Condom Legislation and the Adult Film Industry

[Borgholio]

Step in the right direction. With all the idiots spamming "unconstitutional" about everything from software piracy to using condoms on the set of a porn flick, this is one thing that I think does legitimately qualify as a constitutional issue. Restricting marriage is as bad as restricting the right to vote based on sex or skin color.

[Batman]

I'm almost inevitably going to regret asking, but how in Valen's name does one argue porn movie actors using condoms is unconstitutional?

[Stormin]

Freedom of expression

[Borgholio]

There's a ballot measure here in the Los Angeles area that would require porn actors working in the area to use condoms and submit to regular health and safety inspections by the local government. One porn star came out and said it was unconstitutional to force them to wear condoms.

Yeah, I have to draw the line there. Forcing an industry to comply with health and safety standards for it's workers is somehow unconstitutional because it is the porn industry, as opposed to factories, restaurants or office buildings where the state has been enforcing regulations for years.

[Borgholio]

Freedom of expression

Yeah that's the porn industry's argument in a nutshell. Problem with that argument is that the government wants to regulate health and safety in regards to people who have sex for a living. Freedom of expression only kicks in when the government tries to regulate what you do in your private life.

[Terralthra]

There's a ballot measure here in the Los Angeles area that would require porn actors working in the area to use condoms and submit to regular health and safety inspections by the local government. One porn star came out and said it was unconstitutional to force them to wear condoms.

Yeah, I have to draw the line there. Forcing an industry to comply with health and safety standards for it's workers is somehow unconstitutional because it is the porn industry, as opposed to factories, restaurants or office buildings where the state has been enforcing regulations for years.

The porn industry already has much more stringent health inspections and testing than anywhere else on the planet. Despite frequent sex without barrier methods, the actresses and actors have an STI transmission rate orders of magnitude lower than the general population. We should be trying to figure out what they're doing right, not telling them to do it our way.

[Terralthra]

Hear it from someone who's actually involved:

Testing vs. Condoms in Pornography
Monday, Sept 17th:
I woke up. I showered, washed my hair, and carefully shaved my underarms, legs, and genitals… avoiding any cuts or razorburn. I gently brushed my teeth and skipped flossing as dental floss can cause small cuts on gums. I went to the location where we were filming my newest pornographic movie for Digital Playground.

My test hadn’t been uploaded to the APHSS database yet. The APHSS database replaces the extremely difficult to tamper with STD/STI test viewing system that the adult industry lost when AIM was shut down. We were already transitioning over to this database when Mr. Marcus recently became infected with Syphilis and faked his test results, and most of the major production companies are now requiring that all performers be listed in the APHSS database as cleared to work before performing a scene. Even though my test (which was negative for HIV, Syphilis, Gonorrhea and Chlamydia) had been emailed directly from the testing facility to the production manager, we waited about an hour until my test results were uploaded and the database showed a green check mark next to my name before shooting anything.

Makeup was applied to my face and things involving a straightening iron were done to my hair. I was dressed by wardrobe. We began shooting the story part of the movie. James Deen, the male performer I was working with that day, arrived on set. Manwin is the company that owns Digital Playground. Their PR person arrived on set with a science correspondent from the New York Times named Donald McNeil and his photographer. Mr. McNeil was there to observe what we do before shooting a sex scene. He said he was interested in the adult industry because we haven’t had a single case of HIV transmission within the industry in 8 years and there is no other community he knows of that has that low of a transmission rate. A couple of performers have been infected with HIV outside of the heterosexual oriented porn industry and been identified as positive before passing it on to anyone else. Others who wanted to enter the adult industry have been identified as positive before entering it. Since the infections of Darren James, Miss Arroyo, Jessica Dee, and Laura Roxx in 2004, there has not been a single transmission of HIV on an adult film set in the US.

After we had filmed everything James Deen and I were needed for aside from the sex scene, we filled out our paperwork. This includes a performer release, tax forms and 2257 documentation to prove we are over 18. The production manager printed out a copy of each performer’s page in the APHSS database. I signed my own copy and James’s, indicating that my results were mine and accurate and that I had seen James’s and was comfortable working with him and his clean test which had been taken less than 14 days prior. He did the same. Then the production manager performed an inspection. He looked in our mouths, at both sides of our hands, and at our genitals to make sure there were no visible sores or open wounds. There was another paper to sign stating that we have no sores or open wounds on or in our mouths, hands, and genitals and had been inspected. We also looked at each others genitals, mostly for fun but if either of us had seen (or smelled) something odd we would have called off the scene ourselves. Then we said goodbye to the reporters (who didn’t seem interested in sticking around for the fun part) and had fun, uninhibited sex together while the camera crew filmed it.

We were able to have fun, uninhibited sex with each other without a condom because we both knew that the chances of either of us being infected with an STD are very low. Far lower than, say, a stranger at a bar or a person who hasn’t been tested in a year or more. Our frequent STD testing, the APHSS database (and AIM before them), and the skin inspections are self-imposed. The adult industry created these procedures to keep themselves safer. I follow these procedures to keep myself safer, and because it is required in order to be able to work. When any performer tests positive for HIV or Syphilis, we stop production voluntarily. When I (fairly rarely) have sex with someone outside of the adult industry, I use a condom (Full disclosure: unless we have both been tested very recently, I am on a hiatus from the adult industry, and we are only having sex with each other - also known as monogamy) because I don’t want to catch anything and bring it into our talent pool. I don’t want to catch anything and be unable to work.

Measure B claims to be attempting to fix a problem that doesn’t really exist, and ignores the highly successful health and safety measures that the adult industry already has in place. If everyone in the world got tested every 14 to 28 days, was as educated as we are about the risks they take when they have sex, and called a halt to sexual activity any time one person tested positive for an STI until the incubation period had passed and everyone had been re-tested, there would probably be a lower rate of infection outside the adult industry as well.

(emphases mine)

I'm not sure what else needs to be said, really.

[Borgholio]

Lest there be any confusion, I oppose B. I think we need to worry about far more important things. Plus it's quite true, if their rate of infection is less than average, we should be praising them rather than forcing them to do more.

[Flagg]

What about the benefits condoms in porn may impart upon the audience?

[Jub]

What about the benefits condoms in porn may impart upon the audience?

Why should the governemt force porn to use condoms instead of just making sexual helath classes that actually work?

[Grumman]

What about the benefits condoms in porn may impart upon the audience?

If that's your argument, then you are violating their freedom of expression. What's next, action movies aren't allowed to show people smashing through glass windows, because some dumbass in the audience might try to copy them?

[Terralthra]

What about the benefits condoms in porn may impart upon the audience?

• If people are using pornography as sex education, they have huge problems. Porn is not sex ed, nor should it be.
• The example porn sets by existing is that "condom use all the time" is not a cure-all for STI infection, nor is it even reliable itself. Condoms help protect against HIV (not 100%, even with perfect use), yes, but not HPV, HSV, nor some of the bacterial infections. Making the porn industry switch from a system with an extremely high efficacy to a system with less efficacy, so that people watching porn and using it as sex ed (idiots, in other words), start using a system with less efficacy...this seems to you like a good thing?
• Requiring condom use in all intercourse scenes isn't good sex ed either. It doesn't, for example, require condom use for oral sex on a male (required to prevent the transmission of gonorrhea, HSV, HPV, etc.), dental dams for a female (required to prevent transmission of trich, HSV, gonorrhea, HPV, etc.), getting a new condom to go from vaginal to anal or vice-versa, getting a new condom when going from one woman to another in a 2f1m scene...
• The example porn sets, with frequent testing, inspection, halting sexual activity if there's a positive, etc., is one of risk-awareness, informed consent, and critical thinking. That's already the best possible example to set for people about STI risks, because that's the best approach, as evidence clearly bears out.
• People don't know about the stuff that goes on behind the scenes in porn? Not porn's problem! People don't know about all the safety precautions that go into movie fight scenes and stunts, either. It's not real. It's a movie. If one can legally access porn, one should be able to tell the difference between fantasy and goddamn reality. Adjusting laws to require porn industry participants to follow unnecessary (in light of their existing safety protocols) procedures isn't going to protect cletus and slackjaw from using a Snickers wrapper as a condom.

Like I said: porn's safety record on STIs is ridiculously better than the general population. We should mandate educating everyone in the methods they use to ensure their health and safety, not making an already safe industry change their methods.

[Alyeska]

There's a ballot measure here in the Los Angeles area that would require porn actors working in the area to use condoms and submit to regular health and safety inspections by the local government. One porn star came out and said it was unconstitutional to force them to wear condoms.

Yeah, I have to draw the line there. Forcing an industry to comply with health and safety standards for it's workers is somehow unconstitutional because it is the porn industry, as opposed to factories, restaurants or office buildings where the state has been enforcing regulations for years.

Its about legal technicalities. You cannot pay someone to have sex. But you can pay to watch two consenting people while they have sex. Its a bullshit technicality, but a very real one.

For all practical purposes, if you mandate porn actors wear condoms, it could be argued that you have mandated that EVERYONE wear condoms. And of course it would quickly go to court as an invasion of privacy.

[Dalton]

This thread has been split from the DOMA thread in N&P.

[Terralthra]

Thanks, Dalton. Sorry for the derail.

[Borgholio]

For all practical purposes, if you mandate porn actors wear condoms, it could be argued that you have mandated that EVERYONE wear condoms. And of course it would quickly go to court as an invasion of privacy.

Yeah it can quickly spiral out of control. Still, my beef with it is that it's not "unconstitutional" if it's just a mandate on the porn industry. If it invades people's private lives...then that's a whole different matter.

[Scrib]

Didn't the mayor of this town come out and basically say:"We don't want these people here". Methinks that there's another agenda here...

As for porn it seems that their testing is pretty good, so I'm not as torn on the issue as I would be. If their testing system is good and ubiquitous then let the adults choose.

[ArmorPierce]

I actually know some people in the porn industry. STDs such as Gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes and hpv are pretty much inevitable when working without condom use despite testing requirements. Is there any source that states that a porn worker is less likely to get a std? Maybe per sex encounter but I doubt it is less than the general population.

[Flagg]

I just don't see the problem, really. Condoms help stop disease just like gloves do with food workers. It's both a workplace safety and public health concern.

[Terralthra]

I just laid out like 5 reasons why not. Maybe try scrolling up?

Also, porn is not food service. Porn actors and actresses aren't "serving" sex to hundreds of customers per day, they're doing it with each other, on a screen. The analogy would be more like requiring actors and actresses in movies wearing gloves when making dinner for their in-film family, because the actors/actresses are working, so it's "workplace safety", and to show everyone who watches it what you should do if you want to be sure you don't spread illness.

Food service comparisons are far more analogous to sex workers with their clients. I doubt you'd find many sex workers who would argue with requiring condoms in sex work.

[Flagg]

I just laid out like 5 reasons why not. Maybe try scrolling up?

Also, porn is not food service. Porn actors and actresses aren't "serving" sex to hundreds of customers per day, they're doing it with each other, on a screen. The analogy would be more like requiring actors and actresses in movies wearing gloves when making dinner for their in-film family, because the actors/actresses are working, so it's "workplace safety", and to show everyone who watches it what you should do if you want to be sure you don't spread illness.

Food service comparisons are far more analogous to sex workers with their clients. I doubt you'd find many sex workers who would argue with requiring condoms in sex work.

Except people are having sex and that has the risk of spreading disease. Just because you wash your hands after using the bathroom every time without fail or having to do so doesn't mean there shouldn't be regulations in place requiring you to do so.

[Flagg]

What about the benefits condoms in porn may impart upon the audience?

• If people are using pornography as sex education, they have huge problems. Porn is not sex ed, nor should it be.

Agreed. This doesn't mean it cannot promote good habits such as condom use, though.

[*]The example porn sets by existing is that "condom use all the time" is not a cure-all for STI infection, nor is it even reliable itself. Condoms help protect against HIV (not 100%, even with perfect use), yes, but not HPV, HSV, nor some of the bacterial infections. Making the porn industry switch from a system with an extremely high efficacy to a system with less efficacy, so that people watching porn and using it as sex ed (idiots, in other words), start using a system with less efficacy...this seems to you like a good thing?

They can do both.

[*]Requiring condom use in all intercourse scenes isn't good sex ed either. It doesn't, for example, require condom use for oral sex on a male (required to prevent the transmission of gonorrhea, HSV, HPV, etc.), dental dams for a female (required to prevent transmission of trich, HSV, gonorrhea, HPV, etc.), getting a new condom to go from vaginal to anal or vice-versa, getting a new condom when going from one woman to another in a 2f1m scene...

Sounds like a problem with the law. So change it to require those things.

[*]The example porn sets, with frequent testing, inspection, halting sexual activity if there's a positive, etc., is one of risk-awareness, informed consent, and critical thinking. That's already the best possible example to set for people about STI risks, because that's the best approach, as evidence clearly bears out.

Again, you can do all that and still require condom use.

[*]People don't know about the stuff that goes on behind the scenes in porn? Not porn's problem! People don't know about all the safety precautions that go into movie fight scenes and stunts, either. It's not real. It's a movie. If one can legally access porn, one should be able to tell the difference between fantasy and goddamn reality. Adjusting laws to require porn industry participants to follow unnecessary (in light of their existing safety protocols) procedures isn't going to protect cletus and slackjaw from using a Snickers wrapper as a condom.[/list]

It's not a fantasy, people are sticking their genitals in each other. Having sex. For real. And it is in the porn industry's interest to educate people on the safety measures taken.

Like I said: porn's safety record on STIs is ridiculously better than the general population. We should mandate educating everyone in the methods they use to ensure their health and safety, not making an already safe industry change their methods.

Good for them. And who said anything about making them change their methods? They can easily take the voluntary precautions they already take (which should probably be mandatory anyway) and use condoms for the safety of the actors and the benefit of the viewers.

[Jub]

Flagg, why should it be the job of pornopgraphy to promote safer sex when the sex they are having is already very safe? Should the task of education not fall to parents and schools?

[Flagg]

Flagg, why should it be the job of pornopgraphy to promote safer sex when the sex they are having is already very safe? Should the task of education not fall to parents and schools?

I think you can do both.

[Jub]

Flagg, why should it be the job of pornopgraphy to promote safer sex when the sex they are having is already very safe? Should the task of education not fall to parents and schools?

I think you can do both.

The question is why should they? You don't make sure that Hollywood has to show everything in as safe a manner as possible so why do this for porn?