Sharing My Wife 3 (Reality Junkies) - review by Captain Jack| Author | Post |
|---|---|
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 |  Posted - Oct 14 2016 : 3:18PMThis is why FSC needs to be airing commercials and doing more in terms of non-social media outreach. There's groups out there that appeal to nearly everyone that support the No on 60 position, but you need to actually inform people about them, and I just don't think social media and editorial pages are going to cut it.   [Link] |
| cubbiefanoc Member 474 Posts 4/15 | Posted - Oct 14 2016 : 3:40PM [Link] |
| kinguntermensch Senior Member 1260 Posts 7/14 | Posted - Oct 14 2016 : 5:23PM [Link] |
| Maxxx Stirner Deactivated User 319 Posts 11/14 | Posted - Oct 16 2016 : 11:53AM [Link] |
| tintintin Senior Member 1230 Posts 8/07 | Posted - Oct 17 2016 : 11:30AM [Link] |
pringles  All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 17 2016 : 1:24PM It's been here forever because it has become the thread for all of the proposed condom regulations the industry has faced. It's been about Measure B, AB 1576, Prop 60, and 5193.1. We should know the results of Prop 60 in the evening on November 8th. --- Prop 60 on Jimmy Kimmel Live (Vimeo) --- Why I strongly OPPOSE Prop 60 in California (Daily Kos) Lengthy analysis of Prop 60 on the progressive site Daily Kos --- Adult Performers to Protest Against Prop 60 on Monday (Xbiz) Adult performers will be marching on the headquarters of Michael Weinstein's "Yes on Prop 60" campaign headquarters Monday afternoon to demand that the organization he leads, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, stop "attacks on performers, end his dangerous messaging and to debate adult performers about the measure in a public forum." more at the link above [Link] |
| pringles All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 17 2016 : 7:27PM Photo 1 Photo 2 Photo 3 Photo 4 --- Popular Porn Sites Go Dark In Protest (vocativ) Vivid, Evil Angel, Kink, and others block access to Californians over Proposition 60 Today, adult websites are taking away California's porn. In protest of Proposition 60, a state bill mandating condoms in adult films, several sites are interrupting or entirely blocking access to California IP addresses. This includes the mainstream giant Vivid Video, as well as Evil Angel, Kink, Pink & White Productions, and Treasure Island Media. In-state visitors to these sites are met with a message instructing them to vote no on Prop 60 and, in some cases, warning that their porn might be permanently taken away if the bill passes. This virtual strike coincides with a protest by roughly 100 adult performers planned later today outside of the Los Angeles headquarters of the Yes on 60 Campaign. more at the link above Edited by - pringles on 10/17/2016 7:35:45 PM [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 18 2016 : 8:03PM A lot of performers seem to be savvy enough or at least with enough foresight to promote their personally produced video for digital vendors like Customs4you (I think that's the right name). And I would assume they all reserve the right to sell DVDs of said content as well. But won't the passing of this bill certainly have a major impact on this forum? Won't it be certain that adult DVD production plummets? Who, besides the power hungry, self-appointed would-be Porn Czar Michael Weinstein, stands to benefit the most from this? Maybe the city of Miami? Could Miami become the new LA/Hollywood of porn? [Link] |
| MorganKane Senior Member 6037 Posts 10/10 | Posted - Oct 18 2016 : 10:32PM [Link] |
| cubbiefanoc Member 474 Posts 4/15 | Posted - Oct 18 2016 : 11:30PM The potential law has already affected how I purchase memberships. For companies that I really like, I have taken out long term memberships (year long). Recently, I haven't renewed those memberships because I am in wait and see to what will happen. Since I live in CA, several companies have threatened to block CA IPs from viewing their sites. [Link] |
| kinguntermensch Senior Member 1260 Posts 7/14 | Posted - Oct 19 2016 : 4:43AM WHAT? That doesn't give anyone enough information to vote responsibly! They just see condoms in porn and think they are helping the performers by voting yes. That's ridiculous and there is no way this does not pass! [Link] |
| cubbiefanoc Member 474 Posts 4/15 | Posted - Oct 19 2016 : 11:53AM Unfortunately, I am starting to see many Prop 60 ads popping up on TV with no ads against Prop 60. Getting destroyed by AHF's deep pockets. [Link] |
| pringles All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 19 2016 : 12:14PM I just looked at sample ballots for San Diego and Riverside County. Both contain the following language for Prop 60: "Requires adult film performers to use condoms during filming of sexual intercourse. Requires producers to pay for performer vaccinations, testing, and medical examinations. Requires producers to post condom requirement at film sites. Fiscal Impact: Likely reduction of state and local tax revenues of several million dollars annually. Increased state spending that could exceed $1 million annually on regulation, partially offset by new fees." --- Santa Rosa Press Democrat opposes Prop 60. --- He's not running for office, but this HIV activist has set his sights on the national political stage (San Diego Union Tribune) Article about Michael Weinstein, the AHF, Prop 60 & Prop 61 --- AHF put out this press release two days ago. It notes they will not be debating the No on 60 crowd "due to lack of any semblance of a real or professional 'No on 60' ballot opposition campaign. Instead, the porn industry and 'No' side has seen fit to mount a vituperative and blatantly anti-Semitic opposition smear campaign to the ballot measure, targeting AHF President Michael Weinstein as well as former and current adult industry performers who are backing the ballot measure effort." Examples are given. The same press release gives "counterpoints to the lies, falsehoods and myths the 'No on 60' campaign promotes." The counterpoints address adult worker harassment & lawsuits, First Amendment/free speech infringement claims, industry testing, and PrEP. Edited by - pringles on 10/19/2016 12:15:10 PM [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 19 2016 : 6:45PM Prominent veterans like Nina Hartley have strongly opposed condoms for years. She's Jewish. Abella Danger is Jewish and she opposes it. I'm sure there are plenty others - far more in fact than those favoring the bill. This is why I loathe social justice warriors so much. They always ALWAYS exploit identity first and push "us vs. them" on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender etc. That's their whole modus operandi. This is so low on the part of AHF. They're demonizing opposition, as if to say "only a genocidal racist NAZI could possibly oppose this bill" - which even by the ballot's description reveals it will cost tax payers millions if it's approved. [Link] |
| AggieGuy Member 357 Posts 7/15 | Posted - Oct 19 2016 : 6:55PM Weinstein just proves he is nothing but a two bit political con man, out for his own personal agenda. Also proves he's a total asshole, but we all knew that. [Link] |
| killbillvol69 All-Star Member ^Lucy Pinder 18634 Posts 4/08 | Posted - Oct 19 2016 : 11:43PM I don't think it's appropriate to call him a Nazi. But how is it anti-Semitic? Are they claiming that it's anti-Semitic to refer to someone as a Nazi if they aren't one? I don't get the logic. Maybe they feel it trivializes the holocaust if you use the term Nazi for other things? That's about the best that I can come up with. [Link] |
| Philly30 Member 54 Posts 8/04 | Posted - Oct 20 2016 : 12:08AM https://www.freespeechcoalition.com/measure-b-settlement-neuters-weinstein-renders-measure-b-unenforceable/ [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 20 2016 : 12:26AM AHF isn't stupid, though. The issue with that endpoint is that he has written into the prop that if the state decides not to defend it, the state basically has to pay Weinstein to defend it for them, and the only way for them to remove him from that job is to have basically the entire state government vote him out of that position. Edit: And the reason Measure B was unenforceable didn't have anything to do with their right to be able or not be able to force condoms into scenes. Measure B was unenforceable because there was no way to pay for it. And there was no way to pay for it because what has deemed unconstitutional was to charge different prices for film permits based on what you were shooting, which was how they were planning on paying for enforcement (basically you had to pay more for a permit if you were filming an adult movie). Edited by - whatsatelephonebill on 10/20/2016 12:29:38 AM [Link] |
| Philly30 Member 54 Posts 8/04 | Posted - Oct 20 2016 : 1:34AM From FSC "Today's settlement will effectively prevent enforcement of Measure B. Weinstein is blocked from harassing LA County with further lawsuits related to the Measure, which still has no mechanism for enforcement." [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 20 2016 : 4:43PM [Link] |
| pringles All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 20 2016 : 7:17PM If Prop 60 passes, Cal/OSHA has until 2018 to implement the Act. But the Act becomes effective the day after voter approval. I take this to mean that a few weeks into 2018, lawsuits can fly for anything made during the previous year (statute of limitations) if Cal/OSHA doesn't take action. Meaning you probably don't want to be shooting without condoms next year unless you have spare cash for legal action. Edited by - pringles on 10/20/2016 7:19:03 PM [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 3:02AM So it still will have an impact on production as soon as this coming January. Yeesh. Sounds like a big trap, almost as if they are daring producers to keep making porn with no condoms in 2017, just to open the floodgates in 2018 and producers will be fucked. Time to move shop to Las Vegas. [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 3:20AM What do you guys think the pros and cons are for the major studios relocating and to where? Las Vegas obviously it's much nearer to LA than Miami, so a lot of performers might not even have to move their homes, especially if they don't stay booked all week. I could imagine a lot of performers just making one or two trips a month. It's only about 4 hours apart. But bleh. IDK anyone who wants to drive that much. Do people fly from LA to LV much? Almost seems not worth the cost and wait. It would really only seem to save you a couple hours to fly? On the other hand, Miami seems like the next most productive place for porn after LA. But why don't producers just move their shooting locations to just outside LA county? It would only be a half hour longer commute for performers on average. I guess it's not legal in any of the surrounding counties either? [Link] |
| Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Member Meh 4655 Posts 10/13 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 3:33AM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 3:47AM There's already a few major studios that have relocated to Vegas, especially when we start talking about internet studios. Brazzers did it a long time ago, Naughty America did it a few years ago, PornPros has done it as well. As a matter of fact, in terms of what I consider the 4 "major" internet studios (Brazzers, Naughty America, Bangbros, and Reality Kings), none of them have used California as their primary place of production for years now. Performers generally fly there for a few days, shoot a few scenes for the companies that are there, and then fly back to LA when they're done. With some of the more enterprising performers actually moving to Vegas and flying to LA to shoot there instead of the other way around. [Link] |
| kinguntermensch Senior Member 1260 Posts 7/14 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 3:57AM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 4:02AM Even if Weinstein takes Vegas, Brazzers has foreign studios that he can't reach. They'll always be able to shoot without condoms. [Link] |
| kinguntermensch Senior Member 1260 Posts 7/14 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 4:19AM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 4:33AM What made you think that? Danny D shoots primarily in Britain, and they shoot tons of European women for the site. [Link] |
| kinguntermensch Senior Member 1260 Posts 7/14 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 6:52AM [Link] |
| Goldstein All-Star Member "You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 2:21PM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 2:30PM Mindgeek owns both Brazzers and Reality Kings, but generally uses/treats them as two separate entities, with separate sets of directors and whatnot. Same goes for Twistys and Digital Playground as well. [Link] |
| shalalin Senior Member 1737 Posts 11/07 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 3:58PM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 6:49PM NA never actually shot in San Diego (or at least they haven't since at least 2008). The company headquarters is still there, but they shot their actual scenes in Los Angeles for a while, and they moved the majority of their production to Las Vegas about 3 or so years ago (what isn't shot in Vegas right now is shot in Miami, for the most part). [Link] |
 | |
| pringles All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 7:47PM New Poll Shows Support for Prop 60 Drops to Just 40% (Xbiz) A new Capitol Weekly poll shows support for Proposition 60 dropping to just 40 percent, which is down 13 points from an L.A. Times poll in early September that showed support for the measure at 53 percent. more at the link above [Link] |
| AggieGuy Member 357 Posts 7/15 | Posted - Oct 21 2016 : 7:50PM Edited by - aggieguy on 10/21/2016 7:51:22 PM [Link] |
| pringles All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 10:52AM Cal/OSHA Advisory Committee Meeting Rescheduled To Jan. 31 (AVN) --- WHY PROP. 60 IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL (Los Angeles Daily Journal) This is a must read by John S. Caragozlan and Nat Stern. Caragozian practices law in Los Angeles. Stern is the John. W. & Ashley E. Frost professor of law, Florida State University College of Law. [Link] |
| kinguntermensch Senior Member 1260 Posts 7/14 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 4:09PM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 7:37PM What it means is that the part I brought up (about Weinstein becoming a federal employee to defend the bill if it gets challenged) could be considered unconstitutional, meaning that if the prop passes and the state decides not to defend it, it's possible that there's nothing Weinstein can do to keep it on the books. [Link] |
| shalalin Senior Member 1737 Posts 11/07 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 9:00PM [Link] |
| shalalin Senior Member 1737 Posts 11/07 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 9:02PM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 9:17PM The forums still exist. They're mostly dead, but they still exist. And back about that time (2010), performers traveled to San Diego for the live solo stuff that NA was doing, but the actual scenes were being shot in the Valley then. [Link] |
| pringles All-Star Member 1351 Posts 2/08 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 10:05PM In the near term, 5193.1 is still on the table. See my last post above. The next meeting on this is in January. A reminder is probably needed that both Prop 60 and 5193.1 can fail and condoms would still be mandatory and enforced under California's existing Bloodborne Pathogens Standard (5193). --- Chanel Preston debates AHF's John Schwada on KPCC radio [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 10:08PM Yeah, unless performers can find some combination of pre-exposure drugs and immediate testing that works as well as condoms would (which I don't see being possible in the next couple years), then condoms are still the inevitable future outside of maybe fluid-bonded couples. [Link] |
| BlackSix All-Star Member pornography wasn't sex but fantasies of an impossibly hospitable world 12377 Posts 9/07 | Posted - Oct 22 2016 : 10:54PM "In addition, the 'No' campaign's expected challenge to Michael Weinstein to debate the ballot measure with an adult film performer is being declined due to lack of any semblance of a real or professional 'No on 60' ballot opposition campaign." Really, not a single performer is worthy of debating them? How could such trash pretend to be worthy of a public debate as if they are thinking adults deserving respect and the chance to speak on their own behalf. This is the exact same rhetoric the anti-porner use to refuse engaging with sex workers. It is really despicable. The anti-semitic smear is clearly desperate and to quote some random post on Mike South's site to claim that there are threats of violence coming from those in the industry...such bad faith arguments tell you where they are really coming from. The intention is clearly to run porn out of state as many in government both left and right have wanted to do since the Freeman decision. [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 23 2016 : 8:43PM I know it's possible, but that would disrupt production so much more than condoms already would, it would probably double or triple the cost to taxpayers. As it is, they estimated the cost of the bill passing would be 1 million dollars. Retarding production for post-edit digital removal of the condoms would probably double if not triple the time it takes to produce each release. So cutting the rate of production at least in half means doubling the cost to taxpayers, no? Now it's not only piling on the cost of production in terms of having to allot a certain portion of the budget toward digital editing, it slows production and would evidently be a burden on almost every facet of the industry. All for something female performers themselves oppose, something which makes them uncomfortable? As someone who has an interest in animation and digital effects, I will admit that it is an interesting prospect. I wonder how many Hollywood computer artists would pick up extra work here and there for these kinds of post-production touch ups? The thought had come across my mind. Has anyone seen proof of concept that they could effectively do this? I mean, I know it has to be possible, but I'd really like to take a close look. I wonder how they factor in the female's creaming? Would they figure a way to edit out the condom without also erasing the pussy cream? Excuse my skepticism, but this is clearly more than a simple photoshop-edit type deal. The way Schwada casually touts digital editing makes it seem like all you have to do is wave a magic wand. Edited by - Melvyn on 10/23/2016 8:44:53 PM [Link] |
| Mister Fahrenheit All-Star Member Meh 4655 Posts 10/13 | Posted - Oct 23 2016 : 9:05PM Just finished filling out my ballot tonight and voted No on 60. Sending it off tomorrow. Edited by - Mister Fahrenheit on 10/23/2016 9:06:10 PM [Link] |
| Melvyn Senior Member 2797 Posts 12/12 | Posted - Oct 23 2016 : 9:22PM But so far I'm honestly not hearing great arguments in favor of the bill. It seems like fluff. He's saying "condoms are the gold standard." Ehh.... no, not really. Edited by - Melvyn on 10/23/2016 9:26:25 PM [Link] |
| whatsatelephonebill Senior Member 2935 Posts 10/11 | Posted - Oct 23 2016 : 10:22PM Condoms are the gold standard in terms of safety, which is the real issue the adult industry has. There's no better way to prevent passing STDs to other performers right now than using condoms. If the industry at large can find another way, and can present that to Cal-OSHA, then they would/will be free to use it. [Link] |
| Goldstein All-Star Member "You have sacrificed nothing and no one." 3689 Posts 8/10 | Posted - Oct 24 2016 : 9:00AM Not condoms; Not testing. This argument will keep reasserting itself as the anti-porn forces keep coming after the porn industry. In the short run, their goal is to destroy the porn industry, by, if nothing else, making it no longer economically viable. Well, nothing in life is 100% safe. However, the porn industry has done a pretty damn good job of self-regulating. (A much better job than, say, the fossil fuels industries.) Where companies like BP can sustain fines in the millions and billions -- and still remain profitable -- fines in the tens and hundreds of thousands put adult companies out-of-business. Porn will find a way to survive (even if it means moving out of the country). I don't believe for a moment that the AHF people give a damn about any of the people and performers in the porn industry. Not their "safety," and certainly not for them as people  [Link] |
| Use the code below to link to this topic or a specific post. |
| URL of this thread |
| Link to this post with HTML |
| Link to this post with Forum Code |
