Porn Panic 2011: Derek Burts -- From Rentboy To Crossover HIV+ Victim...To Anti-Gay Double Agent??? (OR:When Mike Weinstein and Bryan Fischer Are In Sync, We Have A BIG Problem)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Porn Panic 2011: FSC/APHSS Responds To AHF Smear Campaign

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Porn Panic 2011 -- The Series Continues: AHF Ratches Up The BS Propaganda Machine To Full Blast, Calls For Federal Investigation of Brazzers And Dings FSC/APHSS For "Stonewalling"

Oh, but Mike Weinstein's through fooling around now...he's getting real serious.

Get a load of this press release AHF just posted to Business Wire.com this afternoon. If only President Obama could be this aggessive.

HIV Porn Case: AHF to File Complaints with Federal & FL Health Officials against Producers

LOS ANGELES, Aug 31, 2011 (BUSINESS WIRE) -- --AHF officials will submit a health and safety complaint under Florida 'Sanitary Nuisance' statutes against Brazzers, the production company involved in the latest HIV case in the adult film industry; industry sources say male performer involved had worked directly with as many as a dozen female performers

--Group also will call on the Free Speech Coalition to "stop obstructing the investigation in Los Angeles County and provide necessary information to health authorities" and will call on Los Angeles City officials to suspend all new film permits for adult films

Never mind that there hasn't even been a verification of even ONE performer testing positive for HIV, or the fact that the producer involved with the alleged "Patient Zero" has formally and publically denied that he had allowed that performer to do the shoot off a positive-confirmed test (the director said that in fact, the test was negative), and that no confirmation of any other performer being infected has been found or even any first- or second-generation confirmation tests done. When there's propaganda to be done, the truth is a natural distraction.

Actually, for AHF, the truth is more like a roll of Charmin tissue. To wit:

In response to the latest reported HIV case in the adult film industry--thought to be the 23rd industry-related HIV case since 2004--AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) will host a press teleconference today, Wednesday, August 31st at 2:00 PM Pacific Time to announce the filing of a 'sanitary nuisance' health complaint with the Florida Department of Health and a similar letter of complaint with federal OSHA officials against Brazzers, the Florida-based adult film production company widely reported as the company where the infected performer was employed. Industry sources say the male performer involved had worked directly--and without condoms--with as many as a dozen female performers.

Ahh...let's count the lies, shall we??

First, you have the old and tired "23 performers contracting HIV in porn since 2004" meme....which seems quite drastic. Seems, that is....until you go "inside the numbers" and find out that only 4 of those cases involved :straight" heterosexual porn performers, and NONE of them were infected directly on set. (And the only questionable one, Derrick Burts of last year, even publically stated that he was infected in a gay scene...which included a condom.) 4 were private citizens using the services of then AIM for their own purposes, and  the remainders were gay male porn performers...where a fundamentally different system of less testing (and CONDOMS, TOO!!!!) was being used. Even the LA Times, who is mostly sympathetic to the condom mandate cause, was smart enough to retract that stat...but Weinstein never let such things get in his way before, now hasn't he??

And then there is the "male performer working without condoms" libel...as if it's Brazzers' fault that the performer, if he did in fact get infected, was able to continue to shoot scenes with women. Remember that the performer was working off a negative test, albeit one that wasn't from a testing facility that had gotten under the umbrella of the Free Speech Coalition's APHSS program because the latter has only gotten started this past month.

Of course, the reason why APHSS was needed in the first place was because the older regimen that had been put in place by the earlier group AIM was shattered when AIM was put out of business...largely thanks to the hard work of AHF and  Cal/OSHA's nuisance suits against them. Gee..ya think that would turn out well, Mike??

"When will it end? This is yet another suspected case of HIV infection in the adult film industry. Given the wide reports, and given that Brazzers affirmatively states they do not use condoms--a violation of both state and federal health statutes--it makes sense to investigate them in the hopes of putting an end to further infections," said Michael Weinstein, president of AIDS Healthcare Foundation. "We are filing these complaints with Florida health officials and federal OSHA officials to prompt industry compliance with employee health and safety regulations and to spur proper and thorough public health investigations of this reported incident. In addition, we are calling on the Free Speech Coalition, the adult industry-sponsored advocacy group, to stop obstructing the investigation of this incident in Los Angeles County and provide all of the necessary information to public health authorities. FSC is an advocacy group, they are not authorized to do these health investigations, and they are not qualified. The pattern of non-cooperation that has characterized the industry and led to the current situation is continuing. It is the responsibility of Los Angeles County, which has not issued any statement to this point, to demand cooperation from the adult industry. Even though the initial exposure took place in Florida, the shutdown in LA constitutes a major public health event under the law. We are also reaffirming our call on the City of Los Angeles to stop issuing new permits."

Excuse me a moment while I go through this laughing spasm.

Wait..there are FEDERAL health statutes out there that require all porn performers to use condoms??  Really, Mike?? So, what about all those damn bareback gay videos that you were selling in your Florida thrift stores recently?? Are you going to be filing federal and state complaints against those companies, too??

And this attempt at intimidating the FSC?? WOW. For an organization who has the full colluding support of the LA County health officials and Cal/OSHA, and who was able to bribe...errrrrrrrrrrrr, persuade four LA city councilmen to attempt to browbeat the LA City Attorney to force the LA film board to cancel all porn film permits until they go condom only, AND when stoned by the Attorney himself,  go over his head to the California Supreme Court to get their way, to attempt to smack down FSC for "stonewalling", is chutzpah to the extreme. But to call FSC an "advocacy group" and "not qualified", and to turn the voluntary step of suspending production until all the testing is done as a "major public health event" and call for the total abolishment?? These jackals are making the words "hypocrisy"  and "projection" into the understatements of the millenium...and we haven't even gotten through the second decade yet!!!

Oh, and unless Weinstein is pulling laws out of his ass as usual, I want anyone reading this to look deep into the Florida legal code and cite for me any sort of regulations where sites like Brazzers (or other home grown adult websites based in Florida) are mandated to use condoms for all of their scenes.

And also...someone please remind Mikey that organizations in California cannot be held resposible for acts of unrelated companies in Florida??

It should also be noted that none of the female performers who would potentially be affected have shot any content in California, and that the moratorium for all porn production is a voluntary preventative measure designed to protect everyone from accidental exposure while the whole situation is sorted out.  Of course, the reason Weinstein wants to make it permanent is to totally break the industry so that AHF and Cal/OSHA can take over and impose his favored condom mandate plus pre-1994 testing regime...the very regime that led to umpteempt outbreaks in the past, when performers could buy and rig tests like derivatives.

One last thing, Mikey: THERE IS NO LOS ANGELES COUNTY INVESTIGATION ONGOING, BECAUSE THIS IS STRICTLY A FLORIDA SITUATION. You might want to recheck your sources on that one.

The Free Speech Coalition (FSC)--which has fiercely opposed condom use in adult films--reported over the weekend that yet another adult film performer has tested HIV positive, and as a result, the industry group itself called for a moratorium on all adult film production, "...until possible first and second-generation exposures have been identified." Sources within the adult industry also said the performer is thought to be a male and had worked directly with as many as a dozen female performers, who in turn worked with scores of other performers.

The most direct response to this particular Big Dam Lie is in two words: BULL. SHIT.

The more stacid response, though, is to simply point out that nowhere does FSC or APHSS ever call for an end to condom usage, nor do they even come close to advocating that performers who choose to use or wish their shooting partners to use condoms should be in any way discriminated against or or ostracized. They simply oppose having condom usage imposed by government fiat.

And notice the trend towards quoting unnamed "industry sources" to support Weinstein's whopping mischaracterization of both the alleged performer and his partners...as if all of them are nothing more than stupid promiscuous sluts who are incapable of protecting themselves. Until the test results come in, he knows exactly what the rest of us know: not a Goddess-damn thing.

Weinstein then goes on to pimp the LA condom mandate ordinance, which has already been debunked here before, so I won't bore you with that.

But after that, it actually gets interesting. Here's what AHF has in store for Brazzers locally:

'Sanitary Nuisance' Complaints in Florida

Unlike California or the federal government, the State of Florida does not have a specifically designated occupational safety and health division. However, there is a "sanitary nuisance" law in the Florida Statutes. AHF believes that unprotected sex in a commercial setting should, arguably, fall under the definition of a "sanitary nuisance," since Florida law defines it as "any act" that may cause disease.

386.01 Sanitary nuisance.--A sanitary nuisance is the commission of any act, by an individual, municipality, organization, or corporation, or the keeping, maintaining, propagation, existence, or permission of anything, by an individual, municipality, organization, or corporation, by which the health or life of an individual, or the health or lives of individuals, may be threatened or impaired, or by which or through which, directly or indirectly, disease may be caused.

386.02 Duty of Department of Health.--The Department of Health, upon request of the proper authorities, or of any three responsible resident citizens, or whenever it may seem necessary to the department, shall investigate the sanitary condition of any city, town, or place in the state; and if, upon examination, the department shall ascertain the existence of any sanitary nuisance as herein defined, it shall serve notice upon the proper party or parties to remove or abate the said nuisance or, if necessary, proceed to remove or abate the said nuisance in the manner provided in s. 823.01.

As such, three "responsible resident citizens" will file complaints with the Florida Department of Health asking them to investigate a sanitary nuisance--unprotected sex taking place on adult film productions in the state.

There is also a Miami-Dade County "sanitary nuisance" law as well (Miami-Dade County Municipal Ordinances Chapter 26A). It uses a similar definition of "sanitary nuisance" as the state law, and it provides for the Director of the Dade County Department of Public Health to investigate nuisances.

So, in effect, Michael Weinstein is going to pay off three "responsible resident citizens" of Miami/South Beach to file a complaint with the state and local departments of health asking them to investigate and potentially shut down Brazzers as a "sanitary nusiance" for....allowing for sex acts without the use of a condom???

Now...such "sanitary nuisance" regs are nomally used against those whom explicitly handle food (such as restaurants or diners) hazardous chemicals or forms of hazardous waste, or whom get close to any form of bodily fluids or internal human organs (such as medical professionals, morticians, and the like). I'm pretty damn sure that it has never been used against porn sites...but there's a first for anything.

But here's the really ironic point: for someone who says that he cares deeply about the well being and safety of porn performers so much, he's sure giving those who don't share his concern and who would much prefer the industry to be drop-kicked into either jail cells or simple nonexistence a really big hammer to sling against any and all adult sites. Imagine the Christian Right getting three like-minded citizens to file local nuisance charges against any woman running a porn site out of her home, for example. Hell, imagine Polk County Sheriff and antiporn zealout Grant Judd using that same hammer to shut down even anyone with a computer LOOKING at porn. Be careful of what you ask for, Michael, because you just might get it.

But then again, I'm guessing that since Governor Rick Scott has so shredded Florida state government as to render it unable to fulfill Weinstein's requests, and that the Miami-Dade officials have far more struggles and concerns on their hand than wet-nursing a false porn panic, he will simply do as he has done so well in Cali: exploit this to the fullest extent to shake people down for lots and lots of money for his coffers, to be shared with both the condom manufacturers who finance AHF and the crossover gay male performers -- some of whom may even be HIV+ -- that he is protecting and covering for.

Which means..this won't be the last propaganda presser we'll get from him.

I just wonder how long it will be for Florida to read him properly and give him the boot.

Porn Panic 2011 Redux #2: Jordan Owen States The Obvious About The Dishonesty Of AHF

Not many people can advocate for adult sexual expression quite like Jordan Owen.

I may not personally agree sometimes with his libertarian conservative "individualistic" perspective, but Jordan is gifted in the art of cutting through the BS of arguments of antiporn activists. He just finished a long series where he totally debunked Gail Dines' recent tome Pornland., and he has also done series debunking the idiocy of Shelley Lubben, Patrick Trueman, and other antiporn/antisex activists.

Today, at his YouTube channel, he posted a video reflecting his own thoughts on the recent HIV porn panic, the credibility of Derrick Burts as a spokesperson for the aggrieved "victim" of the industry (conveniently ignoring his Rentboy.com membership and the fact that the scene he claims he got infected in did in fact include a condom), the menacity of AHF in attempting to replace AIM as the main regulator of the California adult industry, and the illogic of the proposed LA ordinance. It is so powerful that I've decided to mirror it here for your reading enjoyment.

I most certainly recommend that you visit his channel for lots of truth and wisdom. Also, feel free to check out his Facebook page as well.

Jordan Owen (JordanOwen42) giving his personal reflections on the latest 

HIV-in-porn scare, the AHF, Shelley Lubben, and the proposed LA

condom ordinance (via YouTube)

HIV Porn Panic 2011 Update: "Patient Zero" Possibly Exposed, Brazzers.com (In Florida) Implicated

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

HIV Porn Scare 2011 Redux: Rumor, Speculation, And Fact

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

BREAKING: Once Again, Into The Breach We Go: ANOTHER HIV Porn Scare???

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Porn Panic 2011 Supplemental: XBiz Reports On The FSC's Reaction To AHF's Proposed Condom Mandate Ordinance Drive

Don't ever accuse the Free Speech Coalition of not having a rapid response team to events involving the porn industry.

Here's their official response to today's news of AHF's announcement of their drive for an initiative for the condom mandate, as reported today by XBiz.com.

FSC Executive Director Diane Duke said that the Department of Public Health has already stated in response to a lawsuit filed by AHF that it doesn't see a compelling public interest to require the use of condoms in adult productions.

"Clearly AHF has an anti-adult industry agenda and like its previous frivolous lawsuits, erroneous charges with Cal/OSHA, multiple press conferences and protests, I suspect that this is the next step in AHF’s attempt to stay relevant," Duke said.

"Clearly their efforts and financial resources would be much better served in the prevention and treatment of HIV rather than continuing its witch hunt of the adult entertainment industry."

The FSC also said that it will cost taxpayers thousands of dollars to sort out what the City Attorney has already called a "non-issue."

"It's an absurd attempt at grandstanding by AHF and its president Michael Weinstein," said Joanne Cachapero, FSC's membership director. "A judge has already ruled against AHF's attempt to force the city to enforce mandatory condoms, stating that the city cannot be compelled to enforce regulations that fall under the authority of a state agency like Cal/OSHA.

"What a huge waste of resources for the people of California and for AHF's contributors, while Weinstein carries on a campaign of misinformation."

The FSC also said that the performers who appeared at today's press conference do not represent the population in the adult industry and claims that they contracted HIV or other diseases while working on adult productions are "unfounded."

"The data that AHF presents to the media has been debunked as inaccurate and is the result of methodology that has no basis in science," Cachapero said.

"There is no public health threat or epidemic, as Weinstein likes to portray. The adult production industry has been very successful at protecting performers' health and safety ever since the first incidence of HIV infection in 1998, and we continue to be a model for STI testing.

"The only logical reason that AHF would continue its campaign must be to bring attention to their own pro-condom agenda," Cachapero said.

Porn Panic 2011 (The Endless Loop Contionues): AHF, Apparently Not Happy With The Grinding Wheels of Process, Takes Its Case ForThe Condom Mandate To The LA Streets Via Initiative

Michael Weinstein much be hard on cash again...because apparently he's not bothering to wait for Cal/OSHA to do the dirty work of forcing condoms down the throats of porn performers in LA.

Today, Weinstein and his AIDS Healthcare Foundation groupies gathered at the Sheraton Hotel to announce that they were going to initiate a signature drive to put to the voters of the City of Los Angeles an initiative for a proposed ordinance that would force city officials to impose the condom mandate as a requirement for approval of production of porn in that jurisdiction. The goal would be to place the proposed ordinance on the ballot before the people of LA by June of next year.

The  press release announcing this initiative cited all the usual AHF talking points about how adult performers were protected less than mainstream TV actors (ignoring the basic fact that most mainstream actors don't engage in active sex on screen (except, maybe, in casting couches, and that would probably not be covered by condom regs), that there is a pandemic of STD's, including HIV, afoot within the porn industry that is so out of control that outside intervention is needed (conveniently ignoring AHF's own role in toppling the one organization that had been the most effective in controlling STD's--namely the AIM Medical Foundation), and that all they are doing is asking the city to enforce existing law, which they say already mandates condom usage.

The actual press conference, on the other hand, was more than just the usual antics and showboating...though there was plenty of that. Mark Kernes of AVN.com did a decent report on the presser, and I will quote freely from his accounts, which you can see here.

All the usual suspects were there to testify. Mike Weinstein kicked it off:

"We're here today to announce the launching of an initiative campaign before the voters of the city of Los Angeles, to require as a condition of permitting, that adult films follow the law....[w]e protect all other workers in every other industry and minimize their risk....[w]e protect performers in Hollywood films, stunt people and actors, from injury. We even protect animals from being harmed in the making of films, and yet we do not protect the performers in this industry."

Really?? You mean that stunt people are required to wear helmets and goggles and protective gear every time they do a stumt?? Are they also requited to wear PPE (personal protective gear) to prevent themselves from tainted blood?? Are MMA athletes required to wear gloves, dental dams, and googles in order to prevent them from getting infected from blood, too??

And...surely Mike Weinstein already knows that performers are already capable of protecting themselves, and many of them already use condoms as one line of defense along with testing and peer pressure and selective use of partners in shooting porn scenes, does he??

Quite naturally, Weinstein then proceeds to throw his local allies at the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health under his big, shiny bus..never mind the hard work of folks there  like Peter Kerndt and Robert Kim-Fairley to cook the stats on STD transmission to his favor. And, he minces no words either towards the LA City Attorney's office, who stoned his efforts earlier to force the local film regulatory agency FilmLA to impose the condom mandate on approval of film shoots in LA. (The quote is from the Kernes AVN article.)

"Then you come down to the county level, which is responsible for public health and stopping the spread of disease; they've been a no-show," Weinstein claimed. "We've gone to them many times and they have refused to act and they've punted it to the state. At the level of the state legislature, we have not been able to get any member to sponsor legislation to strengthen these provisions. And then we come down to the city. Since most of the films are made in the city of Los Angeles, the city of Los Angeles has jurisdiction over zoning, and as such the issuing of permits. There are about 200 permits a month that are issued to the adult film industry, and we simply want a condition of the issuing of those permits to be that they follow the health and safety laws. We have not been able to get the city council to enact this."

This is what you call "progressive lying through your damn teeth."....because the LA City Attorney's office had already issued its own legal counsel ruling that they had no jurisdiction over FilmLA to require condoms as a mandate for approving film permits; the Cali State Assembly already had a proposed bill in place -- Senate Bill  459 -- that would have modified the designation of "independent contractors" as opposed to "employees" in order to make it easier for Cal/OSHA to enforce the condom mandate through stiffer fines and arbitrary reporting guidelines, and, of course, the proposed changes in the Cal/OSHA regulations are still in the process of being tweaked for final review and approval. But, it's all LA County's fault that Weinstein can't impose condoms on porn shoots, or gain full control of the testing and protection" of porn performers. Tiny violins were crying in the background, I suppose,

But that was just the beginning of the fun and games, for Weinstein and his AHF legal henchman Brian Chase (who actually created the proposed ordinance), brought the full three-ring circus act to supplement their case.

Which brings us right back to...Ministeress Shelley Lubben and her Pink Cross Foundation League of Ex-Porn Sluts For Jesus.

Yup, never mind the irony of an antigay fundamentalist Christian who openly boasts of the magical powers of her Lord and Savior rescuing gays from their sins working with an organization formed to protect the rights of HIV+ perfomers, the majority of which just so happen to be gay. Where there's a camera, and an opportunity to get pub, you know that Shelley will be there. Probably with the ink from Ron Jeremy's signature still not drying off her tits yet, too. Or, the memories of her rediscovering her old stripper moves at same party being still fresh in her mind.

Here's Lubben's contribution to the AHF press release:

“I was a porn star living the glamorous life. Drug overdoses, herpes, suicide attempts and abuse at the hands of the porn industry,” said Shelley Lubben, former porn actress and founder and president of the Pink Cross Foundation, an IRS approved 501(c)(3) public charity dedicated to offering adult industry workers emotional, financial and transitional support for those who want out of the adult industry. “In my time in the industry, I did some very hardcore movies, and only drugs and alcohol could get me through them. I played a crazy game of Russian roulette with my life. The industry did not and still does NOT enforce condom usage, so STDs and HIV were and still are a high risk among porn actors and actresses. While my own life has taken an entirely new and profoundly fulfilling direction and I now work to help performers leave the industry altogether, I wholeheartedly support this ballot initiative that would allow Los Angeles residents and voters to weigh in on tying film permits to condom use in the ongoing production of adult films in California.”

How that jibes with Shelley's repeated claims that she is intent on "destroying the porn industry" is not so made abundantly clear. Also not clear: the disjoint between all this tragic tale of how the porn industry did all this bad to her, and her own spoken and written testimony that her herpes (which she still can't or won't give proof that she had, other than the assertion that "God cured me" of them) or her other ailments, were more the byproduct of her 5 years as a working street prostitute/escort prior to her even starting to make porn films in 1993, or the basic (il)logic of how her 17 credited films makes her the go-to expert on how female porn performers are treated...even though she hasn't made a video of a film in nearly 18 years.

But hey...with Jesus at your side, anything is possible.

I'll just leave it to Michael Whiteacre to address the other points about Shelley's "asistance".

Speaking thereof...Lubben brought with her two of her prized assistants from the PCF: Jan Meza-Merritt and Jenni Case, to reinforce the case against the "porn industry" for its lack of protecting female performers.   Meza-Merritt was particularly strong with the proper "pathos" (again, from the AHF press release):.

“I was brutalized, traumatized and victimized for a buck by an industry that could care less if I lived or died. I contracted Chlamydia and herpes, which is a non curable STD from my time in the porn industry. The porn industry collectively employs thousands of male and female porn actresses monthly. How much higher then is the risk of getting HIV and other STD’s in a transient industry where you have not only one sexual partner per day, but several or more and condoms are looked at as an unnecessary, negative component of this industry?,” said Jan (Meza) Merritt, former porn actress and member of the Pink Cross Foundation. “Enough is enough! How many more HIV incidents must occur in the adult industry before changes are made once and for all? I fully support the ‘City of Los Angeles Safer Sex In The Adult Film Industry Act’ that will allow Los Angeles voters to weigh in on the safety of those individuals who remain working in the porn industry.”

The "City of Los Angeles Safer Sex In The Adult Film Industry Act"?!?!? What...they couldn't have entitled their initiative with something shorter...like, "The Lara Roxxx-Darren James Adult Industry Protection Act"???

But even Ministress Lubben and her acolytes weren't considered sufficient enough for Weinstein, because for the coup'd grace, he brought out of retirement none other than Darren James himself...the original "Patient Zero" of the 2004 outbreak.

James, now on the AHF payroll after nearly 9 years of hiding, testified at the presser about how he "had predicted another HIV outbreak" to occur "because of this same thing", and he inferred that the industry "is not being policed properly." Of course, no one bothered to ask Darren how in the hell he got himself infected to begin with -- most sources say that he was infected in Brazil shooting a bareback scene with a transgendered actor, and there are also concerns that Lara Roxxx might have been infected, too, prior to their scene as well.

And for more recent support, Derrick Burts (aka Cameron Reid) was also recruited to sell the AHF line, and to promote the crossover gay male pro-condom perspective. Burts, of course, was "Patient Zero" for the last "outbreak" in 2010, who first went to AIM-MED for help, then, claiming that he was dissed, crossed over to AHF. At the presser, he was simply off the chain.

[...] Burts charged that, "The porn industry likes to think that they're above the law," claimed that  "performers, especially female performers, are afraid to speak up... They're very belittled in this industry. I've gone to several shoots where the females are just treated horribly," that "If you ask a performer off-record, would you like your male performer to wear a condom, I bet you at least 98 percent of them would say yes";  and further claimed that, "LA County has since then confirmed that I worked with not one but two HIV-positive performers"—not surprising since his primary work was in gay porn. (Quoted from the Kernes AVN,com article)

Never mind again the fact that most performers who request a condom in their scenes are enabled to use them, but many others, like Nina Hartley, prefer not to use them due to personal concerns about micro-tearing of vaginal tissue increasing the risk for more infections, or the personal feel of rubber, or simply because they feel that they are perfectly capable of protecting themselves against STD's without the heavy hand of bureaucrats looking down their blouses or up their skirts.

And...it would kind of upset the apple cart to note that Burts himself has testified that he was infected on a gay  male shoot...in a condomized scene, where he claims the other participant
took off the condom at the end and blew off into his...well, anal orfice, thusly infecting him.

Remember, Clones...gay male porn has its own separate standards for STI control (more reliance on condoms due to the much greater prevalence of HIV+ performers there) as compared to the hetero porn industry (which relies on testing and peer pressure as their firewall against HIV and other common STD's)..

And, that may be the point of Weinstein's antics, I think...other than the desire to get the government grants and use them, along with the condom manufacturers, to seriously get paid. Perhaps AHF and Weinstein really want to create a protection racket for crossover gay/bi male performers wanting to make money off the existing industry...and mandating condoms along with reviving the older ERISA tests for STI's, in combination with existing standards against discrimination of HIV+ performers, would produce a permanent income flow from folk like Burts/Reid.

Of course, the cost of that in weakening the preexisting standards of the testing firewalls (now reinforced through the new AHPSS standards and the more modern PCR-DNA tests standardized through AIM-MED and now through AHPSS), not to mention the economic costs from the rejection of a porn consuming public that has spoken loud and clear with their dollars that they like their porn unwrapped and bareback, regardless of whatever good social intentions may exist.

Anyways..you can't have a proper initiative without a neat-o, catchy organization, and AHF has solved that issue by forming -- you'll love this -- "For Adult Industry Responsibility", who will oversee this effort. Gee..I wonder how Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting will react when they find out that their acronym is being pilfered this way?? If it's anything like the World Wildlife Foundation's fierce reaction (and ultimate win in the courts) over the former World Wrestling Federation's use  of "WWF", I don't think that this will be pretty.

One other thing about the proposed ordinance you should know about: while the proposed Cal/OSHA regulation changes would mandate all kinds of barrier protections, including not only condoms but also gloves, dental dams, goggles, and other forms of "protection", during the shooting of porn sex scenes, the proposed AHF ordinance only requires the condom mandate. Weinstein had a...well, particular reaction at the presser when noted of that little conflict:

Moreover, when asked about the disparity between his initiative's call for universal condom use, and the fact that the Health Code refers to "barrier protection," which would also include dental dams, latex gloves, goggles and face shields during hardcore scenes, Weinstein simply responded, "You've been peddling this 'goggles' line in every article... If that makes you happy, go for it. That has never been our position; it isn't our position now; it isn't the position of CalOSHA."

So much for "follow[ing] the health and safety laws"!

So...never mind that Cal/OSHA's own regulations for "employees" directly mandate all forms of "barrier protections", and that AHF had no opposition whatsoever to adding such protections to the proposed regulations for porn shoots....all of a sudden, only condoms are needed?? Nice job, Mike, for revealing what it was all about in the first place.

Porn Panic 2011 Redux: FSC Unleashes APHSS System For Testing, Protection Of Porn Performers; But AHF/Cal-OSHA Continue Condom Mandate Plans Anyway (UPDATED)

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.