LA city requires condoms now on all porn shoots

[Guest EXPAT]

http://www.gayporntimes.com/hardnews/2012/01/18/l-a-city-council-approves-condom-law-for-adult-films/

While I think all men should use condoms whenever they have sex, I think requiring it in a law is over stepping civil liberties. It's a fine line in having government get involved in stuff like this. But I guess you could say "washing your hands" by food service workers is also a civil liberty being regulated too. When it involves the health of others, maybe it should be regulated like this. Interesting debate.

Now discuss. . .

[TampaYankee]

http://www.gayporntimes.com/hardnews/2012/01/18/l-a-city-council-approves-condom-law-for-adult-films/

While I think all men should use condoms whenever they have sex, I think requiring it in a law is over stepping civil liberties. It's a fine line in having government get involved in stuff like this. But I guess you could say "washing your hands" by food service workers is also a civil liberty being regulated too. When it involves the health of others, maybe it should be regulated like this. Interesting debate.

Now discuss. . .

It ain't over till it's over...

Seems to be an issue who and how this will be enforced before it actually can take effect. Also, I believe the Vivid CEO said if this actually comes to pass that most if not all of the industry will leave LA.

I suspect that is a threat to get the city fathers to reconsider. I also expect it will probably happen if not reconsidered. I could see the industry relocating to San Diego or Vegas among other places, if not just outside LA borders somewhere.

Stay tuned.

[TotallyOz]

Of course, a great deal has been said and discussed here at the porn convention in Vegas. Several companies I know are looking to relocate as some think this is just the first step into closing out the industry in So Cal.

[Guest hitoallusa]

If it protects people in the industry who can't protect themselves then I'm all for it. If people can regulate themselves and all nice then we don't need government. That's not the case.

[BiBottomBoy]

The thing is that for straight porn, studies have shown that condom usage increases the chances of HIV transmission - because the shoots go on for so long that the latex itself creatues small fissures in the vaginal walls which make it much more likely for her to get infected during her personal life.

So, the industry is going to have to take the city to court over this - because they can't use a policy that will kill their talent.

[Guest hitoallusa]

Oh my cute the paper please, BBB.. I want to see how they performed the experiments for the paper and how they collected the data..

[BiBottomBoy]

It's just general medical data. Even if you aer not a porn star doctors will tell you not to fuck for more than an hour with a condom because latex is an abrasive material.

[caeron]

This is typical stupidity of small town government. You can't regulate these things at this level. If people don't want to do it, they'll just move. So all you do is annoy the companies and damage your economy.

[Guest NCBored]

It's just general medical data. Even if you aer not a porn star doctors will tell you not to fuck for more than an hour with a condom because latex is an abrasive material.

I would think that skin-on-skin for an hour or more would cause some damage too.

Is there really any data to back this up, or is it speculative?

[TotallyOz]

I had time today to sit down and chat with the lawyers who are representing the Free Speech Coalition. Perfect being at the right place at the right time. It was a great discussion and they told me the basis of the case as they are seeking an injunction to stop the law from taking effect.

There were many points they went over but the interesting ones were that they were negotiating with the OSHA for new guidelines when all this started. They said the industry was already very strictly monitored and the new laws would require a public health inspector to be present at EVERY shooting in order to make sure the condoms were placed on appropriately etc. Needless to say, that will be costly.

Also it was interesting that the group that got this pushed through spent over 6 million dollars. Amazing that a 3rd party group is so interested right?

Guess what else that group has purposed? That every gay bar be required by law to give condoms to their customers. Another one, they want to close down the bathhouses and saunas in West Hollywood and if they can't get them closed, they want to have a monitor in place to make sure things are done safely.

Lastly, I just happened to have access to 24 porn stars today. All of them were in the straight industry and none in gay films. But, I asked them how often they were tested for HIV. 3 of the said once per month. The other 19 said 2 times per month.

It sounds to me like they are intelligent and cautious individuals. Their job does put them at more risk to get STD's than other jobs for sure but I think coal miners also have more risk for certain diseases that the majority of the population. Just an observation.

[BiBottomBoy]

It's not speculative at all. And, no, skin on skin contact doesn't create the same level of friction, because vaginas are designed for skin on skin contact, and dick, unlike latex, doesn't dry out the vaginal walls.

I've been involved in the porn industry from a marketing perespective for years and know many actresses/actors in the industry and all of their doctors have told them that condoms on set would be very, very bad for their health.

And, the actresses themselves don't want them. Check out Stoya's comments on the issue.

http://stoya.tumblr.com/post/32205235912/testing-vs-condoms-in-pornography

[TampaYankee]

I'm surprised the guys haven't already secured on a temporary basis warehouse space outside the city limits to continue operations while they pursue a more permanent solution. .

[BiBottomBoy]

The problem is that porn isn't shot today the way it used to be. It's not a ragttag affair. They use professional equpment and lighting now - and they have to get insurance and have willing stars.

Because of the low incidence of STDs in straight porn shot in L.A. they've never had an insurance problem before - but insurance companies are much, much less willing to ensure sets outsideof L.A. because in other less self-regulated regions they've had more problems.

Plus, the stars themselves are less willing to work outside L.A. becuase they've come to trust the L.A. production standards which they think could fall in another region.

[Guest hitoallusa]

Oz what about the other two left out. You must have been very busy today. Anyways, if BBB is correct then it will be better to leave it to the industry.

[BiBottomBoy]

Yeah, the thing is the rate of STD infection among hetero porn stars is 1/100th of the rate among the general hetero population.

So, you know, they are doing something right.

[TampaYankee]

The problem is that porn isn't shot today the way it used to be. It's not a ragttag affair. They use professional equpment and lighting now - and they have to get insurance and have willing stars.

Because of the low incidence of STDs in straight porn shot in L.A. they've never had an insurance problem before - but insurance companies are much, much less willing to ensure sets outsideof L.A. because in other less self-regulated regions they've had more problems.

Plus, the stars themselves are less willing to work outside L.A. becuase they've come to trust the L.A. production standards which they think could fall in another region.

A quarter of a mile is outside of LA. It's not like they have to go to Zambia.

[BiBottomBoy]

Tell that to an insurance company.

[JKane]

It ain't over till it's over...

Seems to be an issue who and how this will be enforced before it actually can take effect. Also, I believe the Vivid CEO said if this actually comes to pass that most if not all of the industry will leave LA.

I suspect that is a threat to get the city fathers to reconsider. I also expect it will probably happen if not reconsidered. I could see the industry relocating to San Diego or Vegas among other places, if not just outside LA borders somewhere.

Stay tuned.

Sadly, I'm fairly sure there are no city fathers losing sleep at night over how to keep the porn industry. Maybe one or two city councilmen from the valley are indifferent at best, everybody else would prefer to never think about/deal with porn production again. Sure, *we* all know it's become a lot less seedy lately and employes a lot of people, but that doesn't change the perspective most have of it, and there are still people who regularly encourage that bad reputation. Maybe the writing's been on the wall for LA county since AIM Healthcare was driven out of business...

And I can think of no place waiting with open arms for the industry to move in, either.

With its porn convention(s), massive indigenous stripper and "more" population, and generally low prices/underemployment Vegas would seem the best fit. But tourists miss that the state is actually fairly conservative with a strong Mormon bent. So going big and on the books like mainstream production is in LA may quickly run into the same obstacles--or stronger. Of course many under the radar productions currently happen there, and have tainted the view of Vegas for industry workers. And while it is at least close to LA, there's little to no local production support/talent/spaces/equipment/etc.

Almost everything else I've heard proposed is laughable because the city in question is far more expensive and probably already thinking they don't want porn in their town... the separately incorporated areas of LA like Pasadena, uber-conservative Orange or San Diego counties...

That leaves San Fransisco or maybe West Hollywood. Both are much more expensive than the SFV (at a time porn makes less and less money the old fashioned ways). And both might have a substantial population that has a knee-jerk reaction to encourage condom use in all porn because of its importance in gay porn.

There are some very poor counties around Los Angeles county where people desperately need work, Kern County, Riverside / Inland Empire, possibly parts of San Bernandino or Ventura... But most have conservative leanings and are likely to react poorly to a large above-board buildup by the adult industry in their community--if anybody in the industry wanted to live in the desolate desert.

So a fractured mish-mash with different studios going different places, some trying to do it on the fly/cheap, destroying the safety and even (to us few at least) respectability that has been built up over the years seems most likely to me.

Which would seem the inevitable trajectory anyway, because it's hard to imagine big-studio type porn ever being anywhere near as profitable as it once was. Who here has paid for porn in the last two years? Maybe some websites with their own content make some money, but they were never a part of the Vivid/big studio system we're wringing our hands about here...

My $0.02.

[BiBottomBoy]

The thing is porn can make money. The movie "Pirates" did well over $75 million in sales.

When they offer a superior product people do pay for it.

[JKane]

It could, "Pirates" was a long time ago, if I recall. Back when a lot of things could make money because people bought DVDs.

The thing is porn can make money. The movie "Pirates" did well over $75 million in sales.

When they offer a superior product people do pay for it.

[BiBottomBoy]

My understanding is that lots of not-tech savy people still buy DVDs because they are terrified that free porn will infect their computer/be found on their computer by people they don't want to find it.