Or to put it another way: Suppose there is another Darren James disaster, except that the girl who goes down doesn't do creampies, so it was passed on just by vanilla anal. Who do you blame then?It's a judgment call, where to draw the line. One view is that safety is the most important thing, and this leads you to porn with condoms. I don't agree with that, but I understand why someone takes that view.
Another view puts freedom first, and says "Let the girls and the consumer choose". This happens to be my view, and of course I think it's a sensible one :)
Then there are people in the middle, who say, "Well, I mean, OK, so let's draw the line in the middle, and allow some unsafe behaviors but not allow the highest risk behaviors". Well OK, but that doesn't seem to be based on any principle like the other two views are, and so it feels to me less rational. In fact, I can't help seeing some hypocrisy in this view: people who feel a bit guilty that the girls undergo some risk, but nonetheless their desire for money (industry people) or sexual gratification (consumers) won't let them follow that to its logical conclusion of condoms.

[Link]