As Read on AdultFYI.com

EDITORIAL - Yes, it's true, the California State Assembly is going to committee today to vote on a new bill designed to dent all kinds of porno practices, including more testing for more STDs, more frequently. Also in the proposed bill, a condom mandatory ruling for all sex scenes shot in California may be added to the docket as well as costs of testing to be paid for by adult movie companies which would also make them liable should someone contract something on their set.

Now before everyone goes nuts and thinks their porn career is over, lets go over a few of the things listed in this bill and understand them more clearly.

--

STDs On The List:

The following are a list of STDs the new bill would require adult performers to test for: (1) Chancroid. (2) Chlamydia. (3) Gonorrhea. (4) Hepatitis A virus. (5) Hepatitis B virus. (6) Hepatitis C virus. (7) Herpes simplex virus (HSV), also known as genital herpes. (8) Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). (9) Human papilloma virus (HPV), also known as genital warts. (10) Syphilis.

The way I interpret the bill [and yes, I could be wrong], if you have any of these things, not only can you not work until the disease is finished being treated, but you also have to wait until you can show 60 days of clean tests. With the required testing being moved to an every two week duration [according to the bill], that would mean you'll have to produce four clean tests to a producer before working on their set. The final clean bill of health also must be signed off by a "medical" doctor, not a clinic worker or PhD that just works in healthcare.

Obviously anyone with herpes or genital warts will never be cleared because those are STDs that stay in your blood stream for the rest of your life.

Let's talk about that for a moment. The "herpes" angle to this bill is the one that has a lot of people in an uproar. I've heard, "that's ridiculous, half the talent in porn has herpes, it'll kill the industry" and "you can't stop me from working with herpes, I just won't work with an outbreak."

Do the people that say these things hear themselves? YO! PORN STARS...have you become so involved in your own hell that you actually forgot that many of us DO NOT have herpes? Did you ever consider that many of us DO NOT WANT herpes?

No, in truth, many performers with herpes have NOT thought of these things, nor have they cared. There is a common misconception that working without outbreaks is safe and that those who work under non-outbreak conditions can't pass it on. BULLSHIT! The fact of the matter is, Genital herpes can be transmitted with or without the presence of sores or other symptoms, and is often transmitted by people who are unaware that they are infected. [Do Your Own Research]

I once found out that one of my hosts on KSEX had herpes. No big deal, it's so common that I won't judge anyone. BUT I told her that because I was aware that she was carrying the virus, she was not allowed to participate in any sexual acts on the air with guests or hosts unless they were notified of her condition and agreed to "play" anyway. That sounds fair enough right? As a manager of people, I don't want to be responsible for someone contracting something that they will have to deal with for the rest of their lives.

Her response--"This is ridiculous. Everyone has herpes in this business and those who don't will get it anyway."

I'm proud to say she doesn't work for us anymore. The problem is, she's still shooting.

With these kinds of attitudes in the adult world, why is talent so baffled that the government wants to jump in a fix a few things?

In my opinion, those who don't like the STD provision in this new bill have something to hide. They most likely have the same attitude as the above mentioned talent, probably because they're carrying one of these diseases and are more interested in their work then other people's welfare.

Think about it. If this bill passes under those provisions, yes, many people, even big name stars will be forced to retire, but do you really think we won't find a new alumni of porn stars? Not only will the newbies fill the holes somewhat quickly, but there will then be much cleaner and safer working conditions for everyone.

I have no problem saying that I support this part of the bill.

--

Testing:

The bill is proposing testing every two weeks, paid for by movie companies and 60 days of clean tests before working. Any movie company that doesn't have proper paperwork according to those standards is civilly liable, should someone on their set contract a disease.

This part of the bill is a little fucked because there's so many angles to it that will be nearly impossible to execute or enforce.

First of all, how are you going to determine how much each company pays for testing? I'm assuming it will have to be a scale of some kind whereas movie companies pay a certain percentage into a pot based on how many scenes they shoot per month or per year. The problem with this is, many small companies don't shoot that many scenes and most small companies don't shoot on a regular basis. The big boys do, but even KSEX just started shooting for the Adam & Eve DVDs and we plan on doing maybe 3 movies a year at scattered intervals. It's going to be very unfair to smaller companies if they make a set rate across the board.

The testing every two weeks is not really a problem, more of an inconvenience. Sharon Mitchell recently told someone in an interview about it that it doesn't make sense to test that frequently, although I disagree on that point. I like knowing that if talent is fucking around on the side [which many of them do], we have extra tests in a shorter duration to make it a little more safe. Remember, a lot of these STDs show up a couple of days after contact. If I get tested on the first of the month, then go to a bar that night and irresponsibly fuck a chick I just met with no condom and contract something, I have 29 days of work I could be doing in porn, putting a hell of a lot of people at risk.

Don't act like that behavior is rare in this business either. I see it all the time with many adult stars. I ain't mad at them for fucking around but having shorter durations between testing periods works for me. The 60 days of clean tests works for me too, although I know it will hurt a lot of pockets and I'm not sure it's necessary. Quite frankly when the "meds" are finished for common STDs, the disease is gone. 60 days for most STDs is a bit ridiculous.

Now lets talk about the civil liabilities of contracting an STD on someone's set.

How the fuck do they plan on proving this?

Am I just not aware that blood and urine tests can determine exact time and date of infection?

I mean, I know the tests are pretty good when it comes to a "rough idea" timeframe but how is the state going to prove that Suzie PornStar got Chlamydia on my set or at Joe's Corner Bar the night before? I'm sure there are attorneys that could find a way to win those cases but in my opinion, it's a bit ridiculous to even try to put this into the legal system.

--

Condom Mandatory:

Aside from the few big companies who do it anyway and the female talent that will only work under those conditions, I think it's fair to say that most of us do not support this. I heard Sharon [Mitchell] say at the press conference that AIM always recommends using condoms for porn but to be quite honest with you, I've been testing there now and no one ever recommend that to me in that office. All they did was ask me on a survey sheet if I was Condom Only or Condom Optional. I wrote Optional.

If they had a policy of recommending condom use, you would think when they read "optional" they would have said something like, "ya know, we highly recommend that you use condoms in your scenes." [Don't get the wrong idea, I'm not saying I shoot all kinds of scenes, I've only received a few BJs on film...but they don't know that]

I'm also NOT bashing AIM. I've seen the heat they're getting and I think it's a little harsh considering without their guidance over the last few years, we would've had a lot more problems on the health front. A good friend put it to me on a level that makes a lot of sense--"when your football team is good but having a lot of problems, the coach needs to get fired just so the fans know you're working on it." I think that's why so many people are all over Sharon. Personally, I like her. I haven't heard a convincing story yet as to why she is no good for her position, although I wouldn't mind a real medical doctor overseeing the operation.

Getting back to the Condom Mandatory provision. I don't support it. I think if the testing is as frequent and as thorough as presented in this bill, requiring condoms is not necessary.

One of the things the state probably doesn't know, as well as the mainstream public, is that under the current system our stats are pretty damn amazing. Very minimal major disease contractions, a small amount of other STD contractions and on the most part, a safe environment for all who perform. Combine that with the new testing procedures and you're going to see almost no STDs going through the system.

--

What To Do:

So, there you have my interpretation of the bill and most of it's provisions. I could be off on a few, I didn't graduate top of my class, but I think I covered all the basics.

Whether you support or do not support this bill, or like me, have parts of it you're okay with, where is your voice?

I'm told that the assembly was open to suggestions from the adult biz. I'm also told a small meeting was held over the weekend by a few well known industry personalities where they elected to NOT participate in this meeting in Sacramento. I'm told a member of the adult community who could speak very well on behalf of the porn world volunteered to pay his own way to attend this meeting only to be told by the impromptu porn committee that they would prefer he didn't.

I'm also told the assembly wanted to hear from people that work in the adult business and better understand the day to day working environment. Not so they can regulate, moreso because they want to help.

It's so common for people to bitch and whine to their friends about situations like this, but what about having an active role in what's going down? There's no getting around government intervention with this recent HIV crisis. The more cases that turn up, the more Uncle Sam wants to jump in and "handle it." So...what are you waiting for?

If I had half the history as many adult business legends, I wouldn't be typing this editorial to you, I'd be at Burbank Airport boarding a plane for Sacramento. I would be at this meeting, educating the mainstream players on what the adult business needs from them. Yes, we'd prefer they stay out of our business, but goddamn it if they're going to force their way in, I'd be trying to guide them into a direction that works for all of us.

These talent meetings are great. The charity benefits are awesome. Everyone reaching out to help each other and meetings about unions are all positive things. Whether a union ever got off the ground or not isn't the point. The point is we're all talking. That's healthy. The problem is, we're only talking to each other. [Again, I'm not recommending talking to the mainstream press. That's counterproductive.]

We need some industry leaders to educate the lawmakers on the things that we need to make it all work for our future in porn. Some of you will leave, some of you will retire, but many of us hope to be here for years to come. Some of us actually work in this industry because we love it, not just to pay our bills.

So the next time you complain about this new bill, just remember--you did nothing to stop it!

--

Wankus is the Program Director and hosts a show on KSEXradio.com, Monday, Wednesday and Fridays from 7-9pm (PST). It's free to listen to KSEX and members of the site can watch all the hot action on the in-studio web cams.

[Link]