Kayden Kross. BADASS. Fine ASS. SmartASS. (Literally.) And, All Up In Measure B's Grillz.

Today, there was an Internet social media protest action launched by former performer/current producer Stephen St. Croix, in which numerous performers, producers, and fans formed a flash mob to promote two YouTube videos he had created as part of the campaign against Measure B, the Los Angeles County proposed initative to mandate condoms for porn shoots there. Unfortunately, due to prior work commitments, BPPA wasn't able to actively participate in this action....but we wholeheartedly in spirit and in solidarity support St. Croix's efforts to inform the public on the dangers and misdirections of Measure  B. For those of you wanting to see the two video ads, here they are:

Original vids can be found here and here. 

But...if that isn't enough to convince you of the demerits of Measure B, then perhaps a testimonial from an active porn performer will do??

May I then present the powerful testimony of Kayden Kross, which was posted today to XBiz through her insider blog, The Dish. I will simply repost it in its entirity and let you read for yourself, because it says what needs to be said.

— but about Measure B

If you’re reading this you should care. If you’re reading this you should care because I am a pornstar and you are reading one of my blog pages. You’ve probably whacked it to me. If this is not the case, please change that. I’ll wait.

And I’ll assume from here forward that anyone reading has whacked it to my porn, or at least taken a quick glimpse, and not whacked it. If the non-whacking is my fault, I apologize. Beside the point though, the whacking. Please notice — in a quick mental shuffle through the Rolodex of my porn — the conspicuous absence of condoms in my scenes. They are not there. I did condom scenes in my first movie, and that turned out to suck major monkey balls. The added friction the condoms caused over the course of the shoot was ridiculous. The condoms were not a birth control measure. They were, theoretically, an STD protection. But all the performers were tested. So in my first movie I was protected from STDs that my coworkers didn’t have.

In the next movie I opted out of condoms, and have ever since. Six years I’ve been doing this with a perfect testing record. The system has worked for me.

And in that time, yes, performers have caught gonorrhea. They have caught chlamydia. When this has happened they have taken antibiotics and a week off and then returned to work, good as new. They have not caught HIV. Not a single case of HIV has been transmitted on one of our porn sets in the entire time I’ve been in this industry, and some years before that. Not one fucking case.

And yes, people in the industry have caught HIV off set, in the wild. They have been flagged by the testing procedures and removed from the pool of performers available to work. But they have not transmitted it on a porn set to other performers.

And, yes. There is the recent bad business of this syphilis scare. One of our own faked his test and continued working knowing he had it. That’s shitty. We bungled that one bad. Shitty shitty shitty. Two people caught syphilis this way. With all the bungling. They had to take antibiotics.

And the industry reformed its testing measures to better control against this happening in the future.

In the wild, on average, there are around 2,150 new cases of HIV reported in Los Angeles County each year. This is possibly because there are a lot of people having sex with a lot of other people without verifying one another’s STD status. We are not those people. We’re verified. We are card-carrying motherfuckers.

And who wants to see condoms in porn anyway? Porn is fantasy. It is fantastical with fantastically crazy situations wherein incredibly unlikely women with incredibly unlikely breasts suddenly fall to their knees over men who have their own incredibly unlikely anatomy at the slightest provocation. Never mind the lack of realism behind the perfect shaves and the matching lingerie these women all sport, bent over as they are, waggling their asses with spontaneity. Surely this really happens. Surely women just go around like that, clean-shaven and in designer lingerie, with designer breasts, twenty-four-fucking-seven, horny out of their minds. We beg you to suspend your disbelief in porn. We practically grovel for it. We push limits that would make even a puppet show retch — everything from the dialogue to the story holes to the errors in continuity that are just positively and irreverently savage. But… Measure B would have us get all real-world on your ass and strap a condom on the unlikely dicks and remind everybody sitting at home that fantasy time isn’t very fantastical at all because in the real world there is heartache and death and disease and — god forbid — pregnancy?

Fuck that.

Porn is legal because it is protected under free speech. Free speech protects expression. Measure B wants to force us to amend our free expression to include their message about safe sex.

You know about safe sex, right? Because you’re not twelve? Well just in case, here’s the long and short of it:

Sex is the biological function of procreation. As such, procreation sometimes happens. Condoms will help prevent that, as will birth control pills, spermicide, tube tying, and more extreme measures.

STDs are those diseases that are primarily transmitted via sex, although they are not limited to sexual transmission. The nature of communicable disease by definition requires it to be shared between organisms. It must be communicated — by blood or by semen, by air, by skin-to-skin contact, by snot or by spit or by tears — by something. So yeah, sex will bring a person in contact with a lot of these things. All of them, if you’re an avid deepthroater. Sex is messy and in your face. It’s arguably the only acceptable way to interact with two ends of a digestive system that isn’t your own without a medical license. But yeah, condoms will prevent some communicable diseases with 85% accuracy if you use them exactly right. Having sex with people who have been medically verified as not infected with sexually communicable diseases will also prevent this. So will abstinence. Your best bet, though, is agoraphobia.

So now you know that condoms are an option in safe sex. You are a responsible adult. You will make your choices from here.

But we are not responsible adults, obviously. Because Measure B would like to make the choice for us.

Consider this: Do you remember High School Biology? Remember the concept of Spontaneous Generation and how Louis Pasteur disproved it with the squiggly-necked flask that microbes couldn’t get through? Maybe I’m the only one who remembers this because back then I liked textbooks instead of people. But anyway he proved that things don’t spontaneously generate. They don’t just arise out of thin air. And remember that paragraph I wrote a couple of paragraphs ago? I talked about how diseases must be communicated. And remember that other paragraph, up higher, where I talked about how all performers are tested? We are tested every fifteen days now. It used to be every thirty. And I hate needles. The point is that diseases don’t arise within porn. They are brought into porn by contact with partners on the outside.

And yet porn is treated like disease starts with us and we bring it to you people.
No. Disease ends with us. Maybe we’re doing the local population a small favor. Because we, for the most part, have an open and honest line of communication about STDs. STDs don’t carry the stigma for us that the general population associates with them. We talk about it. We’re on the frontlines and it is in our economic interest to stay disease free, not to mention we’re vain about our genitalia. Most STDs are silent. That means that for the most part people don’t know they have gonorrhea or chlamydia. HIV takes a while to manifest. Stage 1 syphilis is a single painless bump. The general population only knows there is something up if there are symptoms, and even then, they don’t always do anything about it. They definitely don’t go stick a godforsaken needle in their arm every fifteen days even though needles give them that scary-sinky feeling they get on the rides at Six Flags that drop too fast. Or again, maybe that’s just me. But anyhoo, in the general population, STDs travel silently. We porn performers are the variables that light them up. If one of us contracts an STD from one of you we catch it fast and we fix it fast and most of us then go back to you (not you-you, but the hypothetical sexual diseased person I am creating for this example. You know what I mean) and you, the hypothetical carrier, are alerted and told to fix it and then you, the hypothetical carrier, stop spreading it. See what just happened there? We are the end of the line.

Imagine if that one of our number who faked his test had just gone on in the real world instead. Not only would he have never tested, but it would have spread on silently, and those people who he spread it to would have spread it, and on and on, and then eventually someone would have had the sense to go to a doctor once Stage 2 flared up on his balls like one of Moses’ plagues. But that person who went to the doctor would have been so far removed from the original source, the incubation period being what it is, and the stigma being what it is, that the person would probably would have treated it silently and gone on with life, and the others would hopefully have done the same at some point, but not before infecting more people, or maybe they would never have treated it and just gone blind and insane. That is an option. Also known as Stage 3.

You’re probably reading this at work, right? If you’re paid hourly this math will be easier, but if you’re not, break it down. How many hours of your day today will be taken from you in the form of the cash you traded them for by the government. I mean taxes, of course. And then the government, being what it is, will reallocate your money, which is a tangible manifestation of your hours of your life that you traded doing what hopefully you love, but very likely don’t love. Some of the reallocation will be nice. Roads and schools and people not holding you up with machetes and taking your lunch money on the way home from work. These are good things. But some things… some things are not good things. Some things get your money by running a propaganda-driven campaign that the government buys into and then funds (with your money).

Like what is happening with AHF (AIDS Healthcare Foundation). AHF is the force behind Measure B. They are a non-profit foundation that possibly doesn’t profit because profits are diverted to Michael Weinstein in the form of a really ridiculous salary, plus perks. A salary to the tune of $366,096.00 as reported on his 2010 income taxes, to be exact (plus additional compensation that is hard to get a figure on). AHF will benefit greatly if this Measure passes. It is in their best interest. If it were in the interest of the performers it seeks to regulate, the performers would be the ones getting behind it.

And because a lot of performers are not behind it, Measure B has decided that it will cost California $300,000 (which is, to the budget’s credit, less than Michael Weinstein’s salary) annually to enforce it. That’s California, just to be clear. You know, the broke state. The one that already needs more dollars from you as it is. So under Measure B, they’d need to find dollars to send officers to porn sets to babysit, to watch hard dicks, specifically, to make sure, the whole time, that there is a latex barrier between the one willing adult participant and the other. Someone will be paid with your money to do this.

And also, because it’s a capitalist system, as in a free market system, a lot of porn will simply cease to be produced in California under Measure B. Because the market for porn with condoms is almost no market at all. So these businesses will likely move or close down. Either way, they stop paying taxes in California. You know, that broke state. There is talk of Nevada, some other states. I thought about what I would do in Nevada. Gambling bores me and I’m asocial. Nightclubs scare me. Magicians aren’t magical. I cannot live there. I thought about it, and I thought, No, that would suck. No offense, Nevada.

And there are people like me who agree with the Nevada thing. Where do their jobs go? Those people like me are people like you. They have families. Some have kids. They’re rooted in the cities they live in. They’re not all performers. They’re caterers and lighting crews and audio technicians and editors and PAs and producers and make-up artists and directors and agents and copywriters and receptionists and on and on. That’s a lot of fucking people with a lot of fucking jobs in this state in an industry where job security is precarious as it is. Piracy. Remember that? There was a worldwide recession, you may have noticed.

But if none of this appeals to your logos or your ethos, let me appeal to your pathos. Imagine yourself whacking it. Obviously I’d like to insert a case here re: why you should whack it to my porn but you can whack it to anything, almost. It is your imagination. So you’re whacking it, see. Maybe it’s the only free five minutes you get out of this day, because your kids are screaming and they need things and your wife needs things and your boss needs things and there is always traffic and emails piled up and taxes due and smaller bills and the dog needs a check up or maybe you do or maybe your grandmother does and the news is scary and you have dry cleaning to pick up, things to mail, a million petty endless errands and maybe today you’ll get them all done but tomorrow you’re going to wake up and start it all over again, and its been going like this for years, this adult life, and you have five fucking minutes to yourself. And you just want to whack it. So you’re tucked away in the bathroom stall or behind the closed door of your office or maybe you’re in your car parked behind an alley — you’re anywhere — and you have five minutes to whack it before the real world sinks its real world teeth in and pulls you back. And you start scrolling through the available porn and everything is condoms, fucking condoms everywhere with their hospital smell and their real world reminders and the funny bunching they do. You dig deeper. You’re looking for a scene with your favorite chick, or not — doesn’t have to be a chick and doesn’t have to be your favorite, it’s your call — so you’re looking for one scene you can really enjoy in your five fucking minutes of reprieve. But you don’t find it. Your five little minutes of pure selfish happiness, your you time, is slightly diminished by this. Imagine that. The real world creeping in on that last bit of sacred space.

Vote No on Measure B. 

— This message brought to you by a girl who would like to maintain autonomy over her vagina. 

The 25-year-old, Sacramento native is among the most sought-after actresses in adult today. The winner of the 2011 XBIZ Award for Acting Performance of the Year for her role in "Body Heat" is currently exclusive with Digital Playground and has been making adult movies since 2006. She is the only starlet in porn to have had exclusive contracts with Vivid Entertainment, Adam & Eve Pictures and now Digital Playground.

An itenerary of posts opposed to Measure B can be found over at Julie Meadows/Lydia Lee's blog here. Also, check out Steven St. Croix's powerful personal testimonial against Measure B here.

 

How To Stuff A Porn Panic: The Official Op-Ed AGAINST Measure B In Los Angeles County

I'm sure that it will come to no surprise to you that this blog -- BPPA -- has been strongly opposed to all attempts to impose the condom mandate on porn....and we will apply that same principle to our continuous, steady and consistent opposition to Measure B, the proposed referendum that would impose the condom mandate onto Los Angeles County.

Just as this blog will equally and with the same intensity oppose the already passed condom mandate law now in effect in the city of Los Angeles, and which, if the forces of Cal-OSHA and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation have their way, would be imposed not only in Los Angeles, but even state-wide and nationwide.

Our opposition to this initiative goes far beyond our questioning of the political and financial motives of the ordinance's proponents...although much has to be said about the history of Michael Weinstein and the AHF in exploiting the pandemic of STI's and HIV to suit his/their own personal profits, or the ham-fisted paternalism of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health and Cal-OSHA in rejecting the testimonies and experiences of active performers and the proven track record of the existing system of peer pressure combined with screening and vigilant testing, or the tainted histories of some of the performers who have become the main symbols of justification for the condom mandate campaign.

Our opposition to this initiative also goes beyond our knowledge of what happens when good intentions are connected to bad, overreaching legislation that promises a panacea or a quick-fix to a problem that is considerably more complex and requiring more of a broad-based approach than merely scapegoating performers who engage in sex as a performance job. Not to mention, legislation that detaches itself from the all too real epidemic/pandemic of STI's and HIV that has devastated poor and working class communities, as well as the very gay communities that Michael Weinstein would claim to want to protect.

Our opposition to this initiative also goes well beyond the attempts by certain personalities to distort the facts and inject fear and propaganda through outlandish claims of "blacklisting" of performers who want to use condoms voluntarily as one tool of many in protecting themselves; or, even worse, overt alliances with some of the most antisex, antiporn, antihumanist activists whose objectives to simply destroy both the LA porn industry and the consumers/fans/producers/performers whom have thrived within it, or simply to rehash old vendettas against organizations who have been on the front lines of defending and protecting the rights and responsibilities of porn performers.

Mostly, however, our opposition to Measure B is based on a fundamental principle that has sometimes been hijacked and distorted by its proponents, but nevertheless remains an essential concept: "NOTHING ABOUT US, WITHOUT US."

Performers in adult entertainment who take the risks should be the ones to decide for themselves what options they choose to protect themselves...and that includes the choice to use condoms or not to. And any government regulation involving protection of performers must have input and consensus from ALL performers and producers, not simply be imposed by fiat by bureaucrats more concerned with getting sweetheart deals with condom companies and NGO's and government contracts.

In spite of some of the "Why, we're all for performer choice, which was denied us when condom-only was removed in favor of condom optional!!" memes being passed around, the fact remains that this proposal would remove some of the best options for performer testing -- namely, a unified and consolidated testing system -- in favor of a "just shut up, wrap up, and hope the condom doesn't break" fallacy.  Even worse, under the system favored by AHF and the condom mandate proponents, there would be no way that an STD+ or HIV+ performer could be screened out, because of antidiscrimination regulations that would prohibit firing of infected performers.

And, contrary to some of the proponents' assumptions, this is NOT an reflexive opposition to the principle of government regulation, a Trojan Horse to the common right-wing view that ALL government regulation is illegitimate and that only the Wild Wild West rules of "do your own thing, and fuck the consequences" should apply. This isn't to denigrate in any way our libertarian friends and allies who may have that view, but who nevertheless join our opposition to the condom mandate on shared principle; it's only to say that there are people on the Left side of the political spectrum (Susie Bright, for example) who have been as critical and incisive in their opposition to the mandate and the entire campaign to impose condoms as our more conservative friends.

Of course, others far more involved than me have opined about the difficulties in funding the enforcement in an atmosphere of budget cutting and triaging of resoures that could be put to much more effective use, or the imminent dangers of overuse of condoms due to potential allergic reactions and even increased cancer risks. Those concerns are worrisome enough to justify defeat of this measure on its own (lack of) merits.

But whether you are on the Left, Right, or Center, the essential case against the condom mandate and Measure B is best explained by the people who would bear the full brunt of such misguided regulation -- the performers themselves. I will close this with the testimony of one of the most renowned and respected performers of the modern era, since she says everything that needs to be said about why Measure B and all such proposals to impose condoms by force and fiat need to be defeated. I yield the balance of this post to Nina Hartley:

“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...

...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...

...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.”BPPA

Truer words were never better spoken.

More info on the "NO On Measure B" campaign can be found at the Free Speech Coalition blog, and at The Real Porn Wikileaks blog as well. Also, check out Michael Fattorosi's Adult Biz Law blog, too.

Also, see Dr. Chauntelle Tibalis' recent editorial against Measure B at her PVV blog here.

[A disclaimer: This opinion piece reflects only the views of the author and of BPPA, and is in no way affiliated financially or in any other form with the Free Speech Coalition, the Coalition Against Government Waste, AHF, FAIR, or any other organization or group involved in the Measure B campaign.]

Porn Panic 2012: The Syphilis REALLY Hits The Fan; FSC/APHSS Call For Temporary Porn Production Moratorium

I'll simply quote from the statement just released from APHSS just now.

A performer who tested positive for syphilis has been in touch with FSC and is meeting with FSC’s medical professionals to begin partner identification, evaluation and treatment. FSC has called a temporary moratorium on production until the risk to performers in the industry has been properly assessed and all performers have been tested.

APHSS’ doctors have met and discussed the best avenue to protect the performers and have determined that testing the entire population is the most prudent strategy. A determination will be made by the doctors on the appropriate time to lift the moratorium as more information is revealed.

That sucking sound you just heard are the popping of champagne bottles from Michael Weinstein, Shelley Lubben, Gail Dines, and all opponents of porn...because this new development all but assures that the condom mandate ordinance passes in LA County this coming November, and that AHF now has free reign to impose their condom mandate and "barrier testing" regime not only porn produced in Los Angeles, but ultimately everywhere.

After all, who after this will ever trust porn performers to regulate themselves ever again?

It's so much easier to accept the claims of "blacklisting" of pro-condom performers (such as Brittany Andrews, one of the most strident supporters of the condom mandate) who say that intervention is needed to make hetero porn more like gay porn in allowing HIV+  performers to do scenes, and just trust that the condoms don't break. Besides, isn't it for their own good to be the honored sacrificial lambs for "safer sex" and do their part to educate the rabble about the right way to engage in sex??

Of course, the tube sites, the message boards selling all those stolen free bareback scenes, and especially the rogue XXX sites are also popping their champagne bottles, too, because they will be the recipient of the gold mine of underground bareback sales, as the majority of the consumers simply abandon condomized sex. And all the underground, unregulated, and less respectable producers will have a field day, as they will get the full economic benefits of performers forced to go to them to make their paydays when work is eliminated.

But, who cares about all that?? It's all about "performer choice", right?? Except for those who have succeed in protecting themselves without Michael Weinstein's approval.

And, in the meantime, while all this happens, the REAL pandemic of STI's amongst the poor and mostly Black population in California and the US goes on unabated, and the same people so eager to protect performers from themselves cast a blind eye to the denial of decent treatment, or even access to affordable care, for millions of "civilians".

Because forcing dental dams and condoms on porn performers for the purpose of "role modeling" and boosting condom company sales and NCO money is far more important than actually caring for whole neighborhoods suffering and dying.

Enjoy your porn, folks, because it won't be here for long.

[Just my own personal view, folks, and hopefully just not-so-wishful prophecy...but I have my doubts.]

Porn Panic 2012: The Syphilis Hits The Fan

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

Porn Panic 2012: The Testing Wars: Here Comes The Spin

I would be derelict in my duties if I didn't post the reactions from both sides of the now aborted compromise that would have unified performer testing across the board.

First...the statement by Talent Testing Services on their decision to break completely with APHSS:

Talent Testing Service, Inc. worked diligently to comply with three basic requirements in order to appease the Manwin/FSC/APHSS model of presenting a unified reporting system. These three items were:

1. Change our web portal to demonstrate a "Cleared/Not Cleared" status of results instead of showing the actual test results.

2. Automated transfer of Talent Status to the APHSS Database.

3. Cooperate in helping to build protocols in case of a positive case.

Once these three items were completed, Manwin/FSC/APHSS was to issue a press release indicating that it would accept TTS test status to be viewed in the TTS web portal by its producers and agents. After completing the first two items, TTS was asked to provide its protocols for handling positive cases to Manwin/FSC/APHSS. We indicated that this was not part of our agreement, that we would assist and help to create these needed protocols (as agreed), but we would not have ours copied for use at Manwin/FSC/APHSS. We consider these protocols to be proprietary and confidential. At this time Manwin/FSC/APHSS demanded to see these procedures for which we declined.

“It has become evident that our initial position of not participating in the Manwin/FSC/APHSS mechanism for testing/reporting is the correct one.” said Sixto Pacheco, president and CEO of TTS. “We have always believed that industry testing laboratories should be completely unbiased and unattached from any other industry affiliated organizations in order to avoid any misconception about the validity of the testing being performed. Furthermore, the manual entry of a talent's "Status" into the Manwin/FSC/APHSS database by any participating facility is an unsafe practice,” added Mr. Pacheco.

TTS will continue to provide the level of service our stakeholders are accustomed to by providing the latest testing methodologies coupled with our technology based platform without sacrificing our Quality and Privacy Policies and Protocols in place.

Talent Testing Services, Inc. caters to clients by providing the most up-to-date technology. The company uses QR Codes for validating printed test results, as well as a convenient mobile page for verification of authenticity on-demand and access to actual test results. Producers/Agents as well as Talents are provided with a personal online dashboard that provides access to historical and most recent testing information. Furthermore, Talents can set up automatic reminders for next test dates.

 So, apparently, the deal breaker was the insistence that TTS incorporate their protocols for contacting performers possibly testing positive for STI's into the APHSS database, which they balked at for what they deemed "security" reasons.

Not to be outdone, of course, APHSS was quick with their own counter response.

This is the first word we have received from Talent Testing Services that they have chosen to stop sending data to the APHSS database. We regret this decision by TTS since it will have a negative effect on performers and producers.  Further, it obviously endangers adult production industry self-regulation protocols, especially at a time when the industry is under fire from outside interests that support mandatory condom legislation.

We have done everything possible to compromise with TTS – despite their objections to participation in APHSS – because we had requests from several producers and agents to include TTS data in the APHSS database. We agreed with producers and agents that including TTS data was the best possible situation for the industry (despite their unwillingness to comply with APHSS policy & protocols), in order to have a complete source of information for active performers.

If TTS is currently in dispute with Manwin over alleged demands placed on them for further cooperation, APHSS cannot comment on these developments as they do not directly involve any negotiations that we have had with TTS. APHSS responded to TTS’ initial demands by providing them with an automated interface to load data into the APHSS system. At that time, TTS agreed to follow APHSS protocols in the event of an STI exposure incident.

However, because of other objections from TTS to APHSS policy, they declined to be included in the APHSS program and so were not able to become an APHSS-recommended facility. It seems that now they have decided to drop out of the program completely, based on their own business interests.

We assume that Manwin has based their company policy on what is most prudent for them, and we commend them for giving serious consideration to establishing health and safety protocols for their company.

The APHSS database was developed by industry stakeholders, attorneys and compliance experts to be a comprehensive source of information, to safeguard self-regulation protocols – as well as providing performers with reliable health services that include doctors and healthcare professionals. The database design was also developed to safeguard user privacy and security.

APHSS-recommended facilities have been chosen from established healthcare providers that have agreed to abide by industry self-regulation protocols, including the presence of on-staff physicians and adherence to  STI exposure protocols. Many of those protocols are based on those developed by the AIM clinic. These components are essential to any industry self-regulation – without them, the industry has little defense against mandated regulation by governmental entities. The essence of those protocols have been effective since they were established in 1998.

In addition, the recently-initiated Performer Subsidy Fund is to be administered through the APHSS system, which will subsidize testing for all performers whose testing data is updated through the APHSS system. Without voluntary TTS updates for performers that choose to use their services, we cannot hope to know which performers have tested there, so subsidizing their test fees will be nearly impossible. Most critically, it will also be impossible for APHSS to gather data on performers that test at TTS, in the event of an exposure incident.

Again, we have had little communication from TTS concerning these latest developments and we hope that their representatives will reconsider the potential repercussions that their decisions will have on the entire adult production community.

We encourage producers and performers to consider carefully their own policies toward industry testing and STI protocols, but acknowledge that all are free to choose the services they wish to use. Producers and performers wanted - and have a right - to a system that offers them choice, reliability and, most importantly, cooperation in the event of any STI exposure incident. APHSS will continue to provide those services and more, now and in the future.

 So, it seems, we are back at Square One, with no organized testing protocols, a divided industry, and AHF/CalOSHA/LACDPH waiting for November and a successful condom mandate law to move in for the kill shot. Heck of a job there, guys.

Porn Panic 2012: The UCLA/Talent Testing Services Sexual Health Study: Empirical Research Or An AHF/Cal-OSHA Blindside For The Porn Industry??

Well, now....the Porn Testing Wars just got a new and ultimately interesting twist this weekend. As if the breakdown of the compromise between the Free Speech Coalition/Adult Performer Health and Safety Services and Talent Testing Services wasn't enough of a twist already.

Talent Testing, you will recall, reported last week that they would now back completely out of the compromise that they reached with APHSS, where they would share their test results with the database that APHSS uses to notify performers and producers of porn of their clearance to shoot scenes.  Basically, they cited incompatability with the protocols required by APHSS, including the requirement of a doctor on staff to verify test results and notify performers who are at risk for positive STI infection, as well as the need to maintain their "independence" from production companies such as Manwin, whom had essentially funded and backed the APHSS standards and protocols, and even offered to repatriate some of the costs of testing for performers. Mostly, though, they were opposed to joining APHSS on the concern that the latter group was, to their eyes, only a fundraising shakedown for the Free Speech Coalition, and biased towards a competing testing group, Cutting Edge Testing, that was formed out of the charred ashes of AIM -- the original testing group that was ridden out of LA in 2010 as part of the campaign to impose condoms in porn -- and whom was fully within the APHSS protocols.

Given the timing of all this happening while the Los Angeles County condom mandate is still being prepared for a November vote, one can marvel at the way that the industry is eating itself at precisely the wrong time.

However, a new and intriguing outside source has intervened to further stir things up a bit.

On Saturday, Talent Testing Services announced that they would participate in a sexual health survey hosted by the University of Cailfornia at Los Angeles (UCLA), in which they would offer their clients incentives (such as discounts on testing and free followup care) to participate in the survey. Essentially, any performer participating in the survey would have to sign a waiver giving UCLA the right to use their information (I assume with names removed for privacy protection) from their tests in whatever way they see fit.

That wouldn't be too much of an issue...except for one inconvenient fact: UCLA has also been the home of some of the more strident and openly hostle advocates of the condom mandate.  In particular, UCLA  - though its Reproductive Health Interest Group - has hosted seminars on performer testing and condoms in porn that have degenerated into nothing more than glorified press conferences for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the LA County Department of Public Health, Cal-OSHA, and other groups seeking to impose "barrier protections" in porn. (One such seminar even allowed Shelley Lubben to become the default "repesentative" of porn performers, while totally freezing out active performers who weren't so zealous towards the condom mandate and willing to torch the industry for its supposed mistreatment and "abandonment" of its talent.)

So, the question remains: Why would Talent Testing knowingly ally themselves with an organization which has openly abetted the agenda of AHF and would ultimately seek to undercut the industry??

At his latest post over at Adult Legal Blog, Michael Fattorosi weighs in one factor that may count: $$$$$:

There is a third potential possibility as well. Many people are now starting to understand that information is worth money. Data mining is a big time business in this world. STI testing results are indeed worth money to the United States government as well as corporations developing new drugs for STIs.

[...]

Performers wanting to receive a $40 gift card and free follow up STI medical care can participate in the study. Which essentially means that UCLA will have the right to their test results and medical care to use as part of their study – in essence a performer waives their right of privacy in so much that the information will could be sold. I am sure this information will be sanitized – meaning names will be removed since UCLA probably doesn’t care about a performer’s name or identifying information – rather UCLA cares about the empirical data – how often one tests, how often one catches an STI, the treatment received for such, how long the treatment lasted and how effective the results of the treatment were. That could be a data goldmine for a drug company trying to develop the next anti-biotic to fight any one of the many STIs on the planet.

How much can a group or organization receive for this type of information ? According to the link I posted to the National Institutes of Health’s grant overview information website, there is no limit. However if you want more than $500,000.00 you have to call the NIH directly. Apparently you cannot just email the application for a grant requests at that level.

I am not saying that Talent Testing Services received the grant themselves, however it does appear that UCLA has indeed received grant money for the study of STIs. The performers present a very unique situation in the world when it comes to STI research. I am going to bet that no where else in the United States does a group of people test for and possibly contract STIs as much as performers do in porn. And now that the testing cycle is being pushed to every 14 days, the amount of information is only going to increase and therefore the potential gold mine of data will increase in value as well.

As I tweeted, “there is gold in them thar HIV tests!”

 But as usual, I have a much darker, less pliable motive in play. Remember that UCLA has been all in with the AHF and Cal-OSHA throughout the entire condom mandate, and AHF has had no qualms in using underhanded tactics in using and acquiring performer records (whether it be using lawsuits to force AIM to hand over personal and private medical information, to using LACDPH staff to go to performers' houses with syringes seeking live blood samples, to exploiting both private message boards and underground sites like the original Porn Wikileaks in order to use private performers' medical records for their own cause). There's nothing that says that there wasn't some grease applied by AHF to get UCLA their grant for this study, and nothing says that the information gathered by this study won't be used by AHF as campaign fodder for their condom mandate ordinance. Or worse, that the information couldn't be conveniently be "sold" to AHF for use as blackmailing performers into compliance, or even recruiting them unwittingly in service to their potential "condom police".

It probably has also crossed Talent Testing's mind, too, that collusion with AHF/UCLA/Cal-OSHA, combined with busting the Manwin/APHSS/FSC/Cutting Edge Testing trust could gain them some serious credibility later on if the condom mandate ultimately passes and withstands court challenges. Clearing out a competitor AND getting paid...not a bad concept.

Now, all of this is simply conjecture on my part...for all I know, Talent Testing is simply taking advantage of an opportunity to contribute to a badly needed assessment of performer testing and STD study. But, considering the timing of all this, at the very least some answers are in order as to why they would do this at this time, rather than at least wait until after the condom mandate issue is resolved.

And, Shy Love and all those agents who are so exercised at defending Talent Testing's right of "independence" should take a step back and ask these same questions.

Porn Testing Wars 2012: Manwin Clarifies Their Stance Against Talent Testing Services; Reinforces Performer Testing Program Pool

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

Jenna Jameson's Endorsement of Mitt Romney: Mavericky Move, Or Just Plain Foolish??

You would think that the war against the condom mandate would be at the top of porn people's minds right now....but the big buzz overtaking Porn Valley this weekend has less to do with defending the right to go unwrapped. It has more to do with more traditional rights...as in, voting for President.

Jenna Jameson may be long since retired from porn, and may have even generally repudiated it (though, to be fair with Jenna, she has not as of yet gone Shelley Lubben or Linda Lovelace), but she still casts a huge shadow on the industry, having been its most visible brand name for the 1990's and early 2000's. Ever since her controversal biography A Cautionary Tale was released around 1997 or so, Jenna has parlayed her notoriety and her porn queen status into a very lucrative and affluent (as far as adult performers go) lifestyle; her net worth has been estimated to be in the range of $20-30 million, according to the CelebrityNetWorth.com website.

I guess that from that alone, you could tell exactly whom she would endorse for President of the United States this coming election.

CBS San Francisco affiliate KCBS-TV first broke the story of Jameson publically endorsing former Massachusetts governor/Republican Mitt Romney over incumbent POTUS/Democrat Barack Obama last Thursday, and it spread throughout the news cycle and the Internet like wildfire pretty rapidly.  At least Jenna was direct and honest about the endorsement: it's all about the Benjamins:

"I'm very looking forward to a Republican being back in office," Jameson said while sipping champagne in a VIP room at Gold Club in the city's South of Market neighborhood. "When you're rich, you want a Republican in office."

Funny, since in 2008 she actually backed a Democrat, Hillary Clinton, for President; and she didn't pull the trigger for John McCain, the ultimate Republican nominee that year who ended up losing to Obama. Perhaps Sarah Palin was just a bit too....shall we say, idiotic for even a diehard GOP'er like Jenna Jameson to take??

But Jenna's endorsement raised some eyebrows for totally serious reasons, too: Mittenz, as I tend to gloss him, was a generally moderate Massachusetts Republican while he was governor of that state, but like most GOP'ers, he has been forced pretty far to the Right due to the pressures of the Religious Right conservatives and the Tea Party "populists" who now have become the predominant voting "base" of the GOTP; not to mention the influence of big money billionaires such as Sheldon Acheson and the Koch brothers, and political commissars like Grover Norquist. And, that would also include going hard right on sexual expression, too; Romney has been most recently loudly about the scrounge of pornography and how he would control it through filters and prosecutions. Indeed, one of the main persecuters of the Bush era antiporn campaigns, Patrick Trueman -- who now heads the group Pornography Harms -- has even boasted that Romney (through his aides) has now endorsed fully their plans to crack down hard on porn speech and expression as an assault on "decency" and "morality".

Also, Romney had (when he was still campaigning for the Republican nomination against Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich) signed a written statement produced by Trueman's organization Morality in Media specifying "strict enforcement of our nation's obscenity laws" and a promise to appoint an Attorney General who would "vigorously" enforce same laws.

Given all that, one could wonder why someone like Jenna Jameson would basically turn so heavily on the industry that gave her her good fortune.

However, it should be noted that most upper-middle-class professional artists tend to become more conservative politically, and there are plenty of porn performers and producers who are otherwise strong conservative Republicans and supporters of Mitt Romney in general. Even someone like Ron Jeremy, who did manage to deliver a vicious smackdown at Rick Santorum for his fundamentalist zealotry against porn, was willing to give Mittenz a benefit of the doubt, calling him "a good man" who "means well", as well as "a good father". (The Hedgehog, though, is still committed to voting for President Obama.)

Some critics have raised some ulterior motive of racism against Blacks as a prime mover of Jameson's voting habits, citing Jenna's hesitance during her career of working with Black male performers (and remember, some of Hillary Clinton's followers were willing to go down that path during 2008); while others far more obtuse have simply blamed way too many facials and creampies and the nature of Jenna's "profession" for her supposed idiocy.

But while all this has become a running snark of the usual double enterdres and adolescent catcalls; there is a serious and often very dangerous aspect of dismissing Jameson's right to express her political opinions due to her chosen profession. "Slut shaming" is about as much a common practice in American culture as baseball and apple pie; and hating on women because of their sexual prowess is a custom that is far, far too common. It's more overt on the conservative side of the spectrum because that's where the more predominant antisex/antiporn attitudes lie...but it's not totally absent on the political Left, either.

The fact that Jenna Jameson happens to be a conservative Republican should not be an excuse by anyone calling him/herself a liberal or "progressive" (or any other political label, for that matter) to demonize or diminish her as a fully grown woman merely because you don't like her choice of profession or her private sex life. (And that goes to infinity for YOU, Gail Dines....I see your next CounterPunch essay working, madame.)

Also, for all you progs/libs/Lefties who are enjoying the spectacle of Jenna Jameson being raked over the coals for her conservative views: I suppose that some of you are the very same ones who were sporting #ImWithSECupp hashtags when the MSNBC hostess/right-wing libertarian/atheist apostate got satirized by Larry Flynt's HUSTLER magazine in June with the notorious "dick in her mouth" photoshop. But, if what HUSTLER did was over the top and pretty close to "misogyny", then what do you think the vicious smearing of Jenna Jameson for being a porn icon is?? Education??? Never mind that none of that pseudo-feminist solidarity with Cupp transformed her into her any less of an antifeminist/anti-contraception Tea Party sychophant. But then again, when Gail Dines can still get more run for her idiocy about porn in lefty circles while Nina Hartley, who has more authentic lefty/prog/feminist cred in her right butt cheek than a thousand clones of Dines put together, it shows how much real learning folks of the Left could use about their own sex negativity.

Jenna Jameson can and will live with her political endorsements. Maybe we can all do the same, whether or not we agree with her.