Wednesday, July 11, 2007

....And Just In Case You Are Tired Of It, Still MORE From NPNh...

...straight out of Ren's blog, where she lays down the gauntlet at Adam Cohen's nonsense:

Now, this was my reply, which hasn't made it up on his post yet, so I shall share here...

"Adam, I have no problem with people trying to keep "adult businesses" out of their neighborhoods, especially strip clubs and the like, especially in small towns...People have the right to do that, attempt to keep them out. For instance, where I live, all sex oriented businesses are restricted specifically to commerical/industrial zones via the laws, hence, most strip clubs are in club districts, where they are hardly noted amdist the REST of the bars in the area...and most of our sex shops/porn stores are discreet, clean, and and not anywhere near residential neighborhoods....I also note that study is close to 20 years old....when a great many areas in the midwest, especially industry towns, were in the midst of a huge economic slump, crack was a major epidemic, and I wonder just how much that (rather than the wicked, wicked porn stores) had to do with the crime rates...And I live in a damn metro type area...big city to be exact, and I can tell you, people have more to worry about than the little store on the corner that sells smut and vibrators.
You cannot and do not have the right to babysit adults, however, and if they want porn, they right now, in this country, have a right to it."I mean come 1989 we all still called Russia "The Soviet Union"...things have changed since then...
And really, don't get too flattered, NPNH, you aren't the only reason I made the PPA blog, trust me...Charlie was more the inspiration for that originally....

Ren continues on:

I would like to take you up on this thread: If people want to advocate harsher safety measures in the sex industry, better working conditions, for better treatement by law enforcement, making access to net porn harder for kids to get, things of that nature? That shows me they not only care about the people working in the business, but they care for the people who should not be looking at porn and whatnot...those are the folk who I actually think care about peoples "feelings"...

Then Ren responds to some suggestions that Cohen makes that would almost suit his purposes of bare tolerance of porn; Ren's response as posted follows for each one; and I have added some annoted comments of my own.

AG: I have some suggestions for improving the working conditions of porn performers. How do these strike you?

On porn shoots, a public health officer should be required to be present during filming. The pornographers would pay a fee to the city for this.

Ren Ev: Sure, that would be great, but chances are the "fee" would come out of the performers pay...and the health dept would probably have to hire a hell of a lot more employees, which comes outta tax dollars...I mean, are you just talking about for CA porn valley films, or every porn shoot in America? Cause i can tell you, porn is filmed everywhere.

AK: That wouldn't be such a bad idea....except that are you going to charge enough of a fee or offer such an public health officer enough support to actually do such a job?? And..will you be providing full insurance coverage for porn performers to offset the cost of such a bureacracy??

AG: Porn performers should be required to be regularly tested for all STDs they might reasonably be at risk for contracting.

Ren Ev: Nowadays, that is actually pretty common, testing for almost, if not ALL, STD's... from hep to herpes to aids, even if the companies shooting don't require it, a lot of performers see to it on their own.

AK: Ahhh...ever heard of the AIM Health Care Foundation?? They've been at the center of HIV/AIDS testing for adult performers for the past 10 years or so...and their tests are pretty standard and comprehensive.....and mandated by most performers. Other thing: what about those who simply run their sites away from Silicone do you regulate them enough to test them??

AC: Condoms and other protective devices should be required when they will reduce the risk of disease.

Ren Ev: I think more prevelant condom use would be wise. I do not think, however, if performers who test clean should be required to use condoms if they do not want to...for instance, many porn stars are married to other porn stars...should Otto Bauer have to wear a condom whenever he does a scene with Audrey Hollander, his wife?

AK: Condom use should be promoted and encouraged?? Yes, progressive health professionals and individual porn performers who choose voluntarily to promote safer sex. Condom use mandated by the government merely to serve the prevailing ideology??? I don't think so...especially since most conservatives would oppose such use as promoting "promiscuity" anyway.

AC: Excessively risky practices such as "ass-to-mouth" should be prohibited from commercial productions.

Ren Ev: Nope. AtM is something people do in their own bedrooms, as well as countless other forms of anal play which inovle a tongue or mouth touching or even penetrating an anus. I don't agree with banning certain sex acts if people are willing to perform them, and if, yeah, real people also do them, and all forms of anal play, including AtM, do actually occur in some peoples bedrooms.

AK: I second that with a "Hell no"....acts that people willingly perform in their private lives should be allowed to be seen on screen; just because some might get squeamish at the sight of AtM or double vaginal doesn't mean those who can perform it safely should be banished. What's next, Adam...should romantic scenes involving BDSM also be banned due to promoting "male violence and submission" of women??

AC: Performers should have the right to revoke their consent to the distribution of their image, up to, say, 30 days after filming is complete.

Ren Ev: I'd say two weeks.

AK: Make it one week for me, since most porn shoots only last one or two days, anyway; and most of the details of what will happen should be worked out before the contract is signed, so there should be no surprises for the performers. If they don't want to perform the act, they can just walk away and not get that paycheck.

AC: I welcome any other suggestions you might have.

Ren Ev: Well, if we are, in theory, going to send health officals, independent security people would be good as well, to insure no one is forced into anything. But, like the health official, that's a pipe dream. I, personally, think that the minimum age of consent for participation in hardcore (as in, involves penetration) porn should be raised to 21.

AK: Here's one of the few cases where I respectfully dissent from The Henchwoman. In my view, raising the legal age for performing in hardcore to 21 is a bad, bad idea; because it puts the blame on young adults who are considered old and mature enough to vote, old enough to be drafted to kill and be killed in war, and old enough to face adult penalties if arrested on felony offenses....but not considered mature enough to make informed decisions about their own bodies and about engaging in sex for pay??? Plus, what's to say that if the legal age is raised, then our already anti-sex culture decides that 21 becomes the new 18, and that since 21 year olds are considered not mature enough to handle the stresses (both physical and mental) of being sex actresses and performers, that perhaps we should raise the age even higher??

I respect Ren's concerns that young adults don't always think about the consequences of their actions and that a more mature attitude would be enhanced by waiting a bit later to engage in porn or sex work....but it still reeks of paternalism to say that one particular group of people should be considered not able to handle themselves in some matters but not in others.

But, that's only my opinion, of course.



  1. Does "other protective devices" include mandatory dental dams for lesbian oral sex scenes? I can't see that going over too well. First, to the best of my knowledge, dental dams aren't widely used among lesbians and bisexual women in real life because woman-to-woman oral sex simply isn't a major route of STD transmission. Second, as an afficianado of this kind of porn, dental dams largely kill what's visually arousing about this kind of pornography, hence, I can't see it as being very well received.

    As for "cooling off" periods, I think its a good idea in theory. In practice, a big part of the appeal of sex work according to sex workers is that its instant pay. You can decide to work on very short notice and have money immediately – a cooling off period, while introducing a higher level of safety, also interferes with this.

    The 21 AOC for porn – unneeded, moral-panicky stuff – a lot of supporters of this move sound like they think the 18 age of consent for sex in general is too low.

  2. yep, and 21 is merely my opinion as well....

  3. iacb; i think the cooling off period would be an excellent idea specifically for first timers...

  4. "iacb; i think the cooling off period would be an excellent idea specifically for first timers..."

    In that context, it would be a good idea. For somebody who's a "veteran" in the industry, a cooling off period that delayed pay would merely be burdensome. But for somebody just getting into it, not a bad idea.

  5. "Second, as an afficianado of this kind of porn, dental dams largely kill what's visually arousing about this kind of pornography, hence, I can't see it as being very well received."

    You have to be kidding, IACB -- watching people put their tongues in the wrong places isn't arousing at all. :)

    I much prefer porn wherein I often can't see the woman's vulva -- because I know it's far, far more likely she's actually fully enjoying it. Which means, to me, that it actually doesn't matter at all to me if there's a dam or not. Actually, the one scene I have seen where a dam *was* used was one of the most arousing I've ever seen, because that interaction meant "This is about fun and I care about your safety, not just that camera over there."

    As far as women not wanting to use dams -- I'd have a lot more sex with them if it weren't the case that so many consider safe sex weird.

    While seeing vulvas is always nice, it's much more arousing to me to see something that looks like sex. If I want to simply look at a vulva, porn gives one plenty of opportunities to do that too.

    It's the difference between, to put it in terms that might make more direct sense to you, an actual blowjob and "stick your tongue out for the camera, honey..."

  6. And on the wrong place thing:

    One of the few times in my life I can honestly say I had horrible sex was, basically, all about this "look" thing.

    There are some dykes who think that giving a strap-on BJ is about visuals. I've heard them talking about technique: all sorts of little cute stuff so the top can look at them and enjoy the view.

    Okay, that's... um, logical, I *guess*... yeah, there's far less sensation coming from an unattached non-flesh appendage.

    So when this woman I liked told me she was really good at this, I thought hey, sounds nice...

    Um. Staring at someone showing off her tongue parlor tricks WHEN YOU REALLY WANT TO FUCK HER FACE?

    Most boring shit there ever was.

  7. Which is also interesting to me because, well... I've not had that many BJs from dykes but like I said there is that sort of "this should look pretty, that's paramount" when I see them trading technique

    where, I think, with actual men they get much quicker that I don't want them to waste time looking pretty, because (most likely) they're doing what they'd want someone to be doing to them, which is less about how it looks and more about how it feels.

    (Not that it doesn't look cool or that that's not arousing, for me or for men -- I'm sure it is for men too, they've told me so! It's just that that's not the point. For me anyway.)

  8. yeah, trin brings up a point: it's pretty damn hard to film cunnilingus in a way in which you're actually -seeing- what's really going on; hence the whole fakey-fakey, stick one's tongue all the way out and delicately lap.

    it's like--if you've got your face buried in there anyway, unless you have -really- tiny cameras, you're not gonna be able to see the vulva during the Act.

    also--actual "dental dams" (as in, the kind that are actually used in dentistry) are thick and unwieldy and weird; but one can use and more people do these days, say, cling film or special thin sheets of latex specifically designed for such, and they're--well, it can be an -interesting- visual effect. probably way more fun for latex/clear plastic fetishists than others, but--hell, aren't most of the industry standards based on fetishes, albeit more common ones? and with all due respect for those who like them, but that's what they are: fetishes (i've got my own): the body types preferred, the "money shot," DP, ATM, "snowballing," etc. etc...

  9. Glove dam all the way, baby.

    Take a rubber glove. Cut off the four fingers, and cut down the side from the pinky to the wrist. Open it up.

    You now have not only a cheap, easy to find and reasonably thin dam, but one that you can safely penetrate with using the remaining thumb area.

    I should really put that up on my blog...

  10. Well, my views on how much safety is enough and how much s overkill –

    I guess I never "got religion" when it comes to the total latex thing, beyond simple condom use.

    I personally don't think cunnilingus with any kind of barrier looks at all good visually, nor do latex gloves, unless you happen to have a medical fetish. (I have the very opposite of a medical fetish, personally.) It would be one thing if there were a case that could be made that this really blocks an important vector for STIs, but I'm not hugely convinced – especially if they're testing for a broad panel of STIs to begin with. Asking for total latex in porn – not just condoms, but latex for everything – strikes me as serious overkill. If you were to impliment such strict safety guidelines, wet kissing would be pretty much out too, since that isn't exactly 100% risk-of-infection free either.

    Near universal condom use I could see, because penetration and semen are pretty major vectors of HIV and other STDs, and is something that shouldn't be risked except by people who are already "body fluid monogamous". If two people are already BFM, I have no problem filming them barebacking, though, and could give a damn if anybody thinks that sends the wrong "message".

  11. Oh, and much of the cunnilingus I've seen in the porn I've seen goes beyond "delicate lapping", though, yes, I do realize, from watched cunnilingus in real life, you usually can't see what's going on. Same with PIV intercourse.

    Obviously, porn needs a certain amount of "poetic license" when it comes to presenting sex.

  12. And on the wrong place thing:


    Wow, check out this site called
    . Free SMS and free mobile ads!! Its fantastic