Alia Janine
Alia Janine
Official Checked Star Member
Yesterday I attend the Cal/OSHA Advisory Committee Meeting on barrier control protocol in the Adult Industry. Now if any of you have been following this story in the news you should know what's going on. But, for those that don't here's a short briefing: Cal/OSHA came up with a 17 page draft of proper barrier controls, definitions, and procedures for the Adult Industry. Mind you, barrier controls have been in place since the early 90s but due to recent events and formal complaints from the AHF they're stepping up enforcing and trying to make new regulations.
But, why does Cal/OSHA get to regulate what happens on a porn set like they can a hospital or construction site? Because apparently all Adult Performers are consider "employees" and all production companies "employers". We're consider "employees" because of the state's definition of what an employee/employer is. Regardless, if performers are incorporated within themselves, pay taxes as a self employed person or business owner, or the fact that most performers work with multiple companies.
You need to understand that if we were considered independent contractors, as many of us consider ourselves, they would have no control over what we do on a porn set. All they have is the states definition of what an employee/employer is.
There's so much more that goes with that but that's not what I want to discuss. Because honestly, even with the states definition of an "employee" I still believe they are in violation of our 1st Amendment right to free speech/expression.
Let's start from the very beginning.
*Our 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
*Pornography fits under freedom of speech or freedom of expression. It clearly states that it includes sexual expression.
*The state of California defines hardcore pornography as; Hardcore pornography commonly includes explicit depictions of sex acts such as vaginal or anal penetration, cunnilingus, fellatio and ejaculation and/or extreme fetish acts.
*The Supreme Court ruling in California VS Freeman in 1989 legalized pornography. (With the states definition of what pornography)
*Our 1st Amendment also states that: "federal and lower government may not apply "prior restraint" to expression with certain exceptions such as national security and obscenity."
*It is not obscene to show genitals in sexual acts. We have the Miller VS California Supreme Court ruling (The Miller Test) to prove that the majority of what we do is not obscene.
*Prior restraint or prior censorship is censorship in which certain material may not be published or communicated, rather than not prohibiting publication but making the publisher answerable for what is made known. Prior restraint prevents the censored material from being heard or distributed at all; other measures provide sanctions only after the offending material has been communicated, such as suits for slander or libel.
So if Cal/OSHA is forcing us to use any and all types of barrier protection, how is that not censoring us from being able to fully express ourselves sexually?
Also, how is wearing barriers not forcing us to produce and distribute fraudulent products?
Can it also be said that they are in violation of the Due Process Clause of our 14th Amendment? And of our Universal Human Right Laws? Considering that everyone in Adult Industry that was at the meeting got shut down anytime we brought up valid disputes or ideas against/for their proposal, I would say yes. They were unfair, unrealistic, and have absolutely no idea about how our industry works and they don't care.
My thoughts; I don't care if Im consider an employee or not. I know that my 1st Amendment right gives me the right to sexually express myself, in the legal state definition of pornography. By forcing me to use barrier protection they are violating my rights by censoring me and not allowing me fully express myself in the way that I want to. And by not allowing me and other industry members to have any say with what we can do with our own bodies, sexual expressions, our income, or our livelihood, is denying us Due Process.
Everything with a * I got from Wikipedia. So, if I can spend a few hours online doing some research and can find all of this, why is Cal/OSHA (and we'll even throw in the AHF) still so hell bent on 'protecting' our industry? Well to me and many other industry members, they are being discriminatory against our industry for what we do. With the law clearly stating we're in our legal rights how are they not?
But, why does Cal/OSHA get to regulate what happens on a porn set like they can a hospital or construction site? Because apparently all Adult Performers are consider "employees" and all production companies "employers". We're consider "employees" because of the state's definition of what an employee/employer is. Regardless, if performers are incorporated within themselves, pay taxes as a self employed person or business owner, or the fact that most performers work with multiple companies.
You need to understand that if we were considered independent contractors, as many of us consider ourselves, they would have no control over what we do on a porn set. All they have is the states definition of what an employee/employer is.
There's so much more that goes with that but that's not what I want to discuss. Because honestly, even with the states definition of an "employee" I still believe they are in violation of our 1st Amendment right to free speech/expression.
Let's start from the very beginning.
*Our 1st Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. The amendment prohibits the making of any law "respecting an establishment of religion", impeding the free exercise of religion, infringing on the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
*Pornography fits under freedom of speech or freedom of expression. It clearly states that it includes sexual expression.
*The state of California defines hardcore pornography as; Hardcore pornography commonly includes explicit depictions of sex acts such as vaginal or anal penetration, cunnilingus, fellatio and ejaculation and/or extreme fetish acts.
*The Supreme Court ruling in California VS Freeman in 1989 legalized pornography. (With the states definition of what pornography)
*Our 1st Amendment also states that: "federal and lower government may not apply "prior restraint" to expression with certain exceptions such as national security and obscenity."
*It is not obscene to show genitals in sexual acts. We have the Miller VS California Supreme Court ruling (The Miller Test) to prove that the majority of what we do is not obscene.
*Prior restraint or prior censorship is censorship in which certain material may not be published or communicated, rather than not prohibiting publication but making the publisher answerable for what is made known. Prior restraint prevents the censored material from being heard or distributed at all; other measures provide sanctions only after the offending material has been communicated, such as suits for slander or libel.
So if Cal/OSHA is forcing us to use any and all types of barrier protection, how is that not censoring us from being able to fully express ourselves sexually?
Also, how is wearing barriers not forcing us to produce and distribute fraudulent products?
Can it also be said that they are in violation of the Due Process Clause of our 14th Amendment? And of our Universal Human Right Laws? Considering that everyone in Adult Industry that was at the meeting got shut down anytime we brought up valid disputes or ideas against/for their proposal, I would say yes. They were unfair, unrealistic, and have absolutely no idea about how our industry works and they don't care.
My thoughts; I don't care if Im consider an employee or not. I know that my 1st Amendment right gives me the right to sexually express myself, in the legal state definition of pornography. By forcing me to use barrier protection they are violating my rights by censoring me and not allowing me fully express myself in the way that I want to. And by not allowing me and other industry members to have any say with what we can do with our own bodies, sexual expressions, our income, or our livelihood, is denying us Due Process.
Everything with a * I got from Wikipedia. So, if I can spend a few hours online doing some research and can find all of this, why is Cal/OSHA (and we'll even throw in the AHF) still so hell bent on 'protecting' our industry? Well to me and many other industry members, they are being discriminatory against our industry for what we do. With the law clearly stating we're in our legal rights how are they not?
Help finding Alia Janine pictures!
Hello there are a few certain Alia Janine picture sets i'm looking for. I didn't find them in the freeones archive.
One set is of her wearing a ramones t-shirt iirc.
Another is of her in a white shirt giving a hand job to a chubby little dicked guy.
If anyone has these sets or know where i can find them i'd appreciate it!
Hello there are a few certain Alia Janine picture sets i'm looking for. I didn't find them in the freeones archive.
One set is of her wearing a ramones t-shirt iirc.
Another is of her in a white shirt giving a hand job to a chubby little dicked guy.
If anyone has these sets or know where i can find them i'd appreciate it!
claydavis
Major Crimes? Shiiiit.
Alia is shooting her first anal scene for Brazzers today.
https://twitter.com/#!/Alia_Janine/status/83158899213074434
https://twitter.com/#!/Alia_Janine/status/83224859857010688
https://twitter.com/#!/Alia_Janine/status/83158899213074434
https://twitter.com/#!/Alia_Janine/status/83224859857010688
I haven't studied much about law or politics and what they currently can and cannot do, but based on my version of common sense I tend to agree with you Alia. Whenever the question comes up of whether to use barrier controls or not, if the performers involved are in agreement then that's how it should be decided. Not by the employers, not by the regulators... just the performers.
If any measures should be put into place (if its not already there), violations should occur when that choice is made for the performer, or a performer is pressured (beyond expression of opinion) into making a choice via regulation, contractual obligation, or anything like that.
Like you said, they probably have the mindset that they are protecting the performers. I would guess they consider protection and stability to be more preferable than having freedom/"chaos" and variables unaccounted for.
If any measures should be put into place (if its not already there), violations should occur when that choice is made for the performer, or a performer is pressured (beyond expression of opinion) into making a choice via regulation, contractual obligation, or anything like that.
Like you said, they probably have the mindset that they are protecting the performers. I would guess they consider protection and stability to be more preferable than having freedom/"chaos" and variables unaccounted for.
claydavis
Major Crimes? Shiiiit.
She is now available for anal.
claydavis
Major Crimes? Shiiiit.
Alia's interview for ZZ Insider.
http://www.zzinsider.com/videos/view/alia_janine_exclusive_on_set_interview
http://www.zzinsider.com/videos/view/alia_janine_exclusive_on_set_interview
Terry Sleeper
Closed Account
AJ on-the-job:
http://img191.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204815206_A_01_123_377lo.JPG
http://img277.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=120488779_A_04_123_22lo.JPG
http://img291.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204914463_A_06_123_77lo.JPG
http://img140.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204940137_A_07_123_193lo.JPG
http://img139.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204998769_A_12_123_46lo.JPG
http://img191.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204815206_A_01_123_377lo.JPG
http://img277.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=120488779_A_04_123_22lo.JPG
http://img291.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204914463_A_06_123_77lo.JPG
http://img140.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204940137_A_07_123_193lo.JPG
http://img139.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=204998769_A_12_123_46lo.JPG
claydavis
Major Crimes? Shiiiit.
Preview pics for upcoming first anal scene for Brazzers.
http://static.brazzers.com/scenes/5772/preview/img/01.jpg
to
http://static.brazzers.com/scenes/5772/preview/img/15.jpg
http://static.brazzers.com/scenes/5772/preview/img/01.jpg
to
http://static.brazzers.com/scenes/5772/preview/img/15.jpg
