California discusses rules on condom use in porn

http://www.journalgazette.net/article/20110608/ENT/110609551/1007

LOS ANGELES — Porn performers complained that a proposal to mandate condom use and require testing is unfair and could push production underground, telling California officials on Tuesday the tight-knit community doesn't need the extra rules.

Performer Nicki Hunter said during a break from a meeting of California's Division of Occupational Safety & Health she trusts the people she sleeps with to protect themselves from sexually transmitted disease.

"If I wanted to have sex on camera with my husband without using a condom, I couldn't do that?" said Hunter, who was married to a fellow porn star for 13 years.

In a meeting punctuated with impassioned outrage and laughter, officials from Cal/OSHA answered questions about the rules that could require the industry to take more aggressive precautions against sexual transmission of disease.

Under the draft rules, porn producers would have to provide and require "use of condoms or other barrier protection to prevent genital and oral contact with the blood or (any other bodily fluids) of another person."

Producers would also have to provide preventive medical services, like vaccines for human papilloma virus and hepatitis. If porn performers are exposed to bodily fluids during a film, producers would be required to provide follow-up medical services. There are some proposed exemptions for oral sex.

Cal/OSHA drafted the 17-page rules in response to a complaint from an AIDS advocacy group. If the workplace safety agency decides to go forward with the rules, they would go to the state's seven-member Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board.

If the board decides to pursue the rules, the draft could become regulation after more public meetings and a ruling from the board. The process could take years.

Several adult film performers objected, saying the hygienic practices of contenders in bloody TV fighting matches don't face similar regulation.

"In sports like (mixed martial arts), where people are actually bleeding on each other, the exposure of blood-borne pathogens is already on television," sex performer Danny Wylde, 25, said.

Cal/OSHA inspector Deborah Gold said such exposure is inadvertent in sports, but in porn performances exposure to bodily fluids is intentional. She noted that there are rules governing other entertainment workplaces.

The proposed change in rules comes in response to a complaint filed in 2009 by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, calling on the state to require condoms in porn.

The AIDS advocacy group has said actors were in unsafe situations and they glamorized risky sex for audiences.

Foundation spokesman Ged Kenslea said condom use is already required under state and federal laws, but "the industry has by and large simply chosen to ignore this safety requirement while at the same time there has been little to no effective public health enforcement to date."

The state has fined producers in the porn industry on occasion for violations of workplace safety code, but the hard-to-regulate industry has been able to escape scrutiny because of its nature: Porn can be shot just about anywhere, but is typically done discreetly.

Since the complaint, Cal/OSHA has been meeting with stakeholders to discuss implementing a more specific rule.

Cal/OSHA chief counsel Amy Martin said Tuesday that porn performances that don't use condoms are already violating regulations.

The state workplace safety agency believes porn performers fall under the same workplace safety regulations that require nurses to wear protective gear to spare them exposure to blood-borne and fluid-borne illnesses, but the law has never been made specific to porn.

Under those rules, nurses are also required to be tested every time they're exposed to potentially infectious fluids.

"(In porn,) people have exposure incidents every day, they are not sent to the doctor every day and they are not tested every day because the industry is organized differently, so we are attempting to deal with that issue," Martin said.

The new standards wouldn't require STD testing. Some porn performers say they prefer working with an actor who has recently tested negative for sexually transmitted disease to using condoms, which can be unreliable.

In one outburst, a male performer in the back of the room shouted there was no more important issue than testing. Many actors yelled their agreement.

Trying to quiet the heckling crowd, Gold yelled, "I care about this industry, I care about every one of you!"

The industry can continue its norm of testing every 30 days, and provide an environment that is safer than what is required under regulation, Gold said.

Porn star Nina Hartley says she's a feminist who's been working in adult entertainment for 27 years, and she worries what the effects of a condom mandate will be on women.

Some critics of a condom mandate have said it would force porn out of California, but Hartley said it's more likely it will force "a young, rebellious group of people who already works in the margins" to work more secretively.

"And the more underground you push something, the more dangerous it is," Hartley said. "That's bad for women, bad for health, bad for everyone."

Now this is some bullshit, glad I don't live in California, if they used condom in porn, will it mean everybody not just pornstar to wear them. This could movie porn out of that state. i hear Florida is nice and alot of porn is shoot. They are trying to stop people from making there living. First the NFL Lockout now this :horse::horse::horse:
 
If it happen then I could see the porn companies move to Vegas or Florida. Vegas would welcome the adult industry with open arm because the AVN, and AEE are there. Florida is another place but most porn is shoot in Miami were Bang Bro and Reality King are shot. Man California is a fucked up place
 
cali is lame anyways. florida is much warmer and relaxed. bring more stars here!!!

I think Las Vegas would welcome the adult indurty with open arm, now Florida could be a problem. Most pornstar live in Cali and they have to travel to shoot there, but Vegas is the closer to Cali and in Vegas prostitution is legal and there is no state corporate state income tax in Nevada. There alot of places that can shoot porn there and it would help Vegas alot. Right now they are trying to get a NBA or an Team to Vegas because I hear that the Hornets or Kings could be looking at moving to Las Vegas in 2012 because the Kings can't get a new arena and the Hornets are losing money in New Orleans with the fans supporting this team and trying to kept them. NFL is a no-no because the NFL have rules on gambling. Miami is most porn is shoot like Bang Bros and Reality Kings but again the travel is a pain. I see Vegas is a good fit for the indurty
 

Will E Worm

Conspiracy...
California is broke and this is all they can think about. :facepalm:

What's next a sex license so they can check if everyone is practicing "safe sex?" :rolleyes: This is about power and money nothing more.

They all should have left the anti-American California a long time ago.
 
cali is lame anyways. florida is much warmer and relaxed. bring more stars here!!!

No, bring them to Norway! The number of films made will then go sky-high because the stars need something to do to keep them warm! :D
 

RichardNailder

Approved Content Owner
If it happen then I could see the porn companies move to Vegas or Florida. Vegas would welcome the adult industry with open arm because the AVN, and AEE are there. Florida is another place but most porn is shoot in Miami were Bang Bro and Reality King are shot. Man California is a fucked up place

Vegas IS NOT porn friendly - many producers have been driven out in the past few years. One producer inured over $40,000 in legal fees before throwing in the towel and moving to Cali.

It's my understanding that the only states in the United States where you can legally produce porn, consisting of any person(s) having sex, on camera, for pay, with the intent to make a profit, are California and New Hampshire. Those are the only two states with case-law supporting the industry. Other states either have laws forbidding it's production, no case law or case-law detrimental to the industry.

And if you read the news even poorly, you can see that Florida is not the answer either. As one of the most politically conservative states in the country, good luck moving the industry there without pissing them off and forcing motivating the "snow-birds" to enforce the already too restrictive laws.




Bottom line - this is just one more case where our freedoms are being stripped in the hopes of obtaining a minute amount of perceived security.

Damn - and I spent half my life defending "freedom" - just to be fucked by people that think we need a law for everything.
 

RichardNailder

Approved Content Owner
California is broke and this is all they can think about. :facepalm:

What's next a sex license so they can check if everyone is practicing "safe sex?" :rolleyes: This is about power and money nothing more.

They all should have left the anti-American California a long time ago.


Maybe - but if they get their way, they will collect more taxes on an already suffering industry. One current proposal is to force producers to purchase insurance from the state - one way to fool the average idiot into thinking it's not a punitive tax.
 

RichardNailder

Approved Content Owner
No, bring them to Norway! The number of films made will then go sky-high because the stars need something to do to keep them warm! :D

I like Nordic women :drool1: but having just returned from Western Europe, my experience is your girls, although fine, are too greedy :dunno:

I prefer cheap whores :D

Damn - I'd better hope none of my girls read this :anonymous
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
I like Nordic women :drool1: but having just returned from Western Europe, my experience is your girls, although fine, are too greedy :dunno:

I prefer cheap whores :D

Damn - I'd better hope none of my girls read this :anonymous

Well, sometimes you want a cheeseburger, sometimes you want a chateaubriand :2 cents:
 
Vegas IS NOT porn friendly - many producers have been driven out in the past few years. One producer inured over $40,000 in legal fees before throwing in the towel and moving to Cali.

It's my understanding that the only states in the United States where you can legally produce porn, consisting of any person(s) having sex, on camera, for pay, with the intent to make a profit, are California and New Hampshire. Those are the only two states with case-law supporting the industry. Other states either have laws forbidding it's production, no case law or case-law detrimental to the industry.

And if you read the news even poorly, you can see that Florida is not the answer either. As one of the most politically conservative states in the country, good luck moving the industry there without pissing them off and forcing motivating the "snow-birds" to enforce the already too restrictive laws.

Bottom line - this is just one more case where our freedoms are being stripped in the hopes of obtaining a minute amount of perceived security.

Damn - and I spent half my life defending "freedom" - just to be fucked by people that think we need a law for everything.


Vegas would be a good fit because you have the AVN and AEE there. Pulse alot of strip clubs are there. Brazzers shot scene in Vegas pulse pornstar live in California so it a drive there. California want to get porn out of there state but it also bring money to the state. So Vegas is a second pick.
 
Top