The Condom Debate (As I See It) by Danny Wylde
 

Read Danny's Blog for his take on the Condom Debate and how important it is for talent and producers to show up at the Medical Meeting with the Cal-OSHA (California Division of Occupational Safety and Health) Board of Directors Addressing Adult Industry Regulation

June 7th, 2011, 10am
CalTrans Building
100 S. Main St.
Los Angeles, CA 90012

Link to Blog Page

A good read!

No Fear, Just Knowledge...:pimp

I fear the knowledge after 9pm :)

During AIM's decade of operation, there were a total of TWO demonstrable transmissions of HIV on porn sets, as against nearly 20,000 new cases in Los Angeles County during that same time period.

And yet AHF and its cronies in government used every means, most especially nuisance litigation to destroy AIM, in the full knowledge that shredding this safety net would unquestionably increase the health risk for all performers.

The medium is the bump.

Morning Refresher....and a cup of Joe.

Rob -- how many FSC Lobby Days have you been to ?

As I live in Texas, I have never been to a Lobby Day in California.

However, I do try to attend other events such as the ICANN meeting in SF when the .XXX was approved.

Well I attended 3 of them over the past 6 yrs and each and every year, I was personally asked by various Legislators and their staffs when the industry was going to "clean up its act" and "treat performers better ?" I am sure I wasnt the only one questioned as to that issue.

In California, we were given the ability to self police this issue and we didnt.

So regs are what we are going to be stuck with - until and if - someone like Hustler takes the issue up on appeal under a First Amendment theory. Flynt might be the last guy in the industry with the war chest to fight this. I hope he does.

Jesus Christ himself can attend the meeting on June 7th and it wouldnt change a thing. I have been to two of these meetings and didnt appear to me that Gold or anyone on her board had any interest in working with the industry.

If Flynt decides not to - is the FSC going to challenge these regs through litigation when they become law ? If not, can you ask them why ?

What did the legislators mean by "clean up its act" and "treat performers better"?

Did they offer specific instances of performer mistreatment or meaningful suggestions? Or, spout some vague generalities?

I do not know what action the FSC Board will decide to take in the event the proposed new regulations take effect. I'm sure the FSC will release a press release when appropriate that will explain the orgranization's position and the reasons behind that position.

They specifically called for performer health insurance, work comp and condoms. The rest I cannot remember specifics, but most of the legislators and aides were pro industry that we met with. Few were attacking us.

I was one of the people that attended a meeting with Rep Calderon a couple of years ago when he was trying to push his porn tax bill through. He just wanted money for the state. In my opinion he was not trying to drive the industry out. He just, as many do, falsely believed we were awash in cash and the state should get a cut.

I sincerely hope that the FSC puts as much effort towards this as they did .XXX and 2257. Condoms should be optional, not mandatory. This is also a free speech issue.

One of the problems as I understand it is that most performers are not employees; but, private contractors. Therefore, the production company is under no liability to provide any insurance beside liability for injury while working on the set. Same for workman's comp. No independent contractor is going to carry and pay for their own workmans comp.

The insurance needs of talent require an complete reoganization of the industry's talent from independent contractors to employees. This would also limit the work options of talent which I'm sure they will never approve of as they will lose their independence, real or imagined.

Food for thought.

Well thats were you are wrong. In California its well settled that performers are employees for work comp purposes.

I have settled several claims on the behalf of performers against producers for work comp injuries. Many of the major studios carry comp and use payroll services to cover their performers. The ones that dont are merely taking a huge risk.

There is no reorganization. The law is what creates the EE relationship not a decision by the industry.

Being an employee actually gives them more rights, not less. And it actually protects employers that follow the law since being an employees means any on set injuries are work comp claims and not personal injury lawsuits. Work comp doesnt pay any where close to what a PI case would. There is no pain and suffering recovery allowed in work comp and thats where the big money usually is in a PI lawsuit.

I wouldn't hold your breath on that one.

But I do believe that the use of condoms should be up to the individual. However, they should be fully informed of all the risks and not led to believe that if they have a hiv test, they are in the clear. All sexually transmitted diseases should be tested for. Then lay it out for the performers to decide if he/she wants to catch herpes today and HPV tomorrow, or if they are at risk for hepatitis as well as HIV, chlamydia, gonorrhea, and syphilis.

That is how you take care of performers. :2 cents:

Bump for tomorrow's meeting.

No, you are wrong. This is a worker safety issue. Show me any other industry where someone can take a load of a possibly deadly chemical agent to the face and not be required to use safety equipment. Go to just about any other workplace in America and you'll see people using all kinds of safety gear. Condoms suck as far as porn is concerned but people should be able to work without risking their lives.

This workplace involves speech. Your example is not analogous. While I agree performers are entitled to be safe there are less restrictive means to achieve such without violating their or a producer's Constitutional rights. Some performers do not wish to be forced to use condoms.

It should be their choice.

If there is a safe way to take a load up the ass from someone who has sex with multiple people for pay, I'm all ears.

ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME !! Well then all bars and nighclubs should be closed down as there is so much unprotected sex that originates from a drink or 5 in a nightclub. A constuction worker is not required by law to wear work gloves when he/she works but they have a choice. People also have the choice NOT to work in this industry or NOT to work with no condoms being used. You risk your life every time you breathe the air in this world.
Next thing will be government telling us what religion or god to believe in huh. If you dont like working without a condom then turn down the scene when you get booked for it.

If the piss poor arguments presented in the blog are the best "the industry" can do then the argument is lost.

It is not a matter a freedom when a performer works if he puts his life at risk and is unemployed if he doesn't. Some choice. Some freedom.

Testing once a month is meaningless, a lot of performers work as escorts, a broken condom the night before and a death sentence for the performers.

Just because people will continue to do something in another country does not make it right. Change has to start somewhere.

People prefer condom less porn? I bet they prefer racing driving without seat belts too, Boxing without gloves, so what?

A hot naked girls sell with or without condom.

We make our performers use condoms (unless they are a real couple living together ) because even though our erotic films are the best in the world, they are not worth the life of a human being.

One test (full panel) one shoot. No exceptions.

Bump for meeting.

Michael,

One Test = One Shoot. Maybe if next 2 or 3 days.

Problems arise if outside industry sex is occurring such as escorting between testing and shoot dates.

That's completely impractical though. What are the popular talent going to do- get tested 15-20 times in a month? Many of the female talent will do two shoots in a day when they are brand new and many of the males will occasionally double or even triple book themselves in a single day. Then you have the cases where a producer shoots the same female model multiple days in a row. Are they supposed to drive the model back and forth to the testing center each morning? Just saying, that's not going to work. The current standards are working pretty well considering just how much sex is going on in the biz every day.

Great read. ^^

There are many examples of apples and oranges.
The argument of the performer can turn down the scene will not fly.
This was the same argument about bartenders, they could go get another job to not breathe smoke.

That is the sure fire way, but even you know thats not going to happen. Imagine what talents arms would look like after shooting 45 days in 2 months? Look like drug users. You will need a make up artists that specialize in hiding track marks.:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh




The condom thing is going to pass and it will be nationwide. It will put the nail in the DVD coffin.



Underground here we go.