Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why would gay porn be different from straight porn with regard to mandatory TESTING for HIV infection among their "PERFORMERS"?
I could come up with a lot of choice things to say about this but I'd rather someone explain this to me before I start spewing forth.
From what I have heard - quite a few of the male performers who have tested positive lately worked in both gay and straight porn.
Maybe therein lies the problem.
The mandate for testing is industry-imposed. No one who is known to be HIV positive, whether in the straight or gay segment of the industry, is going to be allowed to begin working or continue working. Having a positive test result for HIV would be the end of one's career. It is understood by those within the gay porn segment of the industry that many of the performers are, in fact, HIV positive. Gay porn producers and performers recognize that they would be out of business with testing, due to the likely high rate of positive test results.
They have, therefore, chosen a sort of "don't ask, don't tell" mechanism which involves the widespread use of condoms in place of testing. There is also a much greater social stigma attached to gay porn, which means that gay porn producers and performers are held to a higher cultural standard. Using condoms mitigates that stigmatization to some extent.
A few gay porn producers are condom-free, and use a method called "seriomatching", in which self-identified HIV positive performers are matched only with other HIV positive performers. Other "bareback" gay production companies are starting to use limited testing.
There is a fair amount of controversy within the straight industry about allowing male performers to work in both gay and straight porn. The most recent performer who tested positive (in 2010) worked under different names in these two segments of the industry. The 2004 outbreak originated with an actor who is thought to have contracted HIV while engaging in high-risk, off-set sex in Brazil.
These are the only two HIV outbreaks which have occurred in the porn industry since the inception of AIM. The only previous outbreak had occurred due to a male performer who falsified his test results in 1997. The point is that those who work in the straight industry are required to be regularly tested, and to allow producer/director/co-star access to their test results. Keep in mind that the HIV infection rate of those working in the straight porn industry is below the rate of those in the general population.
Actually, since the law would only affect L.A., they would only have to go outside of the city limits. Maybe the county and eventually the state will pass the same law. Probably not, though.
I understand the desire to protect people from diseases, but considering that these are adults who know what they're getting into, I think a law requiring condom usage goes too far. And where would they draw the line? If a married couple decides to make a sex film to sell for profit, technically, they'd be required to use condoms too. That's too much.
We don't need the idiots in government telling us when to use condoms. It's simple, really.
We don't need the idiots in government telling us when to use condoms. It's simple, really.
It isn't just government behind these attempts. A coalition of groups have been trying to force condom use on the porn industry since 2004. The individual groups involved, including The AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF), have their own pet agendas to push.
The proposed LA law would need to depend upon Cal/OSHA regulations concerning contact with blood-borne pathogens. The problem with that is the fact that, with the exception of a few "contract girls", those who perform in porn are not legally classified as employees (they are independent contractors), which means that Cal/OSHA has no jurisdiction.
If the city attempts to require condom use in the industry, minus a connection to California health and safety codes, it's highly unlikely this initiative will survive even its first constitutional challenge.
How do you make paying for sex legal? Simple - tape it and call it porn.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.