them safe, so why can't producers? I'm not such a fool as to say it would be easily or cheaply done, but it can be done, and the makers in the business today don't do it because they don't have to.
Duefuss RandomPrecision is correct. It's not that people do not care about the performers. It's just that the use of condoms in porn turn a lot of people off, which kind of defeats its purpose. It's simply a preference, equivalent to any other preference which may involve more risks for the participants. Take those who watch and support professional boxing or UFC. Some debate the moral aspects of these spectator sports too, but the bottom line is that the participants have entered these professions freely and would have been aware of the risks before they got involved. One could just as easily say that if viewers must watch combat sports, they should watch amateur boxing, judo, karate or something else where there is a more controlled and safer environment, but can our tastes really be so easily manipulated and, even if they can, are we really under any moral obligation to change them in relation to fully cognizant and free adult individuals engaged in a non-essential profession? I will intellectually support any performers desire to use condoms to safeguard their health but, all other things being equal, my libido prefers condomless porn. Preference is one aspect of it, but I also think many believe the industry does an acceptable job of monitoring and controlling disease outbreaks with its current measures. No system is going to be foolproof and one can always look to improve things, but considering the amount of porn being produced, instances of very serious diseases like HIV, appear to be low. When even one case occurs, it's big news. I think performers should have the choice to use a condom or not, but it's very difficult to control tastes, preferences and the market of choice, particularly in a global economy and with the global nature of the internet. In this thread, I see some still struggle to understand why many are turned off by condoms in porn. Some have suggested it's illogical since the viewer does not have to wear one, others have expressed incredulity that anyone could still be turned off if they were digitally removed, but still used in reality. It's hard to account for taste but, for me, condoms represent a barrier between performers. A necessary evil in one's personal life, but undesirable as a viewing spectacle. They are tolerable in some circumstances, but generally I try to avoid them. If anyone can imagine how unappealing it would be to watch fellatio performed with the receiver wearing a condom or cunnilingus with a flat piece of latex (dental dam) over the vagina, this will give you an idea of the arousal appeal of viewing intercourse with a condom, for many people. Barriers like this kill sensation in real life and, when viewing, remind one that the enjoyment and sensations of the sex are compromised in some fashion. Performers who wore latex body suits, for protection, would have a similar effect, unless one had a fetish for this, even if edited out. What I love about porn is its unadulterated nature, its wildness. I also like the fact that the sexual acts are real and not faked. I only want the fantasy to go so far, but the sex has to be real, between real people. I'm sure, in time, technology will enable film makers to graphically engineer realistic looking people engaged in sex, but, for many, this will not have the same appeal as real people. Porn is not only about fantasy, it is about reality also, as well as psychology, kink, non-conformity, eccentricity, extremes, taboos, diversity, interaction and so on. Naturally, it can also be about education, safety and relationships, but the point is one practice will not appeal to all. The bottom line is, performers are under no obligation to acquiesce to the desires of the viewer. Their health should be their priority, but one can hardly blame the consumer for legitimately seeking that which turns them on, providing it is consensual/uncoerced and between adults.
[Link]
Ida Lupino Deactivated User
429 Posts 11/08
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 11:22AM
Jeez what an exercise in hot air. The cum shot is sacred in gonzo. Fini.
Who made you the judge? Maybe you think that most porn today is crap and boring, I don't think it is. And even if it was - do you really think using condoms would make it better? - I don't think so - on the contrary. Edited by - lange on 6/21/2009 1:42:29 PM
@ Gaspard: What a great response. Thank you for explaining how us non condom fans are thinking. We are not selfish pricks who don't care about the performers. Use of condoms is not the only way to protect the performers. Edited by - lange on 6/21/2009 1:51:27 PM Edited by - lange on 6/21/2009 1:52:39 PM
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 3:47PM
I think the market place is the judge, sales are pretty much in the toilet.
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Jun 21 2009 : 7:59PM
^And if sales are in the toilet without condoms, just imagine how terrible they would be with condoms. You don't improve sales by making the product worse.
[Link]
Clam Digger Deactivated User
Many a man fails as an original thinker simply because his memory is too good. 2268 Posts 1/05
Posted - Jun 22 2009 : 12:13AM
^the product is already largely terrible, regardless of condom use.
There are lots of differing perspectives on how one forms porn preferences. I don't really have a favorite girl; it's more that I have favorite fetishes or favorite sex acts that I enjoy watching. So, I'm more inclined to focus on directors and series than on actresses when shopping for porn, and the absence of condoms in prior dvds by the director or in the series is a major positive factor in making selections. I also read reviews here and elsewhere, specifically looking for information on whether or not condoms are used. If I, somehow, inadvertantly buy a dvd in which condoms are used, I throw it away. There are lots of other things that I'd rather do than watch boring pseudo-porn.
I'm not demanding anything. I'm making a quite different point: that I will not buy, rent, or purchase a product that I will not like and would never watch. If somebody wants to make (legal) products that I will not consume, they have every right to do so and to take their chances in the marketplace.
I read Belladonna's opinion about condom use in porn. "As for condoms, personally, I can only be as safe as I can be without diminishing the value of what I’m trying to accomplish. Condoms just don’t feel good to suck on, or to take in the ass, hard and fast. If I were required to use condoms, my performance would most likely suffer, and in the end I would suffer. I’m not trying to debate with anyone here, I’m just saying, if my co-workers were more responsible, we could all make some great porn and be STD free at the same time. To be perfectly honest, I understand my job is a high risk job, but there are many high risk jobs out there like, construction workers on skyscrapers, oil riggers, stuntmen… but when these people get hurt on the job, do you see the world turning it into something its not? No, it’s just because people are not comfortable with themselves sexually and have to point fingers at us to make themselves feel better about it." http://blog.babeland.com/2009/06/18/belladonna-on-safer-sex-and-the-industry/ Excellent! Belladonna is one of the most famous performers in industry for a long time. Belladonna always accentuated that fans don't like to see condoms in porn and she always worked bareback for more fans pleasure. I think that many performers have a same opinion. I believe that our porn will be live!
Interesting opinion. Nina Hartley: Audience: "I was wondering what your thoughts are about condom use in straight porn?" NINA: "Okay, condom use in porn: Boring. Go to aim-med.org. That is the Website for the adult industry health clinic. We have testing once a month and no condoms. Nobody wants condoms in straight porn. It is, for lots of good reasons - if you're at home alone, when there's love action going on and the intercourse is going to last 12 minutes, okay, condoms are fine. In a movie, the scene goes on 90 minutes. He's up; he's down. The drag on the tissues with or without lube creates micro-tears, which makes me as a female more vulnerable to disease, so I don't want to use condoms in movies. They hurt, and they make an otherwise fun-enough 60 to 90 minutes turn into a not-fun 90 minutes to two-and-a-half hours because of the added bullshit of condoms. http://business.avn.com/articles/30170.html
[Link]
realtip Deactivated User
2301 Posts 6/04
Posted - Jun 22 2009 : 5:47AM
Isn't this exactly why we should be giving suggestions to make porn better instead of worse? The point is that, regardless of how bad porn may be, including condoms will not make it better, only worse.
]