• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

California proposal to require condoms in porn

brainhulk

brainhulk

Diamond Member
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110527/ap_on_he_me/us_porn_industry_condoms

California workplace safety officials have drafted rules to require porn performers to use condoms and other barriers in sex scenes to prevent being infected with sexually transmitted diseases.

Cal/OSHA officials provided the 17-page draft proposal to The Associated Press on Friday, and it is to be discussed at a public meeting in Los Angeles on June 7.

The draft would then go to the state's Occupational Safety & Health Standards Board for a ruling on whether it becomes part of state code.

Some major porn producers have opposed the use of condoms in porn in the past, arguing that a state rule would drive the porn industry out of California and that audiences don't want to watch protected sex
Click to expand...

bye bye San Fernando Valley, porn capital of the world
 
Last edited:
coldmeat said:
Who cares if he's wearing a condom? I don't watch porn to get a good view of the guy's dick.
Click to expand...

It removes the creampie genre.

Personally, I'm not in favor of it due to its "nanny state" aspect; if the porn actors sign disclaimers and voluntarily don't use condoms, that's fine with me. Personal responsibility is a good thing.
 
Most actors must provide proof that they do not have STD's. These people make up what....00001% of the population? This is just more nanny state bullshit.
 
If I were a porn star i'd be in favor of this. As a watcher, I'm not thrilled about it, but if it helps them stay safe then I'd support it. I think they are safe most of the time because they test often, but sometimes actors/actresses will do stupid shit like go do porn in Brazil and contract HIV, then come back and spread it to many other adult actors/actresses before the testing uncovers what is going on. I don't envy the stress they have of having to worry about that as a danger of my career.
 
I'm in favor of this. It's a safety issue, STD tests aren't 100%, numerous performers have been killed by them.

This is a situation where in nearly all cases, the producers have the power - don't want a condom, they can easily replace you - where such a rule could be a big help.

Kadarin, you're an ideologue. Forget the issue of safety - it offends your dogma.
 
Ghiddy said:
If I were a porn star i'd be in favor of this. As a watcher, I'm not thrilled about it, but if it helps them stay safe then I'd support it. I think they are safe most of the time because they test often, but sometimes actors/actresses will do stupid shit like go do porn in Brazil and contract HIV, then come back and spread it to many other adult actors/actresses before the testing uncovers what is going on. I don't envy the stress they have of having to worry about that as a danger of my career.
Click to expand...

HIV really isn't that easily transmitted.

Are there any kind of stats or info about STD transfer in porn? It's the sort of thing that the industry itself would be keen to prevent.
 
Craig234 said:
I'm in favor of this. It's a safety issue, STD tests aren't 100%, numerous performers have been killed by them.

This is a situation where in nearly all cases, the producers have the power - don't want a condom, they can easily replace you - where such a rule could be a big help.

Kadarin, you're an ideologue. Forget the issue of safety - it offends your dogma.
Click to expand...

With all due respect, the risks of unprotected sex are well known to everyone. Where is the personal responsibility? Why does the government need to be involved? There are many things as dangerous or more dangerous to an individual (like free climbing in Yosemite -- read that article in NatGeo a couple of months ago!) that aren't regulated/outlawed. Should they be?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top