Guest fountainhall Posted January 25, 2012 Share Posted January 25, 2012 Los Angeles has finally introduced a low banning male porn stars from not using condoms. And surprisingly, at least to me, the porn film industry is crying “foul”. The move will, its says, drive porn movie producers to move outside the city. LA's San Fernando Valley is considered the capital of the multibillion-dollar US adult film industry . . . The LA-based Aids Healthcare Foundation welcomed the move saying it was crucial in protecting adult film actors from HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases. The foundation, which has campaigned for the measure for six years, said it would now seek similar condom requirement elsewhere in the US. "The city of Los Angeles has done the right thing. They've done the right thing for the performers," said foundation president Michael Weinstein. He said his group would also be vigilant in keeping track of where porn producers might move to. Several of the industry's biggest adult filmmakers have said they might consider moving just outside city boundaries. They insist that adult films featuring condoms are not as popular and that some actors prefer not to use them. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-16712744 In this day and age, that last phrase “some actors prefer not to wear them”, seems totally unbelievable to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 It is my understanding that this is not just for male porn but for straight porn. The gay porn industry is simply too small for them to worry about. The real money is made in straight porn. I was at the recent AVN show in Las Vegas and the convention center was huge but only 2 of the booths were gay. The vast sums of money the straight industry makes and spends is incredible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fountainhall Posted January 27, 2012 Share Posted January 27, 2012 Sounds like Japan where I read somewhere that the porn industry accounts for 1% of GDP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChristianPFC Posted January 28, 2012 Share Posted January 28, 2012 Although my exposure to porn is very limited, this is good news to me. If people watch porn without (the actors wearing) condoms, they think it's okay not to use condoms for sex. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 It is my understanding that this is not just for male porn but for straight porn. The gay porn industry is simply too small for them to worry about. The real money is made in straight porn. I was at the recent AVN show in Las Vegas and the convention center was huge but only 2 of the booths were gay. The vast sums of money the straight industry makes and spends is incredible. I wonder who watches porn? I watch it if I'm not getting the real thing. And not watching if I am. Does anybody watch and get? I don't think I would need it if I lived in Thailand, yet I see street vendors selling it right and left. What's up with that? (No pun intended.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 I don't think I would need it if I lived in Thailand, yet I see street vendors selling it right and left. What's up with that? A few of possible answers:1 Most farang in Thailand are tourists, so they can bring the dvd home for entertainment later in the year. 2 If the poor farang tourist is married, perhaps it's easier spice things up with a dvd, than it would be to off someone for a threesome. "Look who I bought home dear...." 3 Maybe some of the retired farang can't afford to off guys quite as often as they like. The dvd sellers on the beach do more business than those selling blankets, plastic parrots or other tat that people don't want. On the original topic, I'm all for condoms to be worn in porn & also never understood why "bareback" seems to be considered as a selling point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rogie Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 On the original topic, I'm all for condoms to be worn in porn & also never understood why "bareback" seems to be considered as a selling point. I don't seem to watch porn much these days so things may have changed but I seem to recall the highlight of some porn vids is the 'money shot' where the guy whips his cock out of his buddy's arse and shoots his load; clearly if he has to fiddle with a condom it's going to completely mess things up. Ditto when the two protagonists are on the verge of doing it, if a condom is used we see the organ about to penetrate but not actually doing so, followed by a 'cut' and next you see the top doing his stuff, his organ snugly ensheathed. It's almost as if the actors are more embarrassed about being seen to use a condom than being filmed as flagrant exhibitionists. Well that's the way I remember it, hopefully the actors are a bit more relaxed about being seen putting the condom on nowadays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest thaiworthy Posted January 29, 2012 Share Posted January 29, 2012 Rogie, I had to laugh at your use of the word "actor" in context of how you described the scene. When actors act, they "pretend" to be people they're not. How does one "pretend" to be aroused, if they are not actually aroused? Gives a whole new meaning to the word "actor," doesn't it? No matter how many times I read it, it still seems funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
