Condoms in Porn... Measure B/Bill AB 1576/Prop 60

Author	Post
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 10 2012 : 11:30AM If you are a producer, performer, support or a fan and have an opinion on LA County Ballot Measure B (Condoms in Porn) then make sure your voice is heard. I have posted on my site a list of LA newspapers, AM morning radio shows and blogs and their contact info. Almost all newspapers have sections for letters to the editor and op-ed pieces in which they will publish public opinions on political issues such as this. This is a grassroots campaign. If you are a fan and want to have a voice then write a letter. Most will even publish the letter anonymously. If you want to do an Op-Ed piece for AdultBizLaw.com I will publish it as well. And I just posted on poll on condoms in porn on ABL so at least stop by and cast your vote... AdultBizLaw.com Just Be Heard ! Michael Edited by - pornlaw on Sep 10 2012 [mod edit: making this the thread to discuss AB 1576 as well as measure B] Edited by - killbillvol69 on Jun 25 2014 [mod edit: making this the thread to discuss Prop 60 for Nov 2016 as well] Edited by - killbillvol69 on Aug 11 2016 [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 11 2012 : 12:41PM New article on the "Condoms in Porn" law... Will the Adult Industry Get Fucked in the Ass in November Without a Condom By Steven St. Croix http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1019 Michael [Link]
valo Senior Member 1854 Posts 9/07	Posted - Sep 11 2012 : 6:47PM Very good article by Steven. It should be sent to every LA County news paper and website so the public in LA can read it and know the facts. I hope it gets out to as people as possible. [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 12:13PM New Op-Ed from a performer... Why I Think We Have The Right To Choose by Alia Janine... She says mandatory condoms violate her free speech rights! http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1123 Michael [Link]
Kimi Lixx Senior Member 2012 Posts 6/01	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 1:44PM It is interesting to note that it is not understood that pornography, as an objective thing, is covered by the 1st Amendment, but that Pornography, as a business, has nothing to do with free speech. You can make nudie sex pictures and movies at home or with professionals for no money and use no condoms or testing and hang from a trapeze without a net. Go ahead, have a ball. It's your right to express yourself. Workplaces, no matter what they produce, are subject to laws regarding employee safety. Doesn't matter if it's a book bindery, newspaper printer, radio studio or porn set. It is not your right to endanger yourself and others. [Link]

twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 2:27PM Michael, I just read the article you linked above. Help me out here is you can. The author speaks about her first ammendment right and freedom of expression being violated by the mandated use of condoms. But doesn't the first ammendment right here belong to the producer. The performers are just employees, who are paid to create the producers "speech." Performers don't get charged with obscenity, producers do. Janet Jackson did't get fined for showing her boob, the tv station did. Doesn't the speech here belong to the producer, not the performer? I would be very interested in your opinion on this. And Kimi hit the nail right on the head. You can do whatever you like on your own time, but when you are in the workplace it isi different. You can do construction on your own house and not wear a hard hat, but if youare on the job building a house the hardhat is required. The condom mandate has nothing to do with consenting adults engaging in sex, it is co-workers engaged in commercial activity. [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 3:53PM My position is that the US Constitution trumps workplace safety laws. It is the supreme law of the land. Whether a court will find that to hold true is unknown. The only possible comparison you can make in this instance would be decisions involving strippers/gentlemen's clubs. In the gentlemen's club world you cannot serve alcohol and have full nude in most places. There are exceptions to this rule so that comparison isnt directly on point but its close. However there are establishments that do choose not to serve alcohol and are full nude. So a dancer that wants to dance completely naked does have a choice to speak as she wants to. If she only wants to be topless she has that choice as well. As for Kimi's comparison you cannot compare a guy that runs the newspaper printing press with the person that writes the story in the newspaper. One is doing manual labor the other is putting forth speech. As for performers holding First Amendment rights. They certainly do. The producer's rights flow from them. No performer - no free speech. Also, the hardhat comparisons have to stop. Construction workers do not have free speech rights. The adult industry is a workplace that has NO corresponding example in the non-porn world. Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 6:24PM Michael, Over the past several years OSHA has cited several porn companies. Do you know if any companies have ever fought these citations past the internal OSHA review level. Has any porn company ever actually gone to court to fight the citations? [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 9:56PM I do not believe they have. From a cost stand point the challenge would have greatly outweighed the fine. I think this measure if it passes and the LA City ordinance will be challenged though. Especially the LA city one. That one is Constitutionally weak. Even the LA City Counsel's Office tried to stop it. That one is going to cost the City some money down the line in attorneys fees for whoever files the lawsuit against it. Michael AdultBizLaw.com Edited by - pornlaw on 9/13/2012 9:58:16 PM [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 9:57PM New article by Sabrina Deep Imposing Condoms Is Not The Solution Sabrina asks is AHF really trying to shut down the industry ? http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1138 Michael Edited by - pornlaw on 9/14/2012 10:56:05 AM [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 4:33PM Regarding if AHF is trying to shut down the porn industry. IF the AHF was trying to really do this then they would go after the gay porn industry, which is just chuck full of HIV. I've always found it quite interesting that AHF puts their focus on straight porn when it is gay porn that has all the HIV. But can you really expect AHF to go after a "gay industry.?" And all of this talk about the city of LA trying to get rid of the industry and such. The industry has been here for decades. OSHA and County Health have literally ignored the industry up until AHF began filing legal petitions that these entities were legally obligated to respond to. Without the intervention of AHF, the county and OSHA would continue to ignore the industry as they have for decades. The County Health Department used to do the syphilis testing for free for AIM. For years AHF has tried to get anyone in the state legislature to craft laws for the industry, but they have never been able to get a single lesilator to craft a bill. So now they are trying to use the regulatory approach through OSHA and County, and they got their own petition on tha ballot because no legislator would do it. They are now trying to achieve their goals through regulation, which should be done through legislation. @Michael, thank you for your posts. They often clear up alot of misconceptions. Might you adress this issue. Do you think anything Marcus did was criminal, and does anyone he exposed have the right to sue him in civil court? Seeing how the photographic evidence shows that Marcus was probably innfected for month before testing postive, and he never notified any of his past partners when he finally did test postive, does that open any door for civil litigation? [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 5:55PM You should really spend some time reading my blog... I did an article on your question weeks ago... http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=587 Michael [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 6:39PM Kimi Lixx wrote: It is interesting to note that it is not understood that pornography, as an objective thing, is covered by the 1st Amendment, but that Pornography, as a business, has nothing to do with free speech. You can make nudie sex pictures and movies at home or with professionals for no money and use no condoms or testing and hang from a trapeze without a net. Go ahead, have a ball. It's your right to express yourself. Workplaces, no matter what they produce, are subject to laws regarding employee safety. Doesn't matter if it's a book bindery, newspaper printer, radio studio or porn set. It is not your right to endanger yourself and others. Click to expand So I guess you think newspapers, authors of books and journalists who all work for money are not covered by the first amendment because these are all business ventures. It would be pretty easy to argue that publishing the truth endangers people. Publishing violent fiction can obviously influence people. I'd be almost willing to bet every one of these mass killers shooting people have seen a lot of violent movies. Of course there's no way to really prove anything but it's common sense. People have watched movies or read things and gone straight out and done things they saw or read about. Edited by - randomprecision on 9/14/2012 6:47:32 PM [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 7:16PM pornlaw wrote: You should really spend some time reading my blog... I did an article on your question weeks ago... http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=587 Michael Click to expand Thanks, great article. You mention workers comp as a rememdy for exposed performers. What about the section of OSHA regulation 5193 that states that after someone is exposied to OPIM(which happens on virtually every single porn shoot) the employer is obligated to provied testing and treatment if necessary for any exposed employee. Do you see any liablity here for producers who now know that an infected performer was on their set, but did nothing for the other employees who were exposed, as they are legally obligated to do regardless if the know of an infection or not? Seems like the porn industry just gets away with ignoring the laws that any other employer is required to follow. Do you know of any reason why OSHA has never enforced this part of the 5193 regulation? Again, I, and alot of others value your opinion on these matters. [Link]
morbidthoughts All-Star Member Big cats scare me but... 3627 Posts 1/03	Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 7:33PM pornlaw wrote: My position is that the US Constitution trumps workplace safety laws. It is the supreme law of the land. Click to expand Well of course it does but the First Amendment is not unlimited. Commercial speech is regulated all of the time and is not afforded the same level of protection as non-commercial speech. The debate is whether these workplace laws survive the level of scrutiny demanded by the Constitution. [Link]

LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 7:45PM I want just to point out that porn workers although according to Kimi should be treated as workers with all the safety they need , this doesn't apply to STDs no facility can inform of their results anyone but the worker infected thus putting all the others in danger if the worker doesn't inform anybody he may have infected himself. I find strange to say the least that a potential way of infection such as unprotected sex provoke more concerns than a most certain way of infection a sick performer who continues to perform without informing any other he was/is in contact with. so in matter of condoms they are workers in matters of diseases they are regular citizens [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 2:24AM twocentsworth wrote: What about the section of OSHA regulation 5193 that states that after someone is exposied to OPIM(which happens on virtually every single porn shoot) the employer is obligated to provied testing and treatment if necessary for any exposed employee. Do you see any liablity here for producers who now know that an infected performer was on their set, but did nothing for the other employees who were exposed, as they are legally obligated to do regardless if the know of an infection or not? Seems like the porn industry just gets away with ignoring the laws that any other employer is required to follow. Do you know of any reason why OSHA has never enforced this part of the 5193 regulation? Again, I, and alot of others value your opinion on these matters. Click to expand I dont know that Cal-OSHA hasnt. Several producers have been fined by Cal-OSHA in the past. I am not familiar with those particular cases so I cannot say what exactly those fines were for but it may have in fact been for an exposure on set. Michael [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 2:26AM morbidthoughts wrote: pornlaw wrote: My position is that the US Constitution trumps workplace safety laws. It is the supreme law of the land. Click to expand Well of course it does but the First Amendment is not unlimited. Commercial speech is regulated all of the time and is not afforded the same level of protection as non-commercial speech. The debate is whether these workplace laws survive the level of scrutiny demanded by the Constitution. Click to expand Thats why I said "my position." And I am sticking to it ! LOL But you are correct commercial speech can be regulated. But a performer my not be regarded the same as a producer in this matter. I am not sure how a court would compare and contrast the speech of a producer vs. the speech of an actor. Michael Edited by - pornlaw on 9/15/2012 2:28:20 AM [Link]
morbidthoughts All-Star Member Big cats scare me but... 3627 Posts 1/03	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 4:07AM pornlaw wrote: But you are correct commercial speech can be regulated. But a performer my not be regarded the same as a producer in this matter. I am not sure how a court would compare and contrast the speech of a producer vs. the speech of an actor. Click to expand In enforcing workplace safety laws the scrutiny is on the employer not the worker. [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 11:05AM morbidthoughts wrote: In enforcing workplace safety laws the scrutiny is on the employer not the worker. Click to expand True. But I am not sure what that has to do with the commercial speech of a producer vs. a performer. Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
mharris127 Senior Member 1844 Posts 8/09	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 1:57PM pornlaw wrote: New article by Sabrina Deep Imposing Condoms Is Not The Solution Sabrina asks is AHF really trying to shut down the industry ? http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1138 Michael Click to expand I think AHF and the City of Los Angeles is certainly trying to run porn out of town like the city did in the 70's and early 80's with their police raids and prosecution of anyone even uttering the word porn in their jurisdiction. I suspect they will succeed this time. By March 2013 most if not all of porn will relocate to San Francisco (just like last time) and porn will continue as-is from its new location. This law is just too expensive for the industry to fight. I do believe that SF and Marin County are too liberal to support a condom mandate there but San Mateo, Alameda and Santa Clara counties might support one, pigeon-holing the industry in a 60 mile by about 35 mile (at its widest point in Marin) landmass. Any state-wide initiative would have to go through the State Assembly where it would likely be DOA (it would be too arduous a task for AHF and Shelley Lubben's flunkies to get the necessary number of signatures to get a state-wide ballot initiative). Michael (pornlaw), I would start looking for a house in Tiburon or Belevedere if I were you. It looks like you will be moving along with the rest of porn. Once John Stagliano, Christian Mann, Larry Flynt, Fabian the Felon et. al. start buying prices will skyrocket! [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 6:04PM Here are two articles that you might find interesting... Can the HIV Virus Pass Right Through Latex Condoms --> http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1176 Performers: Can Condoms Cause Cancer ? --> http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1156 Some little known facts about condoms... Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
morbidthoughts All-Star Member Big cats scare me but... 3627 Posts 1/03	Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 6:33PM pornlaw wrote: True. But I am not sure what that has to do with the commercial speech of a producer vs. a performer. Click to expand Why would a court compare the two when it's the producer that would be penalized by the government? Does CAL OSHA also fine the employees? [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 16 2012 : 3:13PM Condoms & The First Amendment... Can the government force the porn industry to use condoms ? http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1198 Michael [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 10:01AM Here is the video of AHF's press conference on their "Yes on Condoms" campaign... Including speeches by HIV+ Darren James and Derrick Burts. Along with a question I posed to Michael Weinstein at the end that he really doesnt have an answer for... http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1231 Michael [Link]

twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:02PM In a recent article on AVN the No on B committee repeats the often used industry line, "We are the most tested workforce in the nation." This is probably true, but there is a big part left out. How often do those tests show someone has an std? Its fine to say that everyone gets tested every month, but without any stats to show how often someone tests positive the statement is pretty worthless. If there were stats to show a low rate of std's you would think the porn industry would show those figures, especially in light of this campaign against condoms. If the industry could prove a low rate of std's you would think they would be all over it and show their statistics, but they don't, and that leaves the question, why hasn't the porn industry ever shown the rates of std's based on their monthly testing? If these stats made th industry look good they would be publishing them all over the place, or is it that these stats arent good for the industry, because after all, the truth hurts. And pulishing statistics is not a HIPPA violation. Edited by - twocentsworth on 9/18/2012 4:03:15 PM [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:06PM ^ I don't know how reliable would be such statistics , maybe they would if the industry was a close circle , but it isn't so cannot actually been demonstrated how much of the STDs found come from porn sexual activities or escorting or just from random sex out of set [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:32PM LCF, What does a porn performer do after catching an std off set? He,or she goes to work the next day and exposes everyone on set. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:51PM ^ Yes , of course, but the statistics would be flawed because it can't say how secure is the system , even in hospitals some disease arrive from outside but nobody would say it is the general hospital system to be unhealthy , yet their system are considered as safe as possible , same for porn. What I meant is that even if you find for example 10 performers with Chlamydia you can't say whether they got it performing or escorting or at a swinging party , the statistic is flawed. Another example if those performers got it from performing then you can say the system is unhealthy, but if they took it from outside but being tested for porn they are discovered and stopped then the system is safe.Yet you will find ten positive for Chlamydia in porn testing a rogue statistic is of no use if it doesn't allow to know how the positive performer got an STD , unfortunately this is the most important information to determine how safe porn is Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 9/18/2012 4:59:09 PM [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:08PM LCF, the real quetion is "How many porn perfomrers a working while thet have stds?" It doesnt matter where they got it, what matters is they are working while infected. And the ininuation that stds arent transmitted os set is pretty funny. Unprotected prolonged sex with multiple partners, who are also having sex outside the industry, yet the industry wants you to believe that soemwho there are no std transmissions of the magic porn set. The disease doesnt know if youre on a set or in a hotel room. And there could be a very simple way to determine if someone was actively infected on a set. As OSHA regulation 5193 states, any time someone is exposed to potentiall infectious bodily fluids it is the legal duty of the employer to offer testing and treatment to exposed workers. If they just took a urine sample right there on set and had it sent for testing that day, then they would know if someone had an std while working that day. But of course the industry will never do this, after all, why would they follow the law when it would prove someone had an std on their set. AIM used to charge 25 dollars for the gonnoreah and chlamydia tests combo, so the financial burder excuse is bullshit. Even ten people on a set would only cost 250. [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:12PM Two performers are on a set getting ready to work. One of them has an std. Why does it matter if that person got that std on a set or in a private setting? [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:21PM ^^ I see your point , but there's another question how long they stay undetected? It is the same question as how many drivers are intoxicated on the roads ,the real question is how long they can drive without being stopped? the safety of a system is not how many have or do something the safety of a system is how fast the system react and discover them If the system allows too many to do go undetected then you need to enhance your system but if you stop reasonably fast any infective performer then you have a good system , besides some SDTs are transmitted by oral sex (Herpes, Syphilis) condoms are used for actual intercourse not for oral sex so their use isn't as effective as it seem at first especially in lesbo movies or when a male performs orals to a woman BTW I haven't a position on condoms on set , I'm just discussing for the love of it for the two performers on set, it doesn't matter as it doesn't matter for someone getting an HIV through a transfusion or through sex , yet it does matter to put safety protocols or to enhance them Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 9/18/2012 5:28:25 PM [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:28PM Exactlyt right LCF. How long does the system let someone go undetected. If they just pissed in a cup right there on set everyday, and the producers followed the law, they would be detected the verry first time they walked on to a set with an infection. But producers are not willing to spend 25 per performer to do this, so you have a system that lets this go undetected for weeks. And if a performer gets infected one week after their test it is truely unbelieveable that he wont, at some point, infect one of the many porn partners with whom he has prolonged unprotected sex. LCF, we have this discussion going in two threads now, what do you say we restrict this conversation to this thread. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:30PM Fine to me , but I live in Europe and it is time to bed now [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 6:10PM Are you allergic to latex ? Do you even know ? You need to know especially if condoms become mandatory ! Latex can kill ! http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1258 Michael [Link]

twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 6:36PM Pornlaw, I think it might be safe to assume that anyone in the porn industry has probably at one time in their life used a condom, and should know the answer to your question, but then again, and 8 year veteran, and many other performers overlooked a groin area filled with syhpilis sores and gleefully put it in their mouths, vaginas and ases. A small percentage of people are allergic to latex, and it can cause serious medical problems. But one thing is absolutely 100% true, EVERYONE is allergic to gonnoreah, chlamydia, syphilis, herpes, HIV, and scores, if not hundreds of other diseases. And there are simple tests that can determine if you are allergic to latex. [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 6:53PM It seems like the industry is all to willing to accept the risk of unprotected sex wit multiple partners, but the risk of a latex allergy is too mcuh to be acceptable. Simple question, if you are having sex with a sex worker(porn performer) who has had five partners in the last ten days, and each of those five had five partners, and all of them had a total of ten civilian untested partners, and noneof them used condoms, is it safer to use a condom, or not use a condom? Or is the possibility of a latex allergy big enough to forgo the condom? Seat belts don't always work, and sometimes they actually cause injuries, so accoridng to porn industry logic you shouldnt wear a seatbelt. Another funny side note, The symptoms of a latex allergy are very similar to the symptoms of syphilis, usually a rash develops in the area that was exposed. And since it is known that there were several people over the course of a few months who couldnt recognize a syphilis infection, including the infected person, then what makes anybody think they will see the initial signs of a latex allergy? Dont you just love it, seeing the symptoms of allergies and infections are left to porn performers and porn producers, and we all know how well that works. Edited by - twocentsworth on 9/18/2012 7:13:46 PM [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 9:28PM Actually, if you read my article as opposed to just posting you might actually learn something. Anyone can develop a latex allergy and there is no known test to determine if you will or will not. So someone negative today could develop the allergy over time and end up with a severe reaction later. A stage one is more like poison ivy then syphilis. A stage 3 allergic reaction can result in shock and possibly death. Please dont bastardize my articles for you purposes. I post facts not opinions. Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
mharris127 Senior Member 1844 Posts 8/09	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 9:04AM pornlaw wrote: Are you allergic to latex ? Do you even know ? You need to know especially if condoms become mandatory ! Latex can kill ! http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1258 Michael Click to expand This is also an issue in doctor's offices. I have been to offices that are actually latex-free due to this issue. Fortunately I am not allergic to latex. FYI people can special-order polyurethane condoms but the ballot measure is still dumb and assinine and should be shoved up Shelley Lubben's and Michael Weinstein's asses with HIV tainted Marc Wallice cum! [Link]
Kimi Lixx Senior Member 2012 Posts 6/01	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 1:39PM ^You don't have to special order latex free condoms. They're for sale at the Walmart, the Rite-Aid and I'm sure many, many other convenient shopping places. [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 4:30PM twocentsworth wrote: It seems like the industry is all to willing to accept the risk of unprotected sex wit multiple partners, but the risk of a latex allergy is too mcuh to be acceptable. Click to expand Maybe because most STDs are curable but if you are allergic you must change job , so in order to work you just don't want sensible materials [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 5:26PM Pornlaws article, "Assuming there are 1500 performers currently working in Los Angeles" On what do you base this silly assumption. I thought you were all about 'facts' not opinions(or assumptions) Where do you get this 1500 number from? [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 6:55PM twocentsworth wrote: Pornlaws article, "Assuming there are 1500 performers currently working in Los Angeles" On what do you base this silly assumption. I thought you were all about 'facts' not opinions(or assumptions) Where do you get this 1500 number from? Click to expand Nice to see you read the article. BTW - Did you read the comments from performers that developed latex allergies over time ? As for your question - you have to count all the girls on all of the agency sites and then add in all of the girls that come to Los Angeles to work on occasion that are not on an agency site. You will also want to add in the occasional amateur performer that gets book a scene every once in a while. And then add in the guys, the transsexual performers and then add in the gay performers that shoot in Los Angeles as well. Oh yeah lets not forget to add in the director/photographer/videographer/talent combos that dont appear on agency websites either that do POV shoots. If you think my math is that far off I welcome you to give me a more definitive answer. I have been here for 8 yrs and work with all sides of the business. If you, as a supposed outsider, can do better math - have at it. Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
twocentsworth Member 13 Posts 9/12	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 7:21PM If you want to count the gay performers, shouldnt you also coount the nuber of HIV postitve gay performers when talking about the HIV rate in the porn industry, not to mention syphilis. And where do you get those numbers about the amatuer and non agency performers. Just wondering where your assumptions come from? How do you track the number of these other performers? And the gay industry has, for the most part, used conndoms for a long time. Has there ever been any latex allergy problems in the gay industry?, or cancer clusters in the gay industry related to condoms? [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 9:13PM twocentsworth wrote: If you want to count the gay performers, shouldnt you also coount the nuber of HIV postitve gay performers when talking about the HIV rate in the porn industry, not to mention syphilis. And where do you get those numbers about the amatuer and non agency performers. Just wondering where your assumptions come from? How do you track the number of these other performers? And the gay industry has, for the most part, used conndoms for a long time. Has there ever been any latex allergy problems in the gay industry?, or cancer clusters in the gay industry related to condoms? Click to expand What does any of that have to do with your criticism of my 1500 estimate ? Im just talking about performers that work in LA. As for my estimate I know/rep a lot of people that come into LA to work as well as directors that book them. And I also know/rep amateur companies and talent. A discussion about the gay industry is a completely different animal. And no not all gay companies use condoms. Some even shoot HIV+ with HIV+ performers together. Many gay companies assume that many of their performers are HIV+ ... It would be comparing apples to Cadillacs. Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
LCF All-Star Member Non Prevalebunt! 10364 Posts 1/05	Posted - Sep 20 2012 : 1:58AM Do the law on the ballot distinguish porn from porn? I mean gay porn is included , isn't it? So why it hasn't to be taken into consideration? [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 20 2012 : 11:17AM Laurie Cameron Fan wrote: Do the law on the ballot distinguish porn from porn? I mean gay porn is included , isn't it? So why it hasn't to be taken into consideration? Click to expand No it doesnt. Thats why I am not really sure why 2cents is talking about it. Michael AdultBizLaw.com [Link]
mharris127 Senior Member 1844 Posts 8/09	Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 11:01AM pornlaw wrote: A discussion about the gay industry is a completely different animal. And no not all gay companies use condoms. Some even shoot HIV+ with HIV+ performers together. Many gay companies assume that many of their performers are HIV+ ... It would be comparing apples to Cadillacs. Michael Click to expand I actually recently responded to an article on another site about a newly HIV positive (HIV+) performer performing with two other people (with their- permission and cooperation of course) and my comment bears repeating here. I don't have a problem with HIV+ people performing with another HIV+ person. However, I would personally require proof that all performers involved are truly HIV+ and that one person isn't just dumb as a case of hammers. The Real Wiki Leaks article I originally commented on was unclear on this aspect (IIRC it was a three-person scene and the HIV status was only mentioned for two of the performers). As for HIV+ performers performing with HIV negative (HIV-) performers on screen, it should never happen. I understand personal freedom of choice but medical and social (most HIV drugs are very expensive and paid for by Medicaid in the USA) issues trump freedom of choice in this instance IMO. Any HIV- person having sex of any kind with a known HIV+ person knowingly is truly dumber than a warehouse full of hammers! [Link]
RandomPrecision Senior Member Enjoy! 8175 Posts 3/06	Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 4:25PM morbidthoughts wrote: Well of course it does but the First Amendment is not unlimited. Click to expand That's not what the First Amendment says. Commercial speech is regulated all of the time and is not afforded the same level of protection as non-commercial speech. Click to expand Just because the government says it's OK for them to violate the First Amendment doesn't mean they aren't doing it. It just means the famous "checks and balances" aren't working worth a damn. The courts are supposed to stop them but the courts are all as corrupt as everything else in this country that has anything to do with government. The Commerce Clause has obviously been taken so far beyond anything it was ever intended to be it's practically a nullification of the original US Constitution all by itself. The debate is whether these workplace laws survive the level of scrutiny demanded by the Constitution. Click to expand No it isn't. There is no debate. A real debate is one you can win. The government has clearly chosen to do this and nothing is going to stop them. Just like Obamacare. That little court "challenge" was a charade from the word go. Edited by - randomprecision on 9/21/2012 4:33:55 PM [Link]
morbidthoughts All-Star Member Big cats scare me but... 3627 Posts 1/03	Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 7:20PM RandomPrecision wrote: That's not what the First Amendment says. Click to expand The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what the Constitution says. Not you or me and they have allowed the regulation of commercial speech since the late 70s. You can bitch about their corruption and how they overextend the Commerce Clause but commercial porn easily qualifies as interstate commerce. As for your rant about the government being one entity despite our system of federalism, yawn. [Link]
pornlaw Member 578 Posts 10/05	Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 8:40PM New articles... Weinstein says Focus Shouldnt be on HIV in Porn ! http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1284 The Problem with Producing Porn Outside of California... http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1303 James Deen Speaks Out on Adult Performer Right to Make Choices ! http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1324 Michael [Link]

Author

Post

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 10 2012 : 11:30AM

If you are a producer, performer, support or a fan and have an opinion on LA County Ballot Measure B (Condoms in Porn) then make sure your voice is heard.
I have posted on my site a list of LA newspapers, AM morning radio shows and blogs and their contact info.
Almost all newspapers have sections for letters to the editor and op-ed pieces in which they will publish public opinions on political issues such as this.
This is a grassroots campaign. If you are a fan and want to have a voice then write a letter. Most will even publish the letter anonymously.
If you want to do an Op-Ed piece for AdultBizLaw.com I will publish it as well.
And I just posted on poll on condoms in porn on ABL so at least stop by and cast your vote...
AdultBizLaw.com
Just Be Heard !
Michael
Edited by - pornlaw on Sep 10 2012
[mod edit: making this the thread to discuss AB 1576 as well as measure B]
Edited by - killbillvol69 on Jun 25 2014
[mod edit: making this the thread to discuss Prop 60 for Nov 2016 as well]
Edited by - killbillvol69 on Aug 11 2016

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 11 2012 : 12:41PM

New article on the "Condoms in Porn" law...
Will the Adult Industry Get Fucked in the Ass in November Without a Condom By Steven St. Croix
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1019
Michael

[Link]

valo
Senior Member

1854 Posts
9/07

Posted - Sep 11 2012 : 6:47PM

Very good article by Steven. It should be sent to every LA County news paper and website so the public in LA can read it and know the facts. I hope it gets out to as people as possible.

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 12:13PM

New Op-Ed from a performer...
Why I Think We Have The Right To Choose by Alia Janine...
She says mandatory condoms violate her free speech rights!
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1123
Michael

[Link]

Kimi Lixx
Senior Member

2012 Posts
6/01

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 1:44PM

It is interesting to note that it is not understood that pornography, as an objective thing, is covered by the 1st Amendment, but that Pornography, as a business, has nothing to do with free speech.
You can make nudie sex pictures and movies at home or with professionals for no money and use no condoms or testing and hang from a trapeze without a net. Go ahead, have a ball. It's your right to express yourself.
Workplaces, no matter what they produce, are subject to laws regarding employee safety. Doesn't matter if it's a book bindery, newspaper printer, radio studio or porn set. It is not your right to endanger yourself and others.

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 2:27PM

Michael,
I just read the article you linked above. Help me out here is you can. The author speaks about her first ammendment right and freedom of expression being violated by the mandated use of condoms. But doesn't the first ammendment right here belong to the producer. The performers are just employees, who are paid to create the producers "speech." Performers don't get charged with obscenity, producers do. Janet Jackson did't get fined for showing her boob, the tv station did.
Doesn't the speech here belong to the producer, not the performer? I would be very interested in your opinion on this.
And Kimi hit the nail right on the head. You can do whatever you like on your own time, but when you are in the workplace it isi different. You can do construction on your own house and not wear a hard hat, but if youare on the job building a house the hardhat is required. The condom mandate has nothing to do with consenting adults engaging in sex, it is co-workers engaged in commercial activity.

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 3:53PM

My position is that the US Constitution trumps workplace safety laws. It is the supreme law of the land.
Whether a court will find that to hold true is unknown. The only possible comparison you can make in this instance would be decisions involving strippers/gentlemen's clubs.
In the gentlemen's club world you cannot serve alcohol and have full nude in most places. There are exceptions to this rule so that comparison isnt directly on point but its close. However there are establishments that do choose not to serve alcohol and are full nude. So a dancer that wants to dance completely naked does have a choice to speak as she wants to. If she only wants to be topless she has that choice as well.
As for Kimi's comparison you cannot compare a guy that runs the newspaper printing press with the person that writes the story in the newspaper. One is doing manual labor the other is putting forth speech.
As for performers holding First Amendment rights. They certainly do. The producer's rights flow from them. No performer - no free speech.
Also, the hardhat comparisons have to stop. Construction workers do not have free speech rights.
The adult industry is a workplace that has NO corresponding example in the non-porn world.
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 6:24PM

Michael,
Over the past several years OSHA has cited several porn companies. Do you know if any companies have ever fought these citations past the internal OSHA review level. Has any porn company ever actually gone to court to fight the citations?

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 9:56PM

I do not believe they have.
From a cost stand point the challenge would have greatly outweighed the fine.
I think this measure if it passes and the LA City ordinance will be challenged though.
Especially the LA city one. That one is Constitutionally weak. Even the LA City Counsel's Office tried to stop it.
That one is going to cost the City some money down the line in attorneys fees for whoever files the lawsuit against it.
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com
Edited by - pornlaw on 9/13/2012 9:58:16 PM

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 13 2012 : 9:57PM

New article by Sabrina Deep
Imposing Condoms Is Not The Solution
Sabrina asks is AHF really trying to shut down the industry ?
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1138
Michael
Edited by - pornlaw on 9/14/2012 10:56:05 AM

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 4:33PM

Regarding if AHF is trying to shut down the porn industry. IF the AHF was trying to really do this then they would go after the gay porn industry, which is just chuck full of HIV. I've always found it quite interesting that AHF puts their focus on straight porn when it is gay porn that has all the HIV. But can you really expect AHF to go after a "gay industry.?"
And all of this talk about the city of LA trying to get rid of the industry and such. The industry has been here for decades. OSHA and County Health have literally ignored the industry up until AHF began filing legal petitions that these entities were legally obligated to respond to. Without the intervention of AHF, the county and OSHA would continue to ignore the industry as they have for decades. The County Health Department used to do the syphilis testing for free for AIM.
For years AHF has tried to get anyone in the state legislature to craft laws for the industry, but they have never been able to get a single lesilator to craft a bill. So now they are trying to use the regulatory approach through OSHA and County, and they got their own petition on tha ballot because no legislator would do it. They are now trying to achieve their goals through regulation, which should be done through legislation.
@Michael, thank you for your posts. They often clear up alot of misconceptions. Might you adress this issue. Do you think anything Marcus did was criminal, and does anyone he exposed have the right to sue him in civil court? Seeing how the photographic evidence shows that Marcus was probably innfected for month before testing postive, and he never notified any of his past partners when he finally did test postive, does that open any door for civil litigation?

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 5:55PM

You should really spend some time reading my blog...
I did an article on your question weeks ago...
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=587
Michael

[Link]

RandomPrecision
Senior Member

Enjoy!
8175 Posts
3/06

Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 6:39PM

So I guess you think newspapers, authors of books and journalists who all work for money are not covered by the first amendment because these are all business ventures. It would be pretty easy to argue that publishing the truth endangers people. Publishing violent fiction can obviously influence people. I'd be almost willing to bet every one of these mass killers shooting people have seen a lot of violent movies. Of course there's no way to really prove anything but it's common sense. People have watched movies or read things and gone straight out and done things they saw or read about.
Edited by - randomprecision on 9/14/2012 6:47:32 PM

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 7:16PM

Thanks, great article. You mention workers comp as a rememdy for exposed performers. What about the section of OSHA regulation 5193 that states that after someone is exposied to OPIM(which happens on virtually every single porn shoot) the employer is obligated to provied testing and treatment if necessary for any exposed employee. Do you see any liablity here for producers who now know that an infected performer was on their set, but did nothing for the other employees who were exposed, as they are legally obligated to do regardless if the know of an infection or not? Seems like the porn industry just gets away with ignoring the laws that any other employer is required to follow. Do you know of any reason why OSHA has never enforced this part of the 5193 regulation?
Again, I, and alot of others value your opinion on these matters.

[Link]

morbidthoughts

All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
3627 Posts
1/03

Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 7:33PM

Well of course it does but the First Amendment is not unlimited. Commercial speech is regulated all of the time and is not afforded the same level of protection as non-commercial speech. The debate is whether these workplace laws survive the level of scrutiny demanded by the Constitution.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 14 2012 : 7:45PM

I want just to point out that porn workers although according to Kimi should be treated as workers with all the safety they need , this doesn't apply to STDs no facility can inform of their results anyone but the worker infected thus putting all the others in danger if the worker doesn't inform anybody he may have infected himself.
I find strange to say the least that a potential way of infection such as unprotected sex provoke more concerns than a most certain way of infection a sick performer who continues to perform without informing any other he was/is in contact with.
so in matter of condoms they are workers in matters of diseases they are regular citizens

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 2:24AM

I dont know that Cal-OSHA hasnt. Several producers have been fined by Cal-OSHA in the past. I am not familiar with those particular cases so I cannot say what exactly those fines were for but it may have in fact been for an exposure on set.
Michael

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 2:26AM

Thats why I said "my position." And I am sticking to it ! LOL
But you are correct commercial speech can be regulated. But a performer my not be regarded the same as a producer in this matter. I am not sure how a court would compare and contrast the speech of a producer vs. the speech of an actor.
Michael
Edited by - pornlaw on 9/15/2012 2:28:20 AM

[Link]

morbidthoughts

All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
3627 Posts
1/03

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 4:07AM

In enforcing workplace safety laws the scrutiny is on the employer not the worker.

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 11:05AM

True. But I am not sure what that has to do with the commercial speech of a producer vs. a performer.
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

mharris127
Senior Member

1844 Posts
8/09

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 1:57PM

I think AHF and the City of Los Angeles is certainly trying to run porn out of town like the city did in the 70's and early 80's with their police raids and prosecution of anyone even uttering the word porn in their jurisdiction. I suspect they will succeed this time. By March 2013 most if not all of porn will relocate to San Francisco (just like last time) and porn will continue as-is from its new location. This law is just too expensive for the industry to fight. I do believe that SF and Marin County are too liberal to support a condom mandate there but San Mateo, Alameda and Santa Clara counties might support one, pigeon-holing the industry in a 60 mile by about 35 mile (at its widest point in Marin) landmass. Any state-wide initiative would have to go through the State Assembly where it would likely be DOA (it would be too arduous a task for AHF and Shelley Lubben's flunkies to get the necessary number of signatures to get a state-wide ballot initiative).
Michael (pornlaw), I would start looking for a house in Tiburon or Belevedere if I were you. It looks like you will be moving along with the rest of porn. Once John Stagliano, Christian Mann, Larry Flynt, Fabian the Felon et. al. start buying prices will skyrocket!

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 6:04PM

Here are two articles that you might find interesting...
Can the HIV Virus Pass Right Through Latex Condoms --> http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1176
Performers: Can Condoms Cause Cancer ? --> http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1156
Some little known facts about condoms...
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

morbidthoughts

All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
3627 Posts
1/03

Posted - Sep 15 2012 : 6:33PM

Why would a court compare the two when it's the producer that would be penalized by the government? Does CAL OSHA also fine the employees?

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 16 2012 : 3:13PM

Condoms & The First Amendment...
Can the government force the porn industry to use condoms ?
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1198
Michael

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 10:01AM

Here is the video of AHF's press conference on their "Yes on Condoms" campaign...
Including speeches by HIV+ Darren James and Derrick Burts. Along with a question I posed to Michael Weinstein at the end that he really doesnt have an answer for...
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1231
Michael

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:02PM

In a recent article on AVN the No on B committee repeats the often used industry line, "We are the most tested workforce in the nation." This is probably true, but there is a big part left out. How often do those tests show someone has an std? Its fine to say that everyone gets tested every month, but without any stats to show how often someone tests positive the statement is pretty worthless. If there were stats to show a low rate of std's you would think the porn industry would show those figures, especially in light of this campaign against condoms. If the industry could prove a low rate of std's you would think they would be all over it and show their statistics, but they don't, and that leaves the question, why hasn't the porn industry ever shown the rates of std's based on their monthly testing? If these stats made th industry look good they would be publishing them all over the place, or is it that these stats arent good for the industry, because after all, the truth hurts.
And pulishing statistics is not a HIPPA violation.
Edited by - twocentsworth on 9/18/2012 4:03:15 PM

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:06PM

^
I don't know how reliable would be such statistics , maybe they would if the industry was a close circle , but it isn't so cannot actually been demonstrated how much of the STDs found come from porn sexual activities or escorting or just from random sex out of set

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:32PM

LCF,
What does a porn performer do after catching an std off set? He,or she goes to work the next day and exposes everyone on set.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 4:51PM

^
Yes , of course, but the statistics would be flawed because it can't say how secure is the system , even in hospitals some disease arrive from outside but nobody would say it is the general hospital system to be unhealthy , yet their system are considered as safe as possible , same for porn.
What I meant is that even if you find for example 10 performers with Chlamydia you can't say whether they got it performing or escorting or at a swinging party , the statistic is flawed.
Another example if those performers got it from performing then you can say the system is unhealthy, but if they took it from outside but being tested for porn they are discovered and stopped then the system is safe.Yet you will find ten positive for Chlamydia in porn testing
a rogue statistic is of no use if it doesn't allow to know how the positive performer got an STD , unfortunately this is the most important information to determine how safe porn is
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 9/18/2012 4:59:09 PM

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:08PM

LCF,
the real quetion is "How many porn perfomrers a working while thet have stds?" It doesnt matter where they got it, what matters is they are working while infected. And the ininuation that stds arent transmitted os set is pretty funny. Unprotected prolonged sex with multiple partners, who are also having sex outside the industry, yet the industry wants you to believe that soemwho there are no std transmissions of the magic porn set. The disease doesnt know if youre on a set or in a hotel room.
And there could be a very simple way to determine if someone was actively infected on a set. As OSHA regulation 5193 states, any time someone is exposed to potentiall infectious bodily fluids it is the legal duty of the employer to offer testing and treatment to exposed workers. If they just took a urine sample right there on set and had it sent for testing that day, then they would know if someone had an std while working that day. But of course the industry will never do this, after all, why would they follow the law when it would prove someone had an std on their set. AIM used to charge 25 dollars for the gonnoreah and chlamydia tests combo, so the financial burder excuse is bullshit. Even ten people on a set would only cost 250.

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:12PM

Two performers are on a set getting ready to work. One of them has an std. Why does it matter if that person got that std on a set or in a private setting?

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:21PM

^^
I see your point , but there's another question how long they stay undetected?
It is the same question as how many drivers are intoxicated on the roads ,the real question is how long they can drive without being stopped?
the safety of a system is not how many have or do something the safety of a system is how fast the system react and discover them
If the system allows too many to do go undetected then you need to enhance your system but if you stop reasonably fast any infective performer then you have a good system , besides some SDTs are transmitted by oral sex (Herpes, Syphilis)
condoms are used for actual intercourse not for oral sex so their use isn't as effective as it seem at first especially in lesbo movies or when a male performs orals to a woman
BTW I haven't a position on condoms on set , I'm just discussing for the love of it
for the two performers on set, it doesn't matter as it doesn't matter for someone getting an HIV through a transfusion or through sex , yet it does matter to put safety protocols or to enhance them
Edited by - Laurie Cameron Fan on 9/18/2012 5:28:25 PM

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:28PM

Exactlyt right LCF. How long does the system let someone go undetected. If they just pissed in a cup right there on set everyday, and the producers followed the law, they would be detected the verry first time they walked on to a set with an infection. But producers are not willing to spend 25 per performer to do this, so you have a system that lets this go undetected for weeks. And if a performer gets infected one week after their test it is truely unbelieveable that he wont, at some point, infect one of the many porn partners with whom he has prolonged unprotected sex. LCF, we have this discussion going in two threads now, what do you say we restrict this conversation to this thread.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 5:30PM

Fine to me , but I live in Europe and it is time to bed now

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 6:10PM

Are you allergic to latex ? Do you even know ?
You need to know especially if condoms become mandatory !
Latex can kill !
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1258
Michael

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 6:36PM

Pornlaw,
I think it might be safe to assume that anyone in the porn industry has probably at one time in their life used a condom, and should know the answer to your question, but then again, and 8 year veteran, and many other performers overlooked a groin area filled with syhpilis sores and gleefully put it in their mouths, vaginas and ases.
A small percentage of people are allergic to latex, and it can cause serious medical problems. But one thing is absolutely 100% true, EVERYONE is allergic to gonnoreah, chlamydia, syphilis, herpes, HIV, and scores, if not hundreds of other diseases.
And there are simple tests that can determine if you are allergic to latex.

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 6:53PM

It seems like the industry is all to willing to accept the risk of unprotected sex wit multiple partners, but the risk of a latex allergy is too mcuh to be acceptable.
Simple question, if you are having sex with a sex worker(porn performer) who has had five partners in the last ten days, and each of those five had five partners, and all of them had a total of ten civilian untested partners, and noneof them used condoms, is it safer to use a condom, or not use a condom? Or is the possibility of a latex allergy big enough to forgo the condom?
Seat belts don't always work, and sometimes they actually cause injuries, so accoridng to porn industry logic you shouldnt wear a seatbelt.
Another funny side note, The symptoms of a latex allergy are very similar to the symptoms of syphilis, usually a rash develops in the area that was exposed. And since it is known that there were several people over the course of a few months who couldnt recognize a syphilis infection, including the infected person, then what makes anybody think they will see the initial signs of a latex allergy? Dont you just love it, seeing the symptoms of allergies and infections are left to porn performers and porn producers, and we all know how well that works.
Edited by - twocentsworth on 9/18/2012 7:13:46 PM

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 18 2012 : 9:28PM

Actually, if you read my article as opposed to just posting you might actually learn something.
Anyone can develop a latex allergy and there is no known test to determine if you will or will not.
So someone negative today could develop the allergy over time and end up with a severe reaction later.
A stage one is more like poison ivy then syphilis. A stage 3 allergic reaction can result in shock and possibly death.
Please dont bastardize my articles for you purposes. I post facts not opinions.
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

mharris127
Senior Member

1844 Posts
8/09

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 9:04AM

This is also an issue in doctor's offices. I have been to offices that are actually latex-free due to this issue. Fortunately I am not allergic to latex.
FYI people can special-order polyurethane condoms but the ballot measure is still dumb and assinine and should be shoved up Shelley Lubben's and Michael Weinstein's asses with HIV tainted Marc Wallice cum!

[Link]

Kimi Lixx
Senior Member

2012 Posts
6/01

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 1:39PM

^You don't have to special order latex free condoms. They're for sale at the Walmart, the Rite-Aid and I'm sure many, many other convenient shopping places.

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 4:30PM

Maybe because most STDs are curable but if you are allergic you must change job , so in order to work you just don't want sensible materials

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 5:26PM

Pornlaws article,
"Assuming there are 1500 performers currently working in Los Angeles"
On what do you base this silly assumption. I thought you were all about 'facts' not opinions(or assumptions)
Where do you get this 1500 number from?

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 6:55PM

Nice to see you read the article. BTW - Did you read the comments from performers that developed latex allergies over time ?
As for your question - you have to count all the girls on all of the agency sites and then add in all of the girls that come to Los Angeles to work on occasion that are not on an agency site. You will also want to add in the occasional amateur performer that gets book a scene every once in a while.
And then add in the guys, the transsexual performers and then add in the gay performers that shoot in Los Angeles as well.
Oh yeah lets not forget to add in the director/photographer/videographer/talent combos that dont appear on agency websites either that do POV shoots.
If you think my math is that far off I welcome you to give me a more definitive answer. I have been here for 8 yrs and work with all sides of the business. If you, as a supposed outsider, can do better math - have at it.
Michael

AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

twocentsworth
Member

13 Posts
9/12

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 7:21PM

If you want to count the gay performers, shouldnt you also coount the nuber of HIV postitve gay performers when talking about the HIV rate in the porn industry, not to mention syphilis.
And where do you get those numbers about the amatuer and non agency performers. Just wondering where your assumptions come from? How do you track the number of these other performers?
And the gay industry has, for the most part, used conndoms for a long time. Has there ever been any latex allergy problems in the gay industry?, or cancer clusters in the gay industry related to condoms?

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 19 2012 : 9:13PM

What does any of that have to do with your criticism of my 1500 estimate ?
Im just talking about performers that work in LA.
As for my estimate I know/rep a lot of people that come into LA to work as well as directors that book them. And I also know/rep amateur companies and talent.
A discussion about the gay industry is a completely different animal. And no not all gay companies use condoms. Some even shoot HIV+ with HIV+ performers together. Many gay companies assume that many of their performers are HIV+ ...
It would be comparing apples to Cadillacs.
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

LCF

All-Star Member

Non Prevalebunt!
10364 Posts
1/05

Posted - Sep 20 2012 : 1:58AM

Do the law on the ballot distinguish porn from porn?
I mean gay porn is included , isn't it?
So why it hasn't to be taken into consideration?

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 20 2012 : 11:17AM

No it doesnt. Thats why I am not really sure why 2cents is talking about it.
Michael
AdultBizLaw.com

[Link]

mharris127
Senior Member

1844 Posts
8/09

Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 11:01AM

I actually recently responded to an article on another site about a newly HIV positive (HIV+) performer performing with two other people (with their- permission and cooperation of course) and my comment bears repeating here. I don't have a problem with HIV+ people performing with another HIV+ person. However, I would personally require proof that all performers involved are truly HIV+ and that one person isn't just dumb as a case of hammers. The Real Wiki Leaks article I originally commented on was unclear on this aspect (IIRC it was a three-person scene and the HIV status was only mentioned for two of the performers).
As for HIV+ performers performing with HIV negative (HIV-) performers on screen, it should never happen. I understand personal freedom of choice but medical and social (most HIV drugs are very expensive and paid for by Medicaid in the USA) issues trump freedom of choice in this instance IMO. Any HIV- person having sex of any kind with a known HIV+ person knowingly is truly dumber than a warehouse full of hammers!

[Link]

RandomPrecision
Senior Member

Enjoy!
8175 Posts
3/06

Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 4:25PM

That's not what the First Amendment says.

Just because the government says it's OK for them to violate the First Amendment doesn't mean they aren't doing it. It just means the famous "checks and balances" aren't working worth a damn. The courts are supposed to stop them but the courts are all as corrupt as everything else in this country that has anything to do with government.
The Commerce Clause has obviously been taken so far beyond anything it was ever intended to be it's practically a nullification of the original US Constitution all by itself.

No it isn't. There is no debate. A real debate is one you can win. The government has clearly chosen to do this and nothing is going to stop them. Just like Obamacare. That little court "challenge" was a charade from the word go.
Edited by - randomprecision on 9/21/2012 4:33:55 PM

[Link]

morbidthoughts

All-Star Member

Big cats scare me but...
3627 Posts
1/03

Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 7:20PM

The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what the Constitution says. Not you or me and they have allowed the regulation of commercial speech since the late 70s. You can bitch about their corruption and how they overextend the Commerce Clause but commercial porn easily qualifies as interstate commerce.
As for your rant about the government being one entity despite our system of federalism, *yawn*.

[Link]

pornlaw
Member

578 Posts
10/05

Posted - Sep 21 2012 : 8:40PM

New articles...
Weinstein says Focus Shouldnt be on HIV in Porn !
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1284
The Problem with Producing Porn Outside of California...
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1303
James Deen Speaks Out on Adult Performer Right to Make Choices !
http://adultbizlaw.com/?p=1324
Michael

[Link]