egafd.com

Hi folks,
As can be expected regarding this subject there are a variety of opinions, including mine now, from a non-performer or producer standpoint.

Kim, Tequila, Scott, and Elizabeth for instance all make some very astute and grounded points. Kim, I think it's brilliant for you to have taken the position of being condom only. It's great that other performers such as Tequila and Jospehine also take their stands. There's a common perception that performers don't want to use condoms, coupled with producers saying 'condom sex doesn't sell'. Thankfully it's not the case, and ladies I think you should be respected for taking this position.

Another point to bear in mind is that women such as Tequila, Anna, Josephine are not taking such a position because they want to be obstreperous, but for a far more simpler - and important - reason: their HEALTH, and the risks to it.

As for the common view in the industry that condoms in sales have a detrimental effect on sales, I'd probably agree with Tequila. There may be a dip in in the industry. But a dip would probably be relatively short-lived. Why? Because I think a lot of people seem to overlook the fact that there's more to a porn scene than a condom on a cock, or not.

If I'm watching porn, one of the last things I'm bothered about is whether a guy is 'wearing' or not. In fact, I couldn't really care. There's the location, the 'scene', the chemistry between the performers, what they're doing, how they're doing it. And the actual direction and camera work as well. All of these are vital ingredients. So given all of those ingredients for a hot scene, are we really to believe that adding a condom into the equation is going to be the death knell for sales? Ridiculous.

Let's get this straight - if you're a male porn fan with a few favourite female performers, are you really going to go off them, because they've elected to work with condoms? Of course not.

I can absolutely see where Elizabeth is coming from, with her pertinent points about performer behaviour off set. Theoretically, if the industry performers are a 'closed shop' as such and only sexually involved with tested performers, then condoms would be less of an issue. The industry is only as strong as its weakest link, and if that is a guy who is screwing a 'random' without protection, then it really does become a crapshoot (or should be that 'craBshoot'). Certs and other associated bits of paper are useless based on this sort of behaviour.

As with so many things, it comes down to a matter of trust. Elizabeth's anecdotes demonstrate that this cannot be guaranteed, and nor should it be assumed that every performer is being 100% responsible 100% of the time. Cliched I know, but it just takes one incident for it to become a problem.

So, given the lack of a 100% foolproof system for testing and detecting STD's, AND the risk of performers 'misbehaving' off set, yes I'd think that condoms in porn would be a sensible, healthy, and responsible thing for all concerned.

Oh i also forgot to say when i get my rubbers from the clinc they are FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!

So there are no excuses.. But when you mention to some guys on set about condom shoots they go "i'm not good with condoms, i'm never going to keep it up" So they fall at the first hurdle & they already have in their minds that keeping it up is never going to happen!!!! So if they are like that on a shoot what are they like not on a shoot????
I love to have random sex with random hot guys always protected but if your not wearing a rubber then who are you diving in to bed with!!! You might as well shoot up with a crack head coz that's almost the same as fucking a random.. You never know what you'll get!!! Might be lucky 1, 2 or 3 times but the next time you might not be so lucky & Hep C & HIV are not reversible like some other STD's STI's but the ones you can get rid of if not caught in time can also lead to internal scaring & leave some people sterile!!!!

Keeps safe & live a full & healthy life.. Go bareback & your asking for trouble!!!!

Elizabeth x

Jim - the nuclear industry is a strange example to quote as cases are typically handled by the Nuclear Workers Compensation Scheme - which since its foundation has paid around ?5.3M in compensation to employees exposed to radiation in the workplace.

Still, you're obviously far better qualified than myself to discuss H&S requirements and the legal complexities surrounding work related injury and illness.

So I'll leave it in your capable hands to reassure:

(a) producers that they have absolutely nothing to worry about

and

(b) models that they don't have a cat in hells chance in an action because they are "sexually reckless"

!idontbelieveit!

five years ago on here when i first said people should be wearing condoms i didn't have no support because at that time it was pack mentality, years later the cracks are massive & most are seeing sense even if its only the models as they are the important ones in this anyway.
Condoms should be made optional to the models & steps should be made among the models to achieve this, when the mention of certs first reared its head people were against them & over the years most have warmed to them & the same will happen with condoms.
I also remember being told on this forum by some producers "condoms will never be used in UK porn & if they did they wouldn't be part of it", well it may be time to start using them in your films or think about doing another job as a large percentage of models will using them within a couple of years.

I am going to see what happens, I will continue to get tested however if any model who I book wants me to wear something then I will.I wear a lot of condoms when I shoot alot of the unknowns I find and seriously it looks fine on camera,I never film the putting on or taking off and when you watch it,you can still enjoy the scene.It doesn't stick out like a saw thumb like a lot think.

Paul

I'd again like you point out that using the term "HIV Scare" as a way of referencing this situation is erroneous at best and pure denial of reality at worst.

This issue isn't about a scare.

It's about a human being, a porn industry performer, who has actually contracted Human Immunodeficiency Virus, the virus that causes Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome.

There is no cure for this disease.

So can we please stop calling this a "scare" and maybe use a term that's more grounded in the truth? Perhaps the word "infection" or the like?

I'm not trying to nit pick here and I mean that. But we have to face this for what it is and refrain from sugar-coating it as a means denying the truth.

Good point, Scott.

It seems that AIM cannot name, even to performers, the names of those diagnosed as contracted AIDS or indeed those on a quarentine list.

This is owing to AIM being sued by ex-pornstud Darren James who was involved in a previous HIV outbreak, and sued AIM for releasing his name etc.

So how can an industry continue to shoot were nobody can be told who is infected or on a quarentine list ?
Surely the "data protection" thing would be the same for the UK industry, if we had a central administration group.

a quick response to one of the contributors on this post. I have been a policeman, and a soldier, with friends in the fire brigade, and currently have a brother dodging terry taliban in afghan. With all due respect to this contributor, how dare he compare the porn actor business with these professions, with people who do take calculated risks for the good of their fellow men and women. Oh, and as he may or may not know, I have also done the porn actor bit as well. Jon
on behalf of josephine James

Just looking on the Luke Ford website & it's saying 20 people have been confirmed as HIV positive from this last outbreak..

Read it here...

http://lukeford.com/2010-10-12/attentio ... your-life/