egafd.com

It seems the threat of moving production out of LA County, and the subsequent loss of tax revenue, was enough to defeat the measure making condom use mandatory.

If only our own industry was strong enough to say to the government, 'Get rid of ATVOD or we will relocate abroad'. Dream on.

The last paragraph of the article strongly suggests that the mandatory use
of condoms is a measure that will be re-introduced in the next Session of
the Legislature. Mr Weinstein and his pro-condom lobby will not let go of this
and, as he says, public opinion is moving in favour of protection, (though
porn makers, porn stars, and the majority of porn fans, clearly prefer sex to
be condom free).

How can you make it law that people have to use condoms when having sex, surely that is up to the people concerned, we all know it's safer with condoms but i dont see how you can make it compulsory !

It would be very difficult to legislate condom use for private people having sex in private but on a porn set where paid performers are indulging in sexual activities it could/would be classed as a "Place Of Work" and would therefore come under "Employment Laws" and "Health & Safety legislation".

Myson
!oldie!

I won't comment on this blog by American porn performer Nina Harley, I'll leave that to those more knowledgable than I.



I will point out the following 3 points written in the blog though.

The blog states that Nina Hartley is:
"both a 30 year adult industry legend, a registered nurse and one of the founders of the Adult Industry Medical Foundation (the predecessor to adult performer testing service FSCPASS)"

Regarding Mr Weinstein and the AFH, one paragraph states:
"(and BTW, Aids Healthcare Foundation, the outfit largely responsible for creating not only the current controversy surrounding porn industry STD safeguards but also the more complex and error-prone system of safeguards we have now than existed before they made porn their favorite target, resolutely opposes funding for HIV vaccine research ?because it will divert funds from treatment for existing cases,? which are the source of AHF?s $200 million per year income)"

On the same subject, another paragraph further down states:
"In this case, Aids Healthcare Foundation, the largest HIV service organization in the world (and a stakeholder in the world?s largest condom manufacturer, BTW) has taken it upon itself to come after the porn business in order to force condom use on performers......"

I'll leave it to the readers to make their own mind up.

Myson
!oldie!

My point wasn't so much about mandatory condom use, and it being at least delayed by industry threats to move, as a plaintive wish that our own producers could command enough clout to say 'Enough with the ATVOD restrictions already!' and have some influence on policy. Sadly, the government and the likes of Johnson and his fatuous organisation would probably be glad to be rid of porn production in the UK altogether. If only UK non-adult material producers/site owners such as the BBC and news organisations had stood up more robustly to the proposals some years ago, we might not now be strangled by inane and rather pointless regulation.

If you could legislate and make condoms compulsory in pornos then it would just create a black market in bareback films, and that's where the money would be so it could actually make things worse as far as stds are concerned..

planeterotica wrote:

> If you could legislate and make condoms compulsory in pornos
> then it would just create a black market in bareback films, and
> that's where the money would be so it could actually make
> things worse as far as stds are concerned..
>
>

You are absolutely right, it is the law of unintended consequences which politicians never understand. Make it impossible to make porn in LA, and it will move a few miles down the road to Tijuana, and there will be no controls or safeguards at all.