Presente, Adult Industry Medical Foundation (AIM); Sexual Swiftboating Finally Claims Its Victim

Well..the other shoe finally dropped.

One of the most direct ironies was that it was Violet Blue (the sex blogger notorious for taking the name of a porn performer) who passed on the fatal news today.

Nevertheless, here's how she reported the story of the shutdown of the AIM clinics:

AIM (Adult Industry Medical) Healthcare Clinic Shuts Down

Porn performer  Juliette Stray just tweeted about the sudden closure today of AIM (Adult Industry Medical) Healthcare Clinic. According to  Raincoat Reviews, the Free Speech Coalition (a porn industry legal org) called an industry and member-only meeting last Friday to discuss Workplace Safety, Performer Testing. As you can see by Sarah Shevon’s tweet, only seven porn performers attended the meeting. Apparently at the fateful meeting, they quietly decided to abruptly close the clinic responsible for standardized STD/STI testing, health certificates and community testing enforcement in the mainstream adult industry. AIM was also used by non-porn people for its top-rate tests and fast results.

AIM has not issued a press release nor made any comment or hint on their website that they have closed. Disturbingly, their site AimCheck.net has been taken offline. This means anyone who had good tests can no longer access the test results or have them accessed – the online proof and verification of having clean tests is gone. AIM’s Get Tested link is also broken.

 Considering everything that has happened to them: the HIV scares of 2004, 2009, and 2010, the continuous assaults on their integrity by the likes of the LA local health care establishment, Michael Weinstein's AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the antics of the Pornwikileaks crew in hacking their database and revealing sensitive information, and antiporn activists such as Shelley Lubben and Gail Dines wanting to blow up the testing regime that had worked pretty well to contain sexually transmitted infections amongst the performing community, it's hardly surprising that they would be able to withstand such pressures for too long.

It doesn't make the news any less saddening or tragic, because it shows beyond doubt what a scare campaign built on nothing but fear and lies can do when not directly confronted.

Far worse, though, is the "I got mine, and fuck everyone else" mentality that seems to have infected members of the performer/producer industry when it comes to protecting their rights. Only six performers could be induced to attend a meeting on their very survival as an industry???

In any case, I'm sure that the champagne bottles are popping over at Mike Weinstein's place, since it's a given bet that they will be able to exploit the chaos of not having a standardized testing regime for STI's (though Talent Testing Services is well positioned to take over AIM's duties for the moment) to continue their push for mandating condoms in all porn scenes. I'm just as sure that the tube sites will be celebrating as well, because all this will do is increase the value of stolen bareback scenes ripped to tube sites and stored on PC's and servers, and force performers and producers into venues of less protection and greater risk.

But who the fuck cares, I guess?? Such are the wages of sin..or at least, that's how the usual naysayers and trolls will say it. Porn performers are a bit like children, "illegals", and poor Black men: stepping stones to be used for personal gain and money, but not quite good enough to speak for themselves.

Maybe it's high time they organized themselves and demanded to be treated as humans. And, maybe producers might want to take a very long look in the mirror and see what their foolishness and misplaced pride has gotten them, and get back to what got them their audience in the first place.


Update: The Free Speech Coalition just issued this press release at their website regarding the closure of AIM. I will simply repost it in its entirity:

FSC Responds to Closure of AIM

Last week Free Speech Coalition (FSC) was made aware that AIM Medical Associates (AIM) was in danger of closing its doors. In order to avoid a significant gap in health services for performers, FSC has drawn up preliminary strategies to fill the gap with possible options for performer testing protocols. The FSC Board of Directors will meet tomorrow for an emergency meeting to consider options.

“It is our understanding that AIM is now closed. Our hearts go out to AIM and its dedicated staff. We know that it has been a very difficult time for them,” FSC Executive Director Diane Duke said. “Rest assured that FSC is committed to making sure that the industry and its performers are well-protected.”
Last Friday, FSC conducted three separate meetings for producers, agents and performers to gather feedback and discuss options with industry stakeholders. The response from those meetings was successful in gathering suggestions from industry members on which options to pursue and for taking action.

AIM has suffered a two-year campaign waged by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and is currently a defendant in litigation associated with AHF involving patient medical privacy. AHF also has struck out at several companies and talent agents in their attempt to mandate condom use on adult sets.

FSC has been working with industrial safety regulation agency CalOSHA to develop industry-appropriate regulations for adult production sets. The next CalOSHA Committee meeting addressing regulations for the adult industry will take place in Los Angeles on June 7. The meeting is open to the public, and scheduled to be held at the CalTrans Building in downtown Los Angeles, at 100 Main Street (at the corner of 1^st and Main).

 

Another HIV Porn Scare: Shall We Dance The Same Tune Again??

So, once again, we have a panic in Porn Valley.

A performer tested positive for HIV last week, and all his primary and secondary contacts are now being tested, with the results pending.

And, the usual suspects, on cue, are chirping the same tune as last year about mandating condom usage.

Unfortunately, this time around, there is a distinctly more vicious tone to the debate, because the potential "Patient Zero" just so happens to be bisexual, and has been rumored to cross over into the making of gay male porn as well.  So now, we get gay bashing on top of the ususal shit-throwing debacle.

The reactions are already fast and furious. Many performers, including some A-listers like Lisa Ann, have now instituted explicit condom-only rules for their future scenes; others (like Avy Scott) have gone further and announced that they would eschew boy/girl scenes altogether.(It should be known, though, that Avy made her decision before everything went down.)

As with last year, the debate has been reenergized over whether AIM-MED has squandered its last chance of protection and whether the government should step in and impose the Weinstein program of mandated condom usage and alternative testing. Of course, the fear that such regulation would be the final blow to porn production in California (and, to a lesser extent, Florida) due to collapse of sales already depressed due to piracy and the recession, is the gravest concern of most porn performers and producers.

On the other hand, one person's fear is another one's opportunity: and some sex-positive intellectuals and activists, as well as even a few porn pros on both sides of the camera, may see the resulting storm as a silver lining that finally liberates  porn production to become more humane and progressive.

The dilemma here, as it always has been since we have had these panics, is balancing the well-meaning aims of those who want to provide the maximum protection for performers with those who don't necessarily see condoms as the end-all cure-all for STD prevention,  and would much rather have a say in their own profession.

As for BPPA's position on this issue??  Well, it remains the same as it has been...Ernest Greene's original rebuttal to the last scare in 2009 that was posted here remains as solid today as it was then.(I will add a link to that particular post and the ensuing comment thread it instigated to the sidebar here soon for easy access.)

But the best case against simply throwing condoms around as the ultimate panacea without actually listening to those who would have to actually use them comes from none other than Nina Hartley, who posted this at her website forum in response to similar calls last year:

[...]

Since then, the usual talking heads have gotten their panties in a wad about how Porn Sets Bad Example For The Viewing Public, and Porn Is A Menace To All Who Work In It, and Those Poor Women Who End Up In Porn: What Shall We Do To Save Them?

For the best response to all of this, do a search for "the blog for pro-porn activism," and read the 5,000 word essay that Ernest so generously took the time to write. It tells it like it is much better than I can, so why duplicate work? It won't take long to read, trust me.

In a nutshell, performers as a rule don't care for condoms for several reasons. For most of the men (with few exceptions), condoms make for a very-much-more difficult scene; just one more huge distraction to add to the host of other ones on the set: uncomfortable set, no chemistry with the female player, asshole director, late/early hours, too hot/cold, bad food, personal issues, etc.

For the women, there are just four words: rubber rash/friction burn. Not only do I have to work harder for him to feel anything, the scene takes much longer to get through, with the changing out of condoms, needing to give the guy a break and suck him again, and the total passion-killer that is on-set condom use. It's hard enough to create a real connection, so the scene doesn't feel to the viewer like we faxed it in, on a set as it is. If all of our energy is focused on our working parts, there is none left over to actually connect and show a spark, which is what the people at home want to see.

There are a few men who are voluntarily condom-only and so have little trouble with them, and their work is cut by 2/3, at least.

I know it sounds harsh, but it's not porn's job to set a good example to the viewing public. It's an entertainment medium like anything else out of Hollywood, and mainstream entertainment is not held up as needing somehow to set a good example. It's a shame that our country does such a piss-poor job of educating its young people so that they're driven to view porn to try to get a clue about sex. Except when a movie is expressly done as education-the Guides, Tristan Taormino's movies, etc., their job is to arouse and entertain, period.

I hate it when those who are made uncomfortable by sex or porn project their issues onto our business.

Porn is pretty safe. If a player says "no" to the most egregiously stupid acts (cream pies, whether anal or vaginal), then he or she is unlikely to get a deadly disease at work. People do get the non-lethal ones, but they get treated, as do their partners, and they get to work again when their new test comes back clean.

Of all of the dead porn stars on the Dead Porn Star site, most have died from auto accidents.

And then, there is Belladonna, who adds her nickel's worth on the responsibility of porn performers to protect themselves:

[...]

First of all, I’d like to say that I am thankful that the adult industry has become exceptionally safer since I first started performing back in 1999. Back then, testing for Chlamydia and Gonorrhea was not required, which I found to be ridiculous since those were the most common STDs. However, I do believe that if the 30 day window were shortened to at MOST, 7 days, we could BETTER prevent the spread of Chlamydia and Gonorrhea, not to mention HIV.

Since I started testing people that I have sex with 3 days prior to our engagement, it has been over 5 years since I’ve contracted Chlamydia or Gonorrhea. I knowingly caught over a handful of performers with STDs by using this rule. As a female in this industry, I can say it feels DAMN good to not have to spend every week at the doctor’s office clearing up an STD and being out of work. I feel like I’m more excited about having sex and performing, knowing that I’m going to be STD free. I also think it would be smart for new performers in the business to be required to get a full panel test, prior to performing, not only for themselves to see where they stand, but for our industry as well. I think a lot of performers get into the business and already have the herpes virus and don’t know about it and then try to blame it on the industry.

Performers in this business need to be safer when having sexual relations OUTSIDE of the industry. They need to be more responsible with safe sex because they DO know more than the average person when it comes to STDs and safe sex. If this were happening, the spread of STDs inside the business would be a fraction of what it is now. As for condoms, personally, I can only be as safe as I can be without diminishing the value of what I’m trying to accomplish. Condoms just don’t feel good to suck on, or to take in the ass, hard and fast. If I were required to use condoms, my performance would most likely suffer, and in the end I would suffer. I’m not trying to debate with anyone here, I’m just saying, if my co-workers were more responsible, we could all make some great porn and be STD free at the same time.

Now, the prevailing attitude of those wanting mandatory condom usage would probably be that women like Nina and Belladonna are merely elitists and paid shills for "the industry" who really don't give a damn about the risks of other female performers (and, if the likes of Shelley Lubben are to be believed, are in denial about the risks to themselves...as Lubben's recent crackback -- referenced here -- about Nina "being infected with chlamydia four times" in her porn career shows).

My response to that would simply be: Well...better them who have to take the risk themselves than those who simply talk about it. It's their asses and pussies and mouths that are on the line, now isn't it??

Oh...and one other thing: The only response that will be allowed here for "Patient Zero" regarding his sexual orientation is empathy and support. Those who will exploit this situation to spread unconfirmed rumors or vent their homophobia and rants about the "gay menace" simply will get no love or even bandwidth here. Until the actual test results are made public, the best thing is to wait and see, and make the necessary precautions.

HIV-Porn "Outbreak" Update: Cal Judge Stones Cal-OSHA, Keeps "Patient Zero" Med Records Private

Well, well, well....it seems that there is respect for privacy regarding medical records after all.  Even for porn performers.

This latest from XBiz.com:

Cal-OSHA Can’t Seek AIM Healthcare Medical Records

 OAKLAND, Calif. — A judge last week OK'd a protective order sought by "Patient Zero" over five years’ worth of information from the AIM Healthcare Foundation that Cal-OSHA had been seeking.

Patient Zero, the adult industry performer who was found to be HIV-positive in June, asked the court to seek an injunction against Cal-OSHA and AIM because released patient-identifying information would violate Patient Zero’s right to privacy and give irreparable harm to her, according to a suit filed by ACLU attorneys.



Alameda Superior Court Judge Judge Winifred Smith, in her ruling said that "once [Patient Zero’s] identifying information is revealed, the disclosure cannot be undone,” and that Cal-OSHA can carry out its probe with a variety of other options.


Smith also said that Cal-OSHA was not acting within its jurisdiction in subpoenaing the data through the years 2004-2009.


“Cal-OSHA is charged with, among other things, investigating 'causes of any employment accident that ... results in a serious injury or illness, or a serious exposure, unless it determines that an investigation is unnecessary.' Smith said in her ruling. “Plaintiff is concededly not an employee of AIM, and Cal-OSHA is admittedly not investigating the safety of AIM's employees, but of adult film industry employers."


Smith further said that Cal-OSHA is limited to investigating employers and their agents.


“There is no apparent need for identifying information of Patient Zero, or of patient-identifying information generally, for the purposes of investigation of AIM as an employer," she said.


The suit over Patient Zero information was put on the fast track after her counsel from the ACLU learned of a meeting slated in July between Cal-OSHA officials and AIM personnel.


The court filing detailed the extent Cal-OSHA used its regulatory power to seek patient medical records at AIM, which provides HIV and STD testing and treatment mostly for adult industry performers.

Cal-OSHA, which conducted a surprise inspection of the AIM facility in Sherman Oaks, Calif., on June 17, later issued a subpoena to AIM but not to Patient Zero, who was informed by AIM on June 6 that results of an HIV test showed her preliminarily testing positive for HIV. (Patient Zero’s identity has never been revealed publicly.)


The subpoena issued by Cal-OSHA included requests for confidential public health records and “personally identifying information of AIM patents who tested positive for HIV that could reasonably be expected to identify or lead to the identification of Patient Zero.”


At the time, AIM personnel refused to produce records.


But Cal-OSHA officials scheduled a follow-up investigatory interview with AIM staff in Oakland, Calif., according to the suit.


Once Patient Zero’s attorneys got wind of the interview with AIM staff, they immediately shot off a request to Cal-OSHA objecting to it.


Patient Zero’s counsel said they never received any response from Cal-OSHA relative to the request; however a receipt of the letter showed that Cal-OSHA special counsel did receive the letter.


Patient Zero's counsel later filed its suit at Alameda Superior Court. Last week, they were successful with the injunction.

Notice especially the graph dealing with Judge Smith's ruling that Cal-OSHA has no jurisdiction over AIM's testing activities of porn performers, since the performers themselves are not employees of AIM.  That alone should put an abrupt end to the screeching of Michael Weinstein that Cal-OSHA or the LA County health officials can use this latest "scare" to impose mandatory condom usage or other punitive measures intended to impose their brand of social engineering.

Now...whether that ruling affects Weinstein's ongoing suit against the LA health officials to enforce the mandatory condom rules through local legislation is still up in the air...but considering that it would be Cal-OSHA that would have been responsible for enforcing the rules in the first place, it would seem to be a fatal blow to such efforts.

Of course, that probably won't stop Weinstein from holding one of his pressers condemning Judge Smith as an enabler and a tool of the porn industry who is sacrificing women to their deaths. I wonder if Shelley Lubben or any of the antiporn radicalfems will be accompanying him with the usual horror tales then??