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.
An HIV-AIDs activist group says that it has succeeded in collecting enough signatures to put an initiative on the ballot to require the use of condoms in the Los Angeles adult film industry.
The initiative would force any adult filmmaker who gets a permit to shoot in the city to require performers to use condoms and allow the city to charge a fee to pay for inspections of film sets, said Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which sponsored the signature drive and intends to fund the initiative campaign.
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.
This will send porn production overseas and to other states.
[this may be a boon for amateur sites, though]
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.
Don't most industries have some set of safety standards they are required to abide by? Seeing as this is a business and all business face regulations, I'm not sure how this goes too far.
I think politicians who dream crap like this up should be made to wear condoms over their heads...or their parents should've worn condoms.
This ballot initiative wasn't created by politicians. It was created by an HIV/AIDS activist organization.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiyero
Don't most industries have some set of safety standards they are required to abide by? Seeing as this is a business and all business face regulations, I'm not sure how this goes too far.
This is a special type of business we're talking about. Just as stunt men take risks in their work, so do porn actors. Do you really think people are going to pay to watch fellatio scenes featuring condom-covered penises?
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.
Technically...A married couple doing porn wouldn't need to use condoms as long as they weren't engaging in non monogamous sex.
The Porn industry is dancing on thin ice. There've been several HIV alarms this year and I don't care if they're Adults or not. They know what industry they're in, they know the risks of unprotected sex. But they should be the poster children for safe sex, because they have a responsibility to demonstrate for the consumers of porn that they must use condoms as well.
There's enough porn in the world that they could shut down production in L.A. and there would still be enough porn in the world people could survive without the Los Angeles porn industry.
Glorification of porn needs to stop. It's trite, worn out, used, stale, boring, filth.
I still have no idea how the Porn industry can survive and it not be considered prostitution. (One more thing congress has their filthy hands on).
It's people having sex for money, and companies and people profiting from it. It should be shut down for that reason alone.
I still have no idea how the Porn industry can survive and it not be considered prostitution. (One more thing congress has their filthy hands on).
Prostitution occurs when someone provides sexual gratification to another person for money. That's different from a company hiring someone to perform in a movie. The California Supreme Court ruled on this decades ago. Performing in a porn movie is technically considered acting.
All of you individuals who said NO they shouldn't be required to wear condoms are no doubt purveyors of porn and don't mind the idea of people dying for your pleasure.
Obviously you have no problem with unprotected sex among non monogamous partners.
Sleazy.
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.
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.
Ron Jeremy will probably start a strike over this.
