is VCA constantly using condoms in their productions ? I've actually watched my first VCA title (shame on me) called 'Misspelled' and I didn't know every scene was done with condoms. Why is VCA so 'radical' abou that ? I've also seen other companies using them as well, but not in all the scenes. Is there something like a condom / no condom list to see if there are condoms used before buying it.
Sure - safe sex is a great thing, but I think in adult movies which ought to build up a fantasy this can be quite distracting, especially in VCA movies where the movies often play in an age of mystery, witches and vampires it's quite disillusioning to see those witches use condoms. And also other couples-movies which display loving, caring and trusting partners aren't believable when they're using condoms. Since most of the people on ADT are praising nearly all of VCA's movies I guess nobody else cares about that or maybe in other films no condoms are used ?
spesedy: Yes, VCA is now shooting all features with condoms. More information is here.
BTW, VCA isn't so radical--many of the major adult studios are moving more and more toward condoms, either as an effort to protect their talent or ward off lawsuits. I think it would be easier to have a list of movies without condoms appearing, since most of the stuff I've seen in the past few years use them.
It's true that condoms in porn ruins fantasy. Come on now, I watch porn to be inspired, to work out my libido here. Sure VCA employs beautiful ladies, however seeing condoms sometimes ruins everything, even their sex scenes are getting lame compared to other production houses such as Evil Angel, Anabolic, Private. VCA is getting more and more like VIVID nowadays.
Porno movies, sexy videos, xxx. Adult DVD Talk at your service. 6409 Posts 11/99
Posted - Jan 3 2001 : 10:09AM
VCA has some great directors. I want to see every movie Antonio Passolini makes. Yes, condoms can detract from a sex scene - and I wouldn't want an all sex flick with condoms. But if it's a good feature, the condoms don't ruin it for me.
[Link]
sonic Deactivated User
1178 Posts 12/99
Posted - Jan 3 2001 : 10:25AM
Am I the only individual that doesn't get it? Pornstars and condoms? I thought pornstars were professionals? I thought that they were the celebrities of sex? So now with more use of condoms on screen..now it doesn't seem like it right? Here's why:
If pornstars are "professionals"..than that means that they go through the measurements and security of testing and checking to see if they and their partner are free from diseases right? Cool. This is professionalism.
So if all is safe and good then why the need of condoms? They're safe right? That's the way it supposed to be.
If pornstars on the screen are wearing condoms..and more and more pornstars continue..what does that say?
It gives me the clear message, that something is fuming..something is up. One of these individuals (pornstar) HAS a disease or spends most of his/her time fucking outside the company with any joe from the street no matter if that joe has STD's or any other disease. So that is why they have to wear a condom in the flick production. That's the message that I get.
Does anyone here follow my where I'm getting at?
?
Note: This post was made not to offend anyone, it was created with a clear and clean thought from your average person who questions alot and wants answers he can learn from.
Sonic, I can see your reasoning, but I don't agree with it. I don't particularly care for condoms in porn because it does yank you out of the fantasy. But here are some reasons I can think of why condoms are used (keep in mind, I don't agree with many of them, but they are often cited by people in the industry):
* Poor documentation of HIV tests or none at all * Lag between contracting HIV and when it shows up in tests * Last minute substitution of talent (i.e. star doesn't show up so they have to call in whoever's available) * Stars have sex lives off the screen, so you don't know who they are sleeping with or how * Recent high-profile cases of HIV contractions * Reduction of liability to the studios who require condoms * Greater insurance against pregancy * A means of keeping things on a professional level (i.e. sex without condoms is more personal and intimate) * Promotion of safe sex practices
I agree that facial cumshots and unprotected oral sex seems to fly in the face of most of those reasons, but it's better than nothing.
I also agree with Steph that condoms can work. For example, I recently saw Veronica Hart's White Lightning and the scene between Chloe and Mickey G. has a really effective use of a condom, including putting it on. On the other hand, Paul Thomas' period piece, Jekyll and Hyde , just doesn't work--good costuming and sets, but I just don't believe there were latex condoms in 1877...
My spin on condoms: I prefer no condoms in my private life but at the same time understand why they are used in porn movies. I have a slight preference for no condoms in movies but it's not a huge issue for me since I don't want to support people catching AIDS, or any other nasty disease. Maybe I'm mature enough to accept the current state of matters more than others, maybe I've caved in to industry reasoning.
Let's be honest, shall we? If any of the lovely ladies we like so much in porn were to offer you a jump in the sack, would you wear a condom? If not, you're essentially sleeping with her entire disease history-known or unknown. Just because they are supposedly "tested" every 28 days doesn't mean they always do so, that the tests are perfect, or that she just slept with some nasty puss filled, sore carrying loser with a guitar the night before.
Why do we, as a group, want to insist that these performers take outrageous risks with their lives just because a few of us haven't learned to accept modern day realities? This isn't a slam against anyone here but it may be time to grow up.
Spesedy, you can bank on condoms being used at all the companies that have high end production values. That includes VCA, Wicked, Adam & Eve, and most of the others. The companies that don't use them are going to find out a lot about liability and employment laws when they start getting sued over it. With the new administration coming in, that may be exactly the type of thing they need to open the door to super restrictive legislation that'll be supported by both parties.
Saki, ever the voice of reason: I agree wholeheartedly.
Saki repeated one of my points which was quite important to me :
When watching some movie about some slutty looking prostitute in the 90s I won't have that much of a problem when condoms are used (although I still got a no-condom preference, but that's just what I like to see and doesn't mean I don't understand why they're using it), on the other hand some loving, caring couple or witches, knights, ghosts and vampires simply ought not to use condoms. And that's where the professionality comes in Sonic mentioned. Pornstars ought to do things many people would like to do but never could or never would do. But nowadays pornstars get more and more like you and me. The scenes in the films of the 'high production value'-producing companies HoustonDon mentioned use quite pretty girls with less and less of them being naughty. Seeing a Vivid-girl getting it on - maybe even with a condom - somehow reminds me of a few neighbours. This might be great for a couples movie sometimes, but I'm even hearing more and more girls saying 'Wow, that's tame !'.
I thought I'd see a trend to more and more people buying vids from Anabolic & co.
Do you think companies like Vivid or Adam & Eve can survive that competition ?
Spesedy, I acknowledge your points, but disagree. Vivid and Adam & Eve aren't competing against the ultra hardcore companies and seem to be doing quite well. For every one of us jaded porn afficianado's(sic), there are thousands of people who think Cinemax is hardcore. It's the Vivid's (not a company I like much these days), A&E's and VCA's that are expanding the market-not the Max Hardcore or Extreme Associates-who are doing so.
If seeing Asia Carrera, Jenna Jameson, Jill Kelly, or a bunch of other hotties having sex is tame, I admit to liking tame stuff. Toys, anal, oral and such are not, by my standards, tame, just because they care enough about their health to require condoms. If you have neighbors that look like that, invite me over for a stay. (please?)
I always appreciate free choice and variety, so I'm glad they're there although I might only like them on several occasions. Just got this feeling that most viewers got satiated over the years with porn and were now looking for more extreme things.Well... it's certainly very subjective, but in those films I called 'tame' I sometimes get the impression some actors aren't that much into the scenes and rather thinking about the money they're getting paid. In anabolic & co vids it seems to me most people really like what they're doing, but that's of course far from being scientificYou're welcome, but I won't guarantee anything since they always tell me I'm the only one they love
Patience is a virtue, but who wants to be virtuous? 4283 Posts 4/00
Posted - Jan 3 2001 : 11:11PM
The companies and performers who use condoms actually do believe all of the reasons Saki gave, and more. HIV isn't the only STD we worry about. Have any of you ever had gonorrhea, syphillis, herpes, hepatits, chlamydia...? Well, MANY performers have, and condoms are a good step in preventing transmission of most of these. After all, like said before, you sleep with someone, you sleep with every one and everything that they sleep with.
Even if HIV was the only worry, some performers have gotten much more relaxed about their testing diligence. Many of my friends came up to me after Marc (a veteran performer, for those of you who are new, who showed me a valid-seeming HIV test documenting negative when he was actually positive) infected me, and cried, saying that they were quitting or switching permanently to condom-only. Bravo to those like Nici Sterling, Julie Ashton, Stephanie Swift, and many others, who have not let fan and/or director pressures get them to agree to non-protected sex. They truly are professionals who understand that, for them at least, it's just not worth the risk of losing the chance to continue performing.
If I had stayed strong and not worried about losing a few jobs here and there, I'd still be in scenes today (provided there were still directors who liked me). And I have to say SHAME ON THOSE OF YOU who say repeatedly how much you adore your favorite stars, when it seems as if you care more about not being distracted by a condom than about whether or not they are endangering themselves just so that you can get a hard-on a little easier. My only scene last year was of course with a condom. A guy who said he was a fan had the nerve to complain to me about condom scenes. In anger, I responded to him by saying that if he couldn't get his dick hard watching beautiful girls get fucked (I wasn't just talking about me--I was talking about all girls in the business), maybe he should ask his doctor for some VIAGRA.
As for having to watch condoms, I agree that seeing without is definitely preferable in an ideal situation -- except for promoting a message of safe sex, I don't believe in companies forcing real-life husbands and wifes (like Nici Sterling and Oscar Wilde) to use condoms when they are the only two in the scene. However, not all scenes have to fail just because of the safe sex. In my memory, (although I love VCA, Wicked, and Vivid production values), their sex scenes were often rather weak even in the days of pre-condom. I have no problem watching a scene (from Evil Angel or Anabolic or some of the other companies known for better sex) which uses condoms. If the sex is strong, that's the most important thing for me as a viewer. Evil Angel's policy is to shoot all Brazilian scenes with condoms (because of less-conformed testing), and give all other performers the unpressured option.
I'm glad my AOL kicked me off the first time I typed a response. It was much stronger! This time I just wanted to point out that I don't think the performers are copping out. Believe me, they get A LOT of pressure from directors who say they would hire the performer if they went without condom.
Very interesting that this subject happens to be a new hot topic here on the forum. As it turns out, a similar question has been asked and answered, and will appear on the next ASK THE EMPIRE. I wish just wish I read these very thoughtful responses before writing up the answer, which has already been submitted to my editors at Adult DVD Empire. In particular, Ms. Devereaux's points of view would have added insight.
Personally, I prefer not to see condoms in porn films, but I understand and respect the policy behind them. But as pointed out in several of my reviews, and by reviews from Principal Skinner, I think they do lessen the overall "heat" of an otherwise good sex scene.
Also, I don't think any one should really have to apologize for the fact that they may prefer a video where condoms are absent (like an Anabolic Video, or some Evil Angel titles) than one where they are constantly present (as in the VCA and Vivid videos). No one wants to see anyone jeapordize their health and welfare for the sake of a sex-vid, but all viewers are entitled to their own viewing prefeneces...no matter how politically incorrect or otherwise.
But of course, safety should always come first within any industry...and no actress should ever be pressured to perform in a scene without protection.
To me there is so much more to sex than just seeing a penis pounding a hole, that the condom issue doesn't bother me too much. I realize that men are much more visually oriented, therefore must see this as well as the cumshot, and the closer, the better. I personally would like to see more artistically done erotica, where the mood would build, slowly getting hotter, the music sexually charged, the looks, the sounds, the tease, the thrill of anticipation...until he just touches you and you cum. But, as this has rarely been done right, even in big budget mainstream, I guess I'll just have to keep watching those ass zits pounding away. And let me tell you, that's when I regret getting a big screen as it only exaggerates any flaw.
So, I accept condoms, but if they start using these things, I'm out.
I had heard the term 'dental dam' and pictured some kind of device one fits their mouth, to prevent accidental swallowing. So, I was surprised to learn that they are latex sheets used between a licker & lickee, which also must be held in place by hand. Now, unless you have a latex rubber fetish, I wonder what is the point? And is it still considered oral sex? Is it sex at all? It would seem somewhat dangerous for the licker, I mean what if the thing stuck to their face, and caused suffocation? Try explaining that one to the doctor and next-of-kin!
*What is a dental dam and how do I use it?
Dental dams, or latex barriers, are flat sheets of latex rubber that are used for safer oral sex. They are placed against either the vagina or the anus for use in oral-vaginal or oral-anal sex. If used properly, before any contact is made, they can help reduce the risk of transmitting HIV, and other sexually transmitted diseases. (Some of them are even flavored) . It is recommended that the licker wet the dam before use.
*How to use a dental dam for oral-vaginal or ass to mouth sex: Holding the latex barrier firmly with both hands, cover the entire vaginal or anal area. Either partner can hold the dam in place. Never use the same latex barrier more than once. Like a condom, they are to be used for one use only.
Edited by - dumblonde on Jan 4 2001
[Link]
sonic Deactivated User
1178 Posts 12/99
Posted - Jan 4 2001 : 1:15PM
Well being that I am such a doll in real life (I am a very nice guy and proud of myself. I have good manners..and strong morals )..I DEEPLY apologize if I said something unfairly said.
I am the average person with questions to ask. I learn more in these forums than in real life. In the real world (which I adore) I never ask these questions..I am a totally different person..a loner. It is only here that my behavior is radically different. But I feel I always make it up in the long run.
I thank Saki like always, he gives me the right path to see the answers.
I'm glad for this thread..I learned something..something that I did not know and wasn't aware of. So I feel good...feel good with what I said..and feel good to know there were answers that I strongly agree with.
For those pornstars out there who browse through the forums, if you're lurkers..I sincerely apologize if I said something wrong and it's not worth risking a disease that can make your life miserable. I know about STD's...I have a strong relative who had one..and she managed to get rid of it through months and months of injections and medicine. I am so glad she's alive today. The man who gave it to her (rest in peace) passed away because he did not get a cure and he worsen the condition by contracting A.I.D.S.
It was unbelivable..never have I seen a 5'9" man shrink to 5'4" height size. That is how powerful one of these sexual diseases are.
Hi everyone. At first I was about to say No condoms is better. But usually I do not notice if there are condoms or not.
I think of them as a natural part of sex. They are birth-control. So I wonder what the people in relationships use for Birth-control.
What turns me off is when the guy is wearing the condom and it looks like it is Falling off. If a condom is properly worn it does not bother me. But when it looks like it is falling off then it is a turn off.
So I think it is upto the male performers to keep that condom on properly. I think that is the way I would prefer it. To have all the condoms if used should be used properly. It is a turn off when I am watching and that condom is falling off. When I see it I think to myself "Oh no, it is going to fall off inside her!"
To sum up: Condoms or No-condoms not much difference to me. But if using condoms then those condoms should stay on and not be falling off! They should be used properly.