A sanctuary for supporters of sexual free expression and the adult sexual media.
Wednesday, April 2, 2014
Mike South: Proudly Spreading Ignorance About STI Testing In Porn Since 2003 (Pwnage By Sharon Mitchell And AIM, via AVN)
This summary is not available. Please
click here to view the post.
Tuesday, April 1, 2014
Izzy Hall's Last Stand: SB 1576, The Condom Mandate...errrrrrr, Personal Protective Equipment Bill (Now With 50% More 2257 Kick!!) Gets Its Day In California Assembly
If at first you don't suceed..
Last year, California Assemblyman Isadore Hall made two efforts to exploit the numerous STI controversies ongoing in the Los Angeles-based porn industry in order to pass his bills to force mandatory condoms and other "barrier protection" onto porn shoots. Both times, his bills didn't even make it to the full Assembly for a vote, due to them getting killed in committee due to costs and Constitutional questions.
This week, though, Assemblyman Hall and his backers at the AIDS Healthcare Foundation are hoping that, to use another trite catch phrase, the third time would be the charm.
The newest effort, SB 1576, attempts to take a different approach from the previous attempts last year.
If you will remember, Hall's original attempts at the condom mandate utilized the existing CalOSHA regulations regarding treatment of "employees" and protection from "bloodborne pathogens" in order to require porn producers to force condoms on performers against their wishes. It also basically ignored if not sought to eliminate and replace entirely the existing screening and testing regime that has been used by the industry to screen out potential infections.
This year, though, Hall and his commisars at AHF seem to be more aware that their case isn't quite as airshut as they originally thought....so, they've tweaked and tinkled with their bill constantly to get to the point of finally unleashing it to an Assembly committee on tomorrow. The fact that the Free Speech Coalition is holding their annual "Free Speech Lobbying Days" sessions with the Assembly next week might also have something to do with their sudden desparation push.
Whatever the motivation may be, the final product of Hall still has as many questions as answers.
One main departure from last year is that the bill does give a left-handed nod to the testing regime by requiring that all adult performers not only be induced to wear "personal protective equipment" (that would include not only condoms, but also dental dams, gloves, goggles, and other forms of barrier protection), but would also have to prove that they were tested for HIV and most other STI's within 14 days of their performing anal or vaginal sex acts on screen.
Apparently, this is Hall's/AHF's way of splitting the difference with the industry through acknowledging the success of the FSC-PASS testing regime, while still favoring mandatory "barrier protection" (read, condoms) as supposedly a backup reinforcement.
Strangely enough, the proposed bill would not directly mandate "barrier protection" for oral sex acts, even though the original legislation would have bound porn producers to the provisions of California Code Section 5193, which is in the process of being revised by CalOSHA to cover porn shoots. Those proposed revisions would have not only mandated condoms/barrier protections for all anal and vaginal sex acts on screen, but would also have sanctioned any proximity of bodily fluids (including sperm or vaginal secretions) from areas where STI transmission could take place. That would mean no creampies, no facials, no external pop shots below the breasts or above the knees, and no pop shots on the buttocks. SB1576, unlike last year's efforts, slides away from such requirements, concentrating only on "barrier protection" for anal and vaginal sex.
That would be bad enough for performers who want their own choice of protection...but in the process of attempting to make his bill acceptable for passage, Assemblyman Hall added some language that may potentially undue his efforts.
Here's the pertinent section on how Hall plans to enforce his bill, through what appears to be a record-keeping nightmare for porn producers.
Now, isn't there a law called the Health Information and Personal Privacy Act (aka HIPPA) which protects people's medical records from just such a public intervention?? And, wasn't it AHF who used the same motive of "medical privacy" to sue the old AIM when Desi Foxx's medical info turned up online thanks to the work of the original Porn Wikileaks?
If this sounds so hauntingly familiar, it's the same exact degree of death by information logging that the age verification 2257/2257A federal regulations were created to enforce. And like 2257, this new regime of medical bookeeping would allow so much abuse due to anyone getting access to the medical records of performers and using them for exploitive blackmail or doxxing...or worse.
Whether or not all this is enough go get through the Assembly firewall will be seen by all tomorrow, when the Assembly's Committee on Labor and Enforcement take up the bill. It would have to pass there, then go to another committee and pass that before it goes to the full Assembly..and then it would have to go through and pass the California State Senate before going to Governor Jerry Brown for his signature.
Most folk say that this won't even pass the smell test and will be tabled like the last two efforts. We'll just watch and see.
Last year, California Assemblyman Isadore Hall made two efforts to exploit the numerous STI controversies ongoing in the Los Angeles-based porn industry in order to pass his bills to force mandatory condoms and other "barrier protection" onto porn shoots. Both times, his bills didn't even make it to the full Assembly for a vote, due to them getting killed in committee due to costs and Constitutional questions.
This week, though, Assemblyman Hall and his backers at the AIDS Healthcare Foundation are hoping that, to use another trite catch phrase, the third time would be the charm.
The newest effort, SB 1576, attempts to take a different approach from the previous attempts last year.
If you will remember, Hall's original attempts at the condom mandate utilized the existing CalOSHA regulations regarding treatment of "employees" and protection from "bloodborne pathogens" in order to require porn producers to force condoms on performers against their wishes. It also basically ignored if not sought to eliminate and replace entirely the existing screening and testing regime that has been used by the industry to screen out potential infections.
This year, though, Hall and his commisars at AHF seem to be more aware that their case isn't quite as airshut as they originally thought....so, they've tweaked and tinkled with their bill constantly to get to the point of finally unleashing it to an Assembly committee on tomorrow. The fact that the Free Speech Coalition is holding their annual "Free Speech Lobbying Days" sessions with the Assembly next week might also have something to do with their sudden desparation push.
Whatever the motivation may be, the final product of Hall still has as many questions as answers.
One main departure from last year is that the bill does give a left-handed nod to the testing regime by requiring that all adult performers not only be induced to wear "personal protective equipment" (that would include not only condoms, but also dental dams, gloves, goggles, and other forms of barrier protection), but would also have to prove that they were tested for HIV and most other STI's within 14 days of their performing anal or vaginal sex acts on screen.
Apparently, this is Hall's/AHF's way of splitting the difference with the industry through acknowledging the success of the FSC-PASS testing regime, while still favoring mandatory "barrier protection" (read, condoms) as supposedly a backup reinforcement.
Strangely enough, the proposed bill would not directly mandate "barrier protection" for oral sex acts, even though the original legislation would have bound porn producers to the provisions of California Code Section 5193, which is in the process of being revised by CalOSHA to cover porn shoots. Those proposed revisions would have not only mandated condoms/barrier protections for all anal and vaginal sex acts on screen, but would also have sanctioned any proximity of bodily fluids (including sperm or vaginal secretions) from areas where STI transmission could take place. That would mean no creampies, no facials, no external pop shots below the breasts or above the knees, and no pop shots on the buttocks. SB1576, unlike last year's efforts, slides away from such requirements, concentrating only on "barrier protection" for anal and vaginal sex.
That would be bad enough for performers who want their own choice of protection...but in the process of attempting to make his bill acceptable for passage, Assemblyman Hall added some language that may potentially undue his efforts.
Here's the pertinent section on how Hall plans to enforce his bill, through what appears to be a record-keeping nightmare for porn producers.
(i) (1) An adult film employer’s injury prevention program shall include a log of information for all scenes produced or purchased, including, but not limited to, documentation that:
(A) Each time an employee performing in an adult film engaged in vaginal or anal intercourse,The main point here is that the "employers" would be required to keep detailed records of every scene they produced or published, in which not only the performers' names and licenses would be made accessible to health authorities upon request, but also test results, the detailed sex acts, and the type of "personal protection" used in each scene. Yes, folks, I said medical records. And, those records would have to be maintained and logged by the production companies for as long as the law allowed, if not forever.
a condom or other protective barrierpersonal protective equipment was used to protect the employee from exposure to bloodborne pathogens. This paragraph shall not be construed to require that the
condom or other protective barrierpersonal protective equipment be visible to the consumer in the finished film.
(B) Each employee performing in an adult film was tested for sexually transmitted infections,
including, but not limited to, HIV, according to the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the State Department of Public Health current at the time the testing takes place, not
lessmore than 14 days prior to filming any scene in which the employee engaged in vaginal or anal intercourse and that the employer paid for the test.
(2) For the purposes of this subdivision, “adult film” means any commercial film, video, multimedia, or other recorded representation during the production of which performers actually engage in sexual intercourse, including oral, vaginal, or anal penetration.
Now, isn't there a law called the Health Information and Personal Privacy Act (aka HIPPA) which protects people's medical records from just such a public intervention?? And, wasn't it AHF who used the same motive of "medical privacy" to sue the old AIM when Desi Foxx's medical info turned up online thanks to the work of the original Porn Wikileaks?
If this sounds so hauntingly familiar, it's the same exact degree of death by information logging that the age verification 2257/2257A federal regulations were created to enforce. And like 2257, this new regime of medical bookeeping would allow so much abuse due to anyone getting access to the medical records of performers and using them for exploitive blackmail or doxxing...or worse.
Whether or not all this is enough go get through the Assembly firewall will be seen by all tomorrow, when the Assembly's Committee on Labor and Enforcement take up the bill. It would have to pass there, then go to another committee and pass that before it goes to the full Assembly..and then it would have to go through and pass the California State Senate before going to Governor Jerry Brown for his signature.
Most folk say that this won't even pass the smell test and will be tabled like the last two efforts. We'll just watch and see.
Thursday, March 27, 2014
Why People Living In Glass Houses With Busted Septic Tanks Shouldn't Talk Sh*t About Others: Mike South Exposed As A Hypocrite...And WORSE
Blowback can be a real bitch sometimes. There is a saying: The things you do and say will come back on you, like bad food. Whichever end it comes out of, however, says a lot about you.
For amateur porn producer and profoundly loud critic Mike South, that saying is even more prescient today, in the wake of current events.
Michael Whiteacre over at The Real Porn Wikileaks has been running a fine series of articles there exposing South for the hypocrite and double talker he seems to be.
Most of you know Mike South as one of the most verbiose critics of the Free Speech Coalition's testing protocols and of certain performers in the Los Angeles-based porn industry. Along with his protege, "President" Rob Black, he has been on a rolling campaign from his North Georgia base to support the drive to mandate condoms in all porn shoots, while all along smacking his lips about how superior he is in locating and shooting talent.
Needless to say, that "superiority" took some major crotch blows this week, thanks to Mr. Whiteacre and TRPWL.
It began with an expose post last week where TRPWL relayed the story of a performer named Jessica Chase, whom had attempted to shoot some porn with South in Atlanta for his websites (and for possibly creating a website for her), only to experience all sorts of hell. The actual article goes into full detail of what Ms. Chase endured; here's just a brief sample:
For his part, South simply dismisses Ms. Chase as a "bimbo" and a "dumb bitch", and responded to the original article with his customary "Consider the source".
Problem for him was, that was just a foreshock, albeit a decently sized one. Yesterday, came the proverbial follow up, and it was The BIG ONE in comparison.
In the follow up piece, Whiteacre expounds on Jessica Chase's travails with Mike South to reveal what could be one of the greatest hypocrisies of all time: The man who incessantly attacks the porn industry for not meeting his high standards of HIV/STI protection, not only doesn't follow his own standards, but actually violates them with impunity.
Turns out that in those shoots that Ms. Chase did with South for his sites, he only used a quick instant swab test (OraQuick) for HIV, provided for by the male "talent" (who was also not even paid for their efforts, BTW), instead of the expanded testing regimen (HIV-Hepatitis A/B/C-Chlamydia-Gonorrhea-Syphilis) required by the FSC-PASS protocols. And..he didn't ever require condoms, either.
In fact, for one particular shoot, South allegedly even blew off the fact that Ms. Chase's testing period had lapsed beyond the 28 day period, and told her not to retest, though she offered to do so, because he didn't deem it necessary....because there was no "penetration" in his scenes. "Penetration" in this case refered to vaginal and anal sex; the scene actually shot was a "blow bang" featuring oral sex and facials.
It would be deliciously ironic were it not for the fact that the same Mike South was blasting out posts galore busting LA's porn scene for not mandating condoms and doing more to protect their talent from the apparent STI pandemic that was supposedly ongoing. Or, that the same Mike South had the sac to label as a "moron" and an "idiot" a 30 year veteran of porn and a certified registered nurse whom had more knowledge about STI prevention on the ground than he could ever get.
But, even all that pales to the most ironic aspect of all this: the entire point of the South/Black/AHF condom mandate campaign is to effectively destroy and dismantle the FSC-PASS testing regime and replace it with mandatory condoms reinforced by "local" decentralized testing that would be "free" and based on the OraQuick HIV swab method...in short, the very system that South used against Jessica Chase.
Never mind that the proposed CalOSHA "bloodborne/sexually transmitted pathogen" regulations would also ban facials and require condoms for oral sex acts as well (unless the performers involved take Hep C vaccines and are cleared by approved medical personnel); I guess that South would probably consider that a win since that would shoot down competition for his amateur porn market. If those regulations were adopted by his own state's OSHA, though, South would be out of business....and let's not also forget the fact that Georgia isn't exactly a porn friendly state, either.
And as for South's claim that his "commom sense" approach would beat across-the-board universal testing in screening out STI+ individuals....well, I'll just let Michael Whiteacre hit that knuckball of a lie out of the park in conclusion (bolded emphasis added by me):
For amateur porn producer and profoundly loud critic Mike South, that saying is even more prescient today, in the wake of current events.
Michael Whiteacre over at The Real Porn Wikileaks has been running a fine series of articles there exposing South for the hypocrite and double talker he seems to be.
Most of you know Mike South as one of the most verbiose critics of the Free Speech Coalition's testing protocols and of certain performers in the Los Angeles-based porn industry. Along with his protege, "President" Rob Black, he has been on a rolling campaign from his North Georgia base to support the drive to mandate condoms in all porn shoots, while all along smacking his lips about how superior he is in locating and shooting talent.
Needless to say, that "superiority" took some major crotch blows this week, thanks to Mr. Whiteacre and TRPWL.
It began with an expose post last week where TRPWL relayed the story of a performer named Jessica Chase, whom had attempted to shoot some porn with South in Atlanta for his websites (and for possibly creating a website for her), only to experience all sorts of hell. The actual article goes into full detail of what Ms. Chase endured; here's just a brief sample:
Jessica Chase picks up the story from there:The article provides support through emails and texts provided by Ms. Chase to TRPWL.
I go down there with him, we stay at Lindsey Lovehands (who is a sweetie). Come to find out, she had no idea that we were supposed to be shooting (only South knows how that happened as he set up the shoot because it was for [our] website). She and I get it together the next day and do our two shoots (one for her site, one for mine).
I let South know I was upset when I found out that there were no more shoots. So I ask, “What shoots do I need for my site that I can actually do?”And so it was that Mike South didn’t get his blow job.
“Oh, a bj video,” he says. I’m like, “why didn’t you bring this up when I had a room full of guys, one being a male friend when I shot the Bukkake for you?” I didn’t get a straight answer other than,” You can shoot your bj video with me.” I declined, due to the fact that he is supposed to be a producer, not talent, and frankly I’m not stupid, so I angrily left Florida and returned to Ohio.
As for the matter of the COD package sent via UPS, unsurprisingly there’s more to that, too:
About half-way back I remember my company airbrush tanning equipment is at his house, where I had stopped to follow him to Florida. He had ridden his bike, so I took my airbrush equipment etc. out of my car to make room for his stuff. I text[ed] him to let him know, to which he said that he would ship it COD to me once he returned home from Florida.
He found he had to pay money to ship his photography stuff, etc back to his house, as he couldn’t fit it on his bike, and thus began a huge Mike South tantrum. This tantrum included not giving UPS correct addresses his nor mine, even after I told him my address again and what needed to be done.
For his part, South simply dismisses Ms. Chase as a "bimbo" and a "dumb bitch", and responded to the original article with his customary "Consider the source".
Problem for him was, that was just a foreshock, albeit a decently sized one. Yesterday, came the proverbial follow up, and it was The BIG ONE in comparison.
In the follow up piece, Whiteacre expounds on Jessica Chase's travails with Mike South to reveal what could be one of the greatest hypocrisies of all time: The man who incessantly attacks the porn industry for not meeting his high standards of HIV/STI protection, not only doesn't follow his own standards, but actually violates them with impunity.
Turns out that in those shoots that Ms. Chase did with South for his sites, he only used a quick instant swab test (OraQuick) for HIV, provided for by the male "talent" (who was also not even paid for their efforts, BTW), instead of the expanded testing regimen (HIV-Hepatitis A/B/C-Chlamydia-Gonorrhea-Syphilis) required by the FSC-PASS protocols. And..he didn't ever require condoms, either.
In fact, for one particular shoot, South allegedly even blew off the fact that Ms. Chase's testing period had lapsed beyond the 28 day period, and told her not to retest, though she offered to do so, because he didn't deem it necessary....because there was no "penetration" in his scenes. "Penetration" in this case refered to vaginal and anal sex; the scene actually shot was a "blow bang" featuring oral sex and facials.
It would be deliciously ironic were it not for the fact that the same Mike South was blasting out posts galore busting LA's porn scene for not mandating condoms and doing more to protect their talent from the apparent STI pandemic that was supposedly ongoing. Or, that the same Mike South had the sac to label as a "moron" and an "idiot" a 30 year veteran of porn and a certified registered nurse whom had more knowledge about STI prevention on the ground than he could ever get.
But, even all that pales to the most ironic aspect of all this: the entire point of the South/Black/AHF condom mandate campaign is to effectively destroy and dismantle the FSC-PASS testing regime and replace it with mandatory condoms reinforced by "local" decentralized testing that would be "free" and based on the OraQuick HIV swab method...in short, the very system that South used against Jessica Chase.
Never mind that the proposed CalOSHA "bloodborne/sexually transmitted pathogen" regulations would also ban facials and require condoms for oral sex acts as well (unless the performers involved take Hep C vaccines and are cleared by approved medical personnel); I guess that South would probably consider that a win since that would shoot down competition for his amateur porn market. If those regulations were adopted by his own state's OSHA, though, South would be out of business....and let's not also forget the fact that Georgia isn't exactly a porn friendly state, either.
And as for South's claim that his "commom sense" approach would beat across-the-board universal testing in screening out STI+ individuals....well, I'll just let Michael Whiteacre hit that knuckball of a lie out of the park in conclusion (bolded emphasis added by me):
And how does Mike South claim he prevents STI transmission on set?It was just this kind of "Trust us" mentality that led to Marc Wallace, Darren James, Derrick Burts, Mr. Marcus, and Cameron Bay/Rod Daily. And if folk like Mike South get their way and get to dismantle the testing protocols that have worked, there will be plenty more.
No system is perfect but common sense goes a long way….maybe that’s why in 20 + years in this industry not one person on any of my shoots has ever contracted any kind of STD. Ever.
But then I won’t shoot just anyone either, I have an interview process and if I don’t like her answers (or his) I don’t care how hot they are I ain’t shooting them.
I can’t think of a girl I didn’t stay in touch with for quite some time after we shot, but that’s because (partially) I interview most of them in person at least twice prior to shooting so we kinda becomes friends.
So, Mike South claims he has special powers: the ability to determine someone’s STI status, or their scene partners’ risk of contracting an STI, based on talking to them twice.
As I told South at the time, “Those are anecdotes, Mike, not data, You know better. It also assumes the performers in question actually know where they caught it and/or desire to tell you. That’s not science and it’s not logic either.”
Setting aside the fact that, without a universal testing AND monitoring/surveillance system that could access records of the test results of all performers with whom he worked both before AND AFTER they worked with him, South could not possibly know for certain whether any of his performers had ever contracted an STI.
Does South honestly expect anyone to believe that 20 years ago when, for example, he shot scenes in hotel rooms at adult conventions, when testing was not what it is now — and new talent went from room to room shooting scenes — some performer showed him even a one or two-day old test, and he can somehow be 100% sure that “not one person on any of [his] shoots has ever contracted any kind of STD”?
People lie about their STI status, people can be mistaken, people can fail to get a follow-up test, etc — it is exceedingly difficult to determine where a sexually active person who is doing scenes contracted an STI, or transmitted an STI – but it is scientifically impossible to know this if one can’t look at a tests for EVERY performer before and after the scene. People walk around with STIs for YEARS without knowing they even have them.
And when Mike South tells people not to bother getting tested, they WON’T find out.
Sunday, March 16, 2014
How To Destroy Your Reputation And Alienate An Entire Industry In One Day: The Horrible MindGeek/Twistys TOTY 2014 Fix
This isn't necessarily the normal bit of subject matter for BPPA, but since we cover the industry as much as we defend it, it's important to tell the tale when we think it is doing wrong as when it warrants defense.
The adult Internet is now in full flame over the events of the last two days concerning the former glamcore website Twistys.com, and their apparent railroading of their most recent Treat of the Year contest to reward one of their owner's contract models at the expense of the actually deserving models.
The Real Porn Wikileaks' crack (no, not that kind, folks) reporter Michael "Deep Throat" Whiteacre is on the case with a full synopsis of the sitch posted there...but for you, here's the abbreviated story:
Twistys was one of the most successful "glamcore" porn sites, which featured women doing mainly solo and girl/girl scenes, which made them different from the usual boy/girl and "gonzo" sites like Brazzers and BangBros, which were owned by the conglomerate Manwin.
But then, Manwin ousted their original president, rebooted themselves under the name MindGeek, and bought out Twistys, bringing in new management. And, apparently, they concluded that glamcore wasn't their cup of tea, and that Twistys should be bought to heel and introduced to the porn ticky tacky formula of cheap profits and b/g scenes.
Which brings us to their recently completed 2014 Treat of the Year contest, which was supposed to be a fan-voted election where members of the Twistys forum would have the final say in selecting a winner and a runner-up. The prize was a cash award and a paid trip to Costa Rica to do a rip-roaring scene.
Given Twistys sterling reputation, plenty of their models and former TOTY winners turned out to show out for the votes.
Ultimately, the voting concluded, and a winner was announced. Nicole Aniston got the most votes, and was awarded the prestigious award. The runner up, OTOH, wasn't so simple...and that's where I turn the mic over to Mr. Whiteacre:
But even that "compromise" was apparently not good enough for MindGeek/NewTwistys, because...
The backlash has been predictably swift and deep. Vanessa Veracruz, the scorned and jilted rightful runnerup, is firing back at MG/NewTwistys with a #BoycottTwistys campaign, seconded by many of her sister models. Others, like Elle Alexandra, have fired their own volleys back, saying that they would never model ever again at that site. (In Alexandra's case, not by choice, since NewTwistys revoked and canceled her upcoming shoots following her complaints.)
NewTwistys' "So sorry, we are out of fucks to give; we run our own company and stay your asses out of our business" reaction certainly don't help defuse the situation, either. They managed to banish all critics -- including even some past TOTY participants and winners -- from their forum....and then, they even shut down the forum itself, claiming "ongoing maintenance". Riiiiight. Also, "TwistysRob" resigned his post in protest, and now operates his Twitter account under a new name.
This is exactly the kind of corporate idiocy and disrespect for the models/performers who create the content for companies like MindGeek and Twistys that allow the likes of Gail Dines (remember her??) and Shelley Lubben the tiny bit of legitimacy to slam the porn industry as a meat grinder. It's even more unfortunate because MindGeek/Manwin has actually done positive things for the industry through their contributions to the Free Speech Coalitions's PASS protocols, their support for improved talent STI testing, and their opposition to the condom mandate campaign.
Maybe it's time for a new Danni Ashe to emerge to show the Porn Industrial Complex how it should be done. I have my idea for who could step up to the plate....but that's only me.
The adult Internet is now in full flame over the events of the last two days concerning the former glamcore website Twistys.com, and their apparent railroading of their most recent Treat of the Year contest to reward one of their owner's contract models at the expense of the actually deserving models.
The Real Porn Wikileaks' crack (no, not that kind, folks) reporter Michael "Deep Throat" Whiteacre is on the case with a full synopsis of the sitch posted there...but for you, here's the abbreviated story:
Twistys was one of the most successful "glamcore" porn sites, which featured women doing mainly solo and girl/girl scenes, which made them different from the usual boy/girl and "gonzo" sites like Brazzers and BangBros, which were owned by the conglomerate Manwin.
But then, Manwin ousted their original president, rebooted themselves under the name MindGeek, and bought out Twistys, bringing in new management. And, apparently, they concluded that glamcore wasn't their cup of tea, and that Twistys should be bought to heel and introduced to the porn ticky tacky formula of cheap profits and b/g scenes.
Which brings us to their recently completed 2014 Treat of the Year contest, which was supposed to be a fan-voted election where members of the Twistys forum would have the final say in selecting a winner and a runner-up. The prize was a cash award and a paid trip to Costa Rica to do a rip-roaring scene.
Given Twistys sterling reputation, plenty of their models and former TOTY winners turned out to show out for the votes.
Ultimately, the voting concluded, and a winner was announced. Nicole Aniston got the most votes, and was awarded the prestigious award. The runner up, OTOH, wasn't so simple...and that's where I turn the mic over to Mr. Whiteacre:
According to Alexandra, after the voting ended Rob informed her that Nicole Aniston had received the most votes, and Vanessa Veracruz had come in second."Rob" refers to the now former production manager at Twistys (more on that anon). "Elle" is model Elle Alexandra, who, like Vanessa Veracruz, is a strictly girl/girl performer.
Elle, he said, had come in third, beating Sophia Knight — also a girl/girl-only performer — by one vote.
Two sources inform TRPWL that Aniston, who had not shot boy/girl content in some time, agreed to work with a male performer in Costa Rica on the condition that Twistys bring Veracruz on the shoot as well.Alas, all that effort was cast aside by the Twistys upper management, because $$$$ (emphasis added by me):
Veracruz told TRPWL that she worked very hard on this year’s contest — arranging giveaways of DVDs and 8×10 photos.
“I put in a lot of time and effort to connect with fans on a daily basis,” she said.
Rob reportedly took to the forum to post that Aniston was the winner and Veracruz the runner-up specifically because he didn’t want the MindGeek brass to pass off boy/girl performer and Mindgeek contract star Madison Ivy — who had placed fifth at best — as the contest’s actual runner-up.So, the model who paid a considerable cost in time and money to actually finish second in a model contest must defer to the model who finished at best out of the pack, because promoting your contract model overrides a fair vote in your own contest?? That would be outrageous enough in any form.
Eventually, however, management indicated they would compromise: seeking boy/girl content, they would bring Ivy to Costa Rica, but would still honor Veracruz’s standing as legitimate runner-up.
But even that "compromise" was apparently not good enough for MindGeek/NewTwistys, because...
That was everyone’s understanding until this morning — when the Twistys site saluted Aniston as Treat of the Year, and Ivy as runner-up.And to further emphasize MG/NewTwisty's sudden urge to send the "We make and remake the rules here, sluts" message:
And, in what appears to be a bit of proactive damage control, the link to the Twistys forum — which is overrun with complaints about the contest — was removed from the Twistys homepage.Turns out, MG had arranged for Ivy's shoot in Costa Rica well in advance of even the TOTY vote; they even paid to fly her to the shoot location before making the announcement of Madison's "win". Apparently, the faux MENSAs who now run MG must have thought that Madison Ivy, who is legitimately popular and well honored as a performer, would get more than enough votes in any contest to win. But, when their lack of knowledge and familiarity with the history of Twistys and their glamcore legacy came back and bit them on their asses, they responded like most big conglomerates when faced with a rebellion from one of their subsidiaries: Crush it like a grape and reestablish your power...and then destroy the evidence.
The backlash has been predictably swift and deep. Vanessa Veracruz, the scorned and jilted rightful runnerup, is firing back at MG/NewTwistys with a #BoycottTwistys campaign, seconded by many of her sister models. Others, like Elle Alexandra, have fired their own volleys back, saying that they would never model ever again at that site. (In Alexandra's case, not by choice, since NewTwistys revoked and canceled her upcoming shoots following her complaints.)
NewTwistys' "So sorry, we are out of fucks to give; we run our own company and stay your asses out of our business" reaction certainly don't help defuse the situation, either. They managed to banish all critics -- including even some past TOTY participants and winners -- from their forum....and then, they even shut down the forum itself, claiming "ongoing maintenance". Riiiiight. Also, "TwistysRob" resigned his post in protest, and now operates his Twitter account under a new name.
This is exactly the kind of corporate idiocy and disrespect for the models/performers who create the content for companies like MindGeek and Twistys that allow the likes of Gail Dines (remember her??) and Shelley Lubben the tiny bit of legitimacy to slam the porn industry as a meat grinder. It's even more unfortunate because MindGeek/Manwin has actually done positive things for the industry through their contributions to the Free Speech Coalitions's PASS protocols, their support for improved talent STI testing, and their opposition to the condom mandate campaign.
Maybe it's time for a new Danni Ashe to emerge to show the Porn Industrial Complex how it should be done. I have my idea for who could step up to the plate....but that's only me.
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Gail Dines' Allies: Judith "Bat-Ada" Reisman Goes WingNut Daily Against AHF, Condom Mandate
[Originally posted to Red Garter Club Blog, condensed and edited for posting here.]
There is a saying; Be careful of who you lie with, because you just might get bitten in the ass. Unless, of course, ass bites are one of your most cherished fetishes.
Remember the name "Judith Reisman"? She had recently joined forces with sister fundie Shelley Lubben in a You Tube video taped at a recent porn convention, where Shelley was actively trolling for new fresh recruits to scam for her Pink Cross faux ministry or ex-porn starlets.
Before then, "Dr." Reisman was well acclaimed as a crackpot right-wing "scholar" who focused her antiporn activism on the calamitous impact of porn on the synapses of its user through "erotoxins", as well as her usual crackpot opposition to any form of sexual activity not approvable to her Christian fundamentalist sensibiities.
You may also remember "Dr." Reisman from her legacy of going from being a script writer for the old-school children's TV show Captain Kangaroo (an eye-roller of its own, considering that Mr. Captain himself, Bob Keeshan, was a openly activist liberal) to becoming an antiporn "feminist" activist who blamed adult sexual speech for causing child sexual abuse, pedophilia, rape, and other degradations to women and children. In an essay that was posted to the 1970's antirape radicalfeminist anthem, Take Back The Night, she maligned the three founders of print porn media -- Playboy's Hugh Hefner, Penthouse's Bob Guccione, and HUSTLER's Larry Flynt, in no particular order, as "Hitler, Stalin, and Goebbels". She then parlayed that pub into an appearance giving testimony to the 1980's Meese Commission On Pornography, where she got to pontificate on the cosmic danger of Playboy pushing child porn to impressionable youth through its...cartoons.
So...how does this connect with Gail Dines?? Well, Reisman's "scholarship" on the negative impacts of porn has been used, reused, and used over and over again by Dines and her associates over at Stop Porn Culture to make their case for censorship of all sexually explicit material. Also, Shelley Lubben has often used Reisman as a go-to source for some of most classic rantage about the destructiveness of porn on those who perform it.
Even better than that, Dines and SPC have been more frequently using Reisman's "scholarship" as a means to unite the antiporn "feminist" and traditionalist Religious Right "obscenity" movements with the anti-sex work "abolitionists" in connecting porn and prostitution/escorting/oncall sexual services/sexual commerce as "sex trafficking".
Plus (and here's the kicker to all this), Dines has been attempting to glam her way into the debate over mandatory condoms in porn by positively citing the efforts of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation to force performers to use condoms and other "barrier methods" as a means of containing an alleged STI/HIV "pandemic".
Never mind that the efforts of AHF come from a fundamentally different paradigm of making money off condom sales....ahhhh, I mean, protecting the jobs of crossover HIV+ performers who would be otherwise prevented from performing in the "straight" porn industry due to the current screening/testing regimen imposed by the Free Speech Coalition's PASS protocols. And, never mind that AHF's core constituency happens to be the very gay male community that has been truly wrecked by the HIV pandemic, albeit there is vast opposition even there to what some feel is AHF's hamfisted approach to selling condoms as "behavior modification", as opposed to treatment or development of a vaccine to cure HIV. To Gail Dines, anything that can be used to slam porn as "corporate capitalist" mass rape and abuse of women is a good thing.
Except, with Judith Reisman, she may have bit off just a bit too much.
Michael Whiteacre of The Real Porn Wikileaks alerted me to an article which ran today over at the very, very ultra right-wing site World Net Daily, which most folk would much prefer to call "WingNut Daily" due to its predisposition to the most bizarre conspiracy theories known to mankind. You know...Birth certificates? Madrassas? Agenda 21/ACORN? "Obama is a Muslim Socialist"??
Anyways..the article pretended itself to be an attack on the notion that condoms are the most effective means for gay male folk to protect themselves against STI's, including HIV/AIDS. It preferred the old tried-an-true method of gays giving up their nasty, sinful, disgusting "buggery" and coming home to Jesus Christ and the joys of heterosexual monogamy and procreative marriage..or facing the full brunt of criminalization through anti-sodomy laws. The article also called for good, God-fearing families of people suffering from HIV, and/or the relatives of people who actually succumbed to HIV/AIDS, to be able to file class action suits against "pro-gay" organizations for lying about the true nature of condoms failing to protect their users from contracting HIV.
Further, the WND article claimed that anal "sex" (yes, the fright quotes are included, because to the author of the piece, penises should never, ever attempt to even touch the tender anal passages of any other person, especially not another man) is not subject to the wonderful protection of more Godly acts like "natural" vaginal sex, because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) allegedly never approved the use of condoms for anal penetration.
The author's evidence for this?? Citations from a "study" from a right-wing Hawaiian state senator named Bob McDermott, attempting to oppose a sex education program in that state that was used by a whopping 12 schools, which called for the usage of condoms as a barrier protectant for PIV and anal penetration. That study took note of the disclaimer that the CDC had not endorsed the use of the original condoms for anal sex due to the risk of breakage and the inflexibility of anal passages.
A single line quote from Rep. McDermott condenses the point concisely:
Don't you just love how fundie rightwingers are so quick with cursing, and just as quick with masking it?
The payoff paragraph in this is whom the author recommends to be sued:
A right-wing antigay organization targeting AHF for representing HIV+ gay folk isn't really news, of course. Until you find out that the author of that piece happens to be.... (screenshot, please)
[click on thumb to link to article]
Yup....you read right....THAT Judith Reisman. Gail Dines' go-to source for "feminist" analysis against porn. The artist formerly known as "Judith Bat-Ada" who was so trusted by radfems that she scored a essay in one of their classic anthologies. The one connection between the whacked-out Hard Right and the radfem antiporn "Left". THAT Judith Reisman.
And now, the same Judith Reisman who is now attempting to ride the wave of antiporn/anti-sexwork activism, and link it with the anti- "sex trafficking" and "porn addiction" movements, and bring her old-school historic antigay bigotry into the mix.
Gee...I wonder what Michael Weinstein would be thinking once he reads this? Or, the "radicallesbians" now totally committed to this "alliance"? Or, for that matter, Professor Dines herself, since she constantly rails about her movement being nicked falsely as palling around with reactionaries. Or...is World Net Daily now simply her newest ally in the fight against The Great Porn Capitalist Conspiracy, and any talk of a "progressive" antiporn "feminist" movement merely just a ruse to cover up the usual sex-hate against anything not linked to procreation or "mutual love"?
I suppose we will all have to see for ourselves, right??
There is a saying; Be careful of who you lie with, because you just might get bitten in the ass. Unless, of course, ass bites are one of your most cherished fetishes.
Remember the name "Judith Reisman"? She had recently joined forces with sister fundie Shelley Lubben in a You Tube video taped at a recent porn convention, where Shelley was actively trolling for new fresh recruits to scam for her Pink Cross faux ministry or ex-porn starlets.
Before then, "Dr." Reisman was well acclaimed as a crackpot right-wing "scholar" who focused her antiporn activism on the calamitous impact of porn on the synapses of its user through "erotoxins", as well as her usual crackpot opposition to any form of sexual activity not approvable to her Christian fundamentalist sensibiities.
You may also remember "Dr." Reisman from her legacy of going from being a script writer for the old-school children's TV show Captain Kangaroo (an eye-roller of its own, considering that Mr. Captain himself, Bob Keeshan, was a openly activist liberal) to becoming an antiporn "feminist" activist who blamed adult sexual speech for causing child sexual abuse, pedophilia, rape, and other degradations to women and children. In an essay that was posted to the 1970's antirape radicalfeminist anthem, Take Back The Night, she maligned the three founders of print porn media -- Playboy's Hugh Hefner, Penthouse's Bob Guccione, and HUSTLER's Larry Flynt, in no particular order, as "Hitler, Stalin, and Goebbels". She then parlayed that pub into an appearance giving testimony to the 1980's Meese Commission On Pornography, where she got to pontificate on the cosmic danger of Playboy pushing child porn to impressionable youth through its...cartoons.
So...how does this connect with Gail Dines?? Well, Reisman's "scholarship" on the negative impacts of porn has been used, reused, and used over and over again by Dines and her associates over at Stop Porn Culture to make their case for censorship of all sexually explicit material. Also, Shelley Lubben has often used Reisman as a go-to source for some of most classic rantage about the destructiveness of porn on those who perform it.
Even better than that, Dines and SPC have been more frequently using Reisman's "scholarship" as a means to unite the antiporn "feminist" and traditionalist Religious Right "obscenity" movements with the anti-sex work "abolitionists" in connecting porn and prostitution/escorting/oncall sexual services/sexual commerce as "sex trafficking".
Plus (and here's the kicker to all this), Dines has been attempting to glam her way into the debate over mandatory condoms in porn by positively citing the efforts of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation to force performers to use condoms and other "barrier methods" as a means of containing an alleged STI/HIV "pandemic".
Never mind that the efforts of AHF come from a fundamentally different paradigm of making money off condom sales....ahhhh, I mean, protecting the jobs of crossover HIV+ performers who would be otherwise prevented from performing in the "straight" porn industry due to the current screening/testing regimen imposed by the Free Speech Coalition's PASS protocols. And, never mind that AHF's core constituency happens to be the very gay male community that has been truly wrecked by the HIV pandemic, albeit there is vast opposition even there to what some feel is AHF's hamfisted approach to selling condoms as "behavior modification", as opposed to treatment or development of a vaccine to cure HIV. To Gail Dines, anything that can be used to slam porn as "corporate capitalist" mass rape and abuse of women is a good thing.
Except, with Judith Reisman, she may have bit off just a bit too much.
Michael Whiteacre of The Real Porn Wikileaks alerted me to an article which ran today over at the very, very ultra right-wing site World Net Daily, which most folk would much prefer to call "WingNut Daily" due to its predisposition to the most bizarre conspiracy theories known to mankind. You know...Birth certificates? Madrassas? Agenda 21/ACORN? "Obama is a Muslim Socialist"??
Anyways..the article pretended itself to be an attack on the notion that condoms are the most effective means for gay male folk to protect themselves against STI's, including HIV/AIDS. It preferred the old tried-an-true method of gays giving up their nasty, sinful, disgusting "buggery" and coming home to Jesus Christ and the joys of heterosexual monogamy and procreative marriage..or facing the full brunt of criminalization through anti-sodomy laws. The article also called for good, God-fearing families of people suffering from HIV, and/or the relatives of people who actually succumbed to HIV/AIDS, to be able to file class action suits against "pro-gay" organizations for lying about the true nature of condoms failing to protect their users from contracting HIV.
Further, the WND article claimed that anal "sex" (yes, the fright quotes are included, because to the author of the piece, penises should never, ever attempt to even touch the tender anal passages of any other person, especially not another man) is not subject to the wonderful protection of more Godly acts like "natural" vaginal sex, because the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) allegedly never approved the use of condoms for anal penetration.
The author's evidence for this?? Citations from a "study" from a right-wing Hawaiian state senator named Bob McDermott, attempting to oppose a sex education program in that state that was used by a whopping 12 schools, which called for the usage of condoms as a barrier protectant for PIV and anal penetration. That study took note of the disclaimer that the CDC had not endorsed the use of the original condoms for anal sex due to the risk of breakage and the inflexibility of anal passages.
A single line quote from Rep. McDermott condenses the point concisely:
“Genitals are sexual reproductive organs,” McDermott told EAGnews, “and the a– isn’t that.”
Don't you just love how fundie rightwingers are so quick with cursing, and just as quick with masking it?
The payoff paragraph in this is whom the author recommends to be sued:
A
class action lawsuit by AIDS victims and their loved ones would rock
the world – a suit based on the fact that condom pushers have for years
dispensed false, deceptive claims about how the product protects – or
fails to protect – the health of sex participants. The reality is that
everyday condoms are manufactured and approved for natural, vaginal sex,
not anal “sex” – they are not effectively designed to protect from
disease those people who engage in sodomy.
Such
a lawsuit should target the AIDS Heathcare Foundation, Planned
Parenthood and a myriad of teachers and school systems, too many to
count, that have taught that anal “sex” (traditionally termed “sodomy”
or “buggery” under British-based legal codes) as not so different than
natural coitus.
A right-wing antigay organization targeting AHF for representing HIV+ gay folk isn't really news, of course. Until you find out that the author of that piece happens to be.... (screenshot, please)
[click on thumb to link to article]
Yup....you read right....THAT Judith Reisman. Gail Dines' go-to source for "feminist" analysis against porn. The artist formerly known as "Judith Bat-Ada" who was so trusted by radfems that she scored a essay in one of their classic anthologies. The one connection between the whacked-out Hard Right and the radfem antiporn "Left". THAT Judith Reisman.
And now, the same Judith Reisman who is now attempting to ride the wave of antiporn/anti-sexwork activism, and link it with the anti- "sex trafficking" and "porn addiction" movements, and bring her old-school historic antigay bigotry into the mix.
Gee...I wonder what Michael Weinstein would be thinking once he reads this? Or, the "radicallesbians" now totally committed to this "alliance"? Or, for that matter, Professor Dines herself, since she constantly rails about her movement being nicked falsely as palling around with reactionaries. Or...is World Net Daily now simply her newest ally in the fight against The Great Porn Capitalist Conspiracy, and any talk of a "progressive" antiporn "feminist" movement merely just a ruse to cover up the usual sex-hate against anything not linked to procreation or "mutual love"?
I suppose we will all have to see for ourselves, right??
Sunday, January 26, 2014
Alexander S. Birkhold Flushes The Arguments For The Condom Mandate With Authority (Washington Univ. Law Review Legal Thesis)
This may be one of the best legal arguments against the condom mandate I've seen in quite a while.
Alexander S. Birkhold, originally a writer for the New York University School of Law, has written a thesis paper for the Washington University Law Review, in which he authoritatively debunks condom mandate laws such as Measure B and the Safe Sex In The Adult Industry Act as gross violations of the First Amendment protections of free speech and consensual sexual expression. Although his main focus is on the impact of such laws on gay bareback sexual acts, I don't doubt that straight/hetero sexual performers could benefit from his analysis as well.
Here's his paper, originally released by Washington University's Law Review as part of their free Law Commons series, and reposted by moi via Scribd.com.
Alexander S. Birkhold, originally a writer for the New York University School of Law, has written a thesis paper for the Washington University Law Review, in which he authoritatively debunks condom mandate laws such as Measure B and the Safe Sex In The Adult Industry Act as gross violations of the First Amendment protections of free speech and consensual sexual expression. Although his main focus is on the impact of such laws on gay bareback sexual acts, I don't doubt that straight/hetero sexual performers could benefit from his analysis as well.
Here's his paper, originally released by Washington University's Law Review as part of their free Law Commons series, and reposted by moi via Scribd.com.
Condom Mandate Update: CalOSHA "Landmark" Ruling In Treasure Island Media Case Seals The Debate On Condoms In Porn...Or, Doesn't.
Interesting event happened on Friday that might have some major bearing on the entire Condom Mandate battle in Los Angeles County....and beyond, even nationwide.
In 2009, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed a grievance with CalOSHA against a San Francisco-based gay porn production studio, Treasure Island Media, in which they claimed that by not using condoms as part of their scenes, TIM was in violation of the "bloodborne pathogen" standard requiring the use of "barrier protection" in all scenes as a means of STI protection. Never mind that no one in any one of those scenes were found to be HIV- or STI-positive, or to have been infected with HIV or any other STI as a result of those scenes; the point was, according to AHF, to establish CalOSHA's power to impose the condom mandate at will against any porn production company statewide. CalOSHA had sanctioned TIM in Feburary of last year with two violations of the standard, to which TIM appealed to CalOSHA's built-in judicial appeal process.
Well...last Friday, CalOSHA Administrative Law Judge Mary Dryovage made her ruling on the case; siding with CalOSHA and upholding the sanctions against Treasure Island Media. In her ruling, she essentially rehashed the standard AHF propaganda points that condoms were the only true means of preventing disasterous outbreaks of STI's, and that porn performers absolutely must be regulated as "employees" for their own "protection", and have condoms forced on them for their own "good".
Naturally, AHF is crowing loud about this "landmark" decision, saying that it effectively ends the debate on condoms in porn by establishing CalOSHA's inevitable right to regulate bareback porn out of business. Here's AHF's spokesperson Ged Kenslea, riffing on, via proven AHF sycophant...errrrrrrrrr, LA Weekly regular columnist Dennis Romero:
Case closed, then?? Ahhhhh....not quite.
There is another side of the story, of course, and The Real Porn Wikileaks just so happened to get Treasure Island Media's response to the ruling and subsequent barrage of BS from AHF.
For starters, they noted that while Judge Dryovage did sustain the original CalOSHA sanctions, she did significantly reduce the fines involved: totally eliminating the fine for one count (from $9,000 to $0); and reducing the fine for the other count from $9K to $6,300.
And secondly, they loudly announced that the principle of defending sexual freedom demanded that they further appeal the decision to an even higher court. Here's attorney Karen Tynan, who represents TIM, speaking via TRPWL:
It remains to be seen how the appeal process will resolve this case...or if this "landmark" decision really is the end of the line for bareback porn....although, I'm sure Isadore Hall and Michael Weinstein are already writing the speeches that Hall will use to integrate this ruling into their next legislative attempt to force Measure B statewide, or to aid CalOSHA to craft the ever evolving "bloodborne pathogen barrier protection" regs as a wedge to be imposed nationwide.
And, I'm just as sure that those who perform and enjoy bareback porn -- whether gay or straight or bi or whatever combination thereof -- will equally battle to defend their freedom and right to do so.
Either way, this isn't over, by any means. Stay tuned.
In 2009, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed a grievance with CalOSHA against a San Francisco-based gay porn production studio, Treasure Island Media, in which they claimed that by not using condoms as part of their scenes, TIM was in violation of the "bloodborne pathogen" standard requiring the use of "barrier protection" in all scenes as a means of STI protection. Never mind that no one in any one of those scenes were found to be HIV- or STI-positive, or to have been infected with HIV or any other STI as a result of those scenes; the point was, according to AHF, to establish CalOSHA's power to impose the condom mandate at will against any porn production company statewide. CalOSHA had sanctioned TIM in Feburary of last year with two violations of the standard, to which TIM appealed to CalOSHA's built-in judicial appeal process.
Well...last Friday, CalOSHA Administrative Law Judge Mary Dryovage made her ruling on the case; siding with CalOSHA and upholding the sanctions against Treasure Island Media. In her ruling, she essentially rehashed the standard AHF propaganda points that condoms were the only true means of preventing disasterous outbreaks of STI's, and that porn performers absolutely must be regulated as "employees" for their own "protection", and have condoms forced on them for their own "good".
Naturally, AHF is crowing loud about this "landmark" decision, saying that it effectively ends the debate on condoms in porn by establishing CalOSHA's inevitable right to regulate bareback porn out of business. Here's AHF's spokesperson Ged Kenslea, riffing on, via proven AHF sycophant...errrrrrrrrr, LA Weekly regular columnist Dennis Romero:
AHF spokesman Ged Kenslea told us that one of the most important aspects of the ruling ...The decision was also praised by yet another even more pro-AHF sycophant, former producer Mike South, who breathlessly repeated the same old AHF talking points that this all but clinched the condom debate....not to mention that not only could Cal-OSHA could set the rules regarding the condom mandate, but because their rules could be expanded nationwide by the federal OSHA, they could be enforced everywhere in the US. In other words, to rephrase AHF President Michael Weinstein's well quoted saying: "Whereever they go, we will follow them."
... is its affirmation that performers are indeed employees due protection under under workplace safety rules. The group has long argued that federal law prohibiting exposure to bloodborne pathogens such as sperm at the workplace applies to California's adult performers.
The industry has said that porn stars are very part-time workers who paid per "scene" as independent contractors.
The ruling by Judge Mary Droyovage wrote that, without condoms, there is "substantial probability that employees would suffer serious exposure resulting in serious physical harm or death if violation occurred."
Kenslea said AHF's stance is that the ruling applies only to condom use and that it does not mandate dental dams, surgical masks, eye protection, gloves and other gear feared by the industry.
The case involved a "bareback" sex tape by Bay Area studio Treasure Island Media. The video featured multiple partners on film, none apparently using condoms. Treasure Island appealed Cal/OSHA's sanctions, leading to the ruling.
The AHF was "a catalyst for" the ruling, Kenslea said, because the case included a complaint from the organization. He said he was surprised the studio appealed.
Case closed, then?? Ahhhhh....not quite.
There is another side of the story, of course, and The Real Porn Wikileaks just so happened to get Treasure Island Media's response to the ruling and subsequent barrage of BS from AHF.
For starters, they noted that while Judge Dryovage did sustain the original CalOSHA sanctions, she did significantly reduce the fines involved: totally eliminating the fine for one count (from $9,000 to $0); and reducing the fine for the other count from $9K to $6,300.
And secondly, they loudly announced that the principle of defending sexual freedom demanded that they further appeal the decision to an even higher court. Here's attorney Karen Tynan, who represents TIM, speaking via TRPWL:
[...] “Having the fines lowered by a total of nearly two-thirds is a very significant win for us,” said Karen Tynan, Treasure Island Media’s attorney.Apparently, AHF went to the tried-and-true tactics of antiporn crusaders of yesteryear: the old "OMG...OMGOMGOMGOMG...the SHOCK AND HORROR of such disgusting, nasty, filthy buttsexin' goin on!!!" card.
Tynan went onto say, “We will be appealing the decision with a Petition for Reconsideration on the grounds that the decision was unsupported by the facts.” Among the issues regarding the sufficiency of evidence: Cal/OSHA’s star witness was a disgruntled former employee who had been terminated in 2010 and their medical expert was an osteopath (a branch of medical practice that emphasizes the treatment of medical disorders through the manipulation and massage of the bones, joints, and muscles.) who last treated communicable diseases almost twenty years ago.
At issue was The 1000 Load Fuck, directed by Morris. The 2009 video pushes the envelope, taking porn into taboo regions of the forbidden and depraved. In a bold and unprecedented experiment, one young man voluntarily takes a gallon of semen up his ass.In effect, AHF used this movie the way antiporn prosecutors used Ira Issacs' alleged scat videos, or Gail Dines used "gonzo" porn: as a means of shocking and scaring and shaming "aberrant" sexual practices to illicit the usual response of anger and disgust and "There outta be a law against that!!!" meme. Or, in this case, "They better cover that up with a condom!!!"
“We watched the video over and over and over. Then we watched it in slow motion, reverse, and paused it on almost every frame,” said TIM General Manager Matt Mason, who testified for almost a day and a half and withstood hours of cross examination by Cal/OSHA attorney Kathryn Woods. “The state prosecutors took special interest in the turkey baster and the liquid fun in that scene.”
It remains to be seen how the appeal process will resolve this case...or if this "landmark" decision really is the end of the line for bareback porn....although, I'm sure Isadore Hall and Michael Weinstein are already writing the speeches that Hall will use to integrate this ruling into their next legislative attempt to force Measure B statewide, or to aid CalOSHA to craft the ever evolving "bloodborne pathogen barrier protection" regs as a wedge to be imposed nationwide.
And, I'm just as sure that those who perform and enjoy bareback porn -- whether gay or straight or bi or whatever combination thereof -- will equally battle to defend their freedom and right to do so.
Either way, this isn't over, by any means. Stay tuned.
Wednesday, January 22, 2014
"Porn 101" -- The Remix: Adult Performer Advocacy Committee's MUST SEE Introductory Porn Video
[Personal note by Anthony: Yes, I know, it's been quite a while since I last posted here at BPPA...my night job combined with some sheer laziness on my part has contributed to that. I'm going to do my best to re-crank the posts here more often....and also add some more personal commentary rather than just recapping current porn events. Just be assured: BPPA isn't dead, by any means.]
Way, way, waaaaaaay back in the 1990's, when the LA porn industry was still more like the Wild Wild West in regards to its quasilegality and its means of protection, the idea of having an introductory video for people interesting in having sex on camera for pay might have seemed radical. Back then, though, testing was still mostly a hit-or-miss proposition via the ELISA antibody test, and knowledge and education of the risks of live sex was spotty at best. That began to change after the 1998 "outbreak", where a performer was confirmed to have gotten infected with HIV (and faked his tests to hide that result); the Adult Industry Medical Foundation was founded soon afterwards, and DNA testing greatly improved the quality of protection. It also helped that AIM founder Sharon Mitchell got some of her best friend porn performer allies, including a well known performer at that time named Nina Hartley, to create a video and circulate it amongst budding ingenue performers. That video, titled "Porn 101", became the standard of that time for introducing newbies to the fruits and the hazards of being an adult entertainerHepa.
Flash forward to the current era...where testing is now worlds beyond even the heights of the 1990s, where the Internet and social media have both revolutionized and terrorized the porn industry, and where the rewards and risks for performing sexually explicit imagery have been amplified even more thanks to the added profit streams. Given all the drama of the past few years with piracy, STI/HIV panics, and the condom mandate, getting performers to speak in one unified voice and offer clearer and safer paths for noobies wanting in on the action is an even dauntier task than ever.
Which is exactly why the formation of the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee couldn't have come at a better time.
APAC was originally the brainchild of performer/director Mick Blue and performer Anikka Albrite, who decided after the Great Hepatitis C and Cameron Bay/Rod Daily HIV scares of last year that it was time for performers to get together to represent themselves. Then they got two serious heavyweight high-profile performers, James Deen and Stoya, to join in and develop the core of the organization. From there...well, I'll just quote Mark Kernes' recent AVN article:
As part of the process of organizing and educating performers, Blue hopped on the idea of updating that classic "Porn 101" video for the more modern era:
Well done and done well, gang!!!
Way, way, waaaaaaay back in the 1990's, when the LA porn industry was still more like the Wild Wild West in regards to its quasilegality and its means of protection, the idea of having an introductory video for people interesting in having sex on camera for pay might have seemed radical. Back then, though, testing was still mostly a hit-or-miss proposition via the ELISA antibody test, and knowledge and education of the risks of live sex was spotty at best. That began to change after the 1998 "outbreak", where a performer was confirmed to have gotten infected with HIV (and faked his tests to hide that result); the Adult Industry Medical Foundation was founded soon afterwards, and DNA testing greatly improved the quality of protection. It also helped that AIM founder Sharon Mitchell got some of her best friend porn performer allies, including a well known performer at that time named Nina Hartley, to create a video and circulate it amongst budding ingenue performers. That video, titled "Porn 101", became the standard of that time for introducing newbies to the fruits and the hazards of being an adult entertainerHepa.
Flash forward to the current era...where testing is now worlds beyond even the heights of the 1990s, where the Internet and social media have both revolutionized and terrorized the porn industry, and where the rewards and risks for performing sexually explicit imagery have been amplified even more thanks to the added profit streams. Given all the drama of the past few years with piracy, STI/HIV panics, and the condom mandate, getting performers to speak in one unified voice and offer clearer and safer paths for noobies wanting in on the action is an even dauntier task than ever.
Which is exactly why the formation of the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee couldn't have come at a better time.
APAC was originally the brainchild of performer/director Mick Blue and performer Anikka Albrite, who decided after the Great Hepatitis C and Cameron Bay/Rod Daily HIV scares of last year that it was time for performers to get together to represent themselves. Then they got two serious heavyweight high-profile performers, James Deen and Stoya, to join in and develop the core of the organization. From there...well, I'll just quote Mark Kernes' recent AVN article:
"APAC was basically formed by Anikka [Albrite] and me in my kitchen," explained veteran actor/director Mick Blue, "and then we brought James Deen and Stoya into it, and then the four of us started to build the APAC group, and Nina Hartley and all the others came to APAC later."I should note that APAC is NOT related in any way to the group Adult Performers Coalition For Choice (APC4C), that was formed in the wake of Los Angeles County's Measure B campaign...though the two groups do share common goals.
As part of the process of organizing and educating performers, Blue hopped on the idea of updating that classic "Porn 101" video for the more modern era:
APAC has had several meeting[s] over the past few months, with one of its primary aims being the production of a new Porn 101 video. To that end, according to Blue, Kimberly Kane, Chanel Preston, Jessica Drake, Anikka Albrite and Danny Wylde met as a group to create a script for the project.To say that the Porn 101 remix is impressive is an understatement. Check out the cast:
"One of the things I want to make very clear is that APAC as a group is responsible for the things APAC does," Blue said. "Kimberly Kane, Jessica Drake and Nina Hartley, they basically thought about doing another Porn 101 many years ago, but it never happened. Then, after the first Hepatitis C moratorium came up last year, followed by the first HIV moratorium, Anikka Albrite and me said, 'We need to make a change now to the industry,' so I started calling people and said, 'Okay, guys, we need to get together; we need to make a change. We need to form a performers' group where we can create a voice for performers, and speak, for example, to the producers and also Free Speech [Coalition] about moratoriums and so on.' When we shot the Porn 101 video, we invited other people to speak in front of the camera. It's now on YouTube."
And it's a hell of a cast. Besides Blue and Albrite, appearing in Porn 101, in no particular order, are Jessica Drake, Nina Hartley, James Deen, Danny Wylde, Stoya, Kimberly Kane, Kylie Ireland, Chanel Preston, Asa Akira, Kelly Shibari, Dani Daniels, Nyomi Banxxx, Bonnie Rotten, Penny Pax, Jon Jon, Casey Calvert, Toni Ribas, April Flores, Wolf Hudson, Xander Corvus, Ryan Driller, Claire Robbins, Chloe Foster, Jay Taylor, Alina Li, Zak Sabbath and Mandy Morbid—many of whom are also members of APAC.Kernes' article does a much better job of summarizing all the goodness of this video; feel free to go to his article. I'd rather just let you watch for yourself. So, with full thanks and appreciation to APAC for their permission to repost: here you go, folks. (Original here, via YouTube, props also to Kinky.com)
"For us, it's all about the need to make our industry safer and to explain to people that are working in the industry that they have responsibilities to all the other people they work with," Blue said. "It's like explaining to them, 'Look, you need to watch out what you do in your private life because everything you do in your private life can put everybody who is in the industry who is working with you in danger as well, as we've seen in the past three moratoriums.' So we hope that through this video, people are going to get a better idea about our industry and about their responsibilities and also about their own bodies and their own safety regarding agents, producers and so on."
Well done and done well, gang!!!
Friday, December 13, 2013
HIV Porn Panic 2013: "All Clear" Given, Moratorium Lifted As Of Today, Sayeth FSCPASS....But, What About The Peanut Gallery Skeptics?
Well, that was a short, sweet, and thankfully brief little panic.
Last night, the Free Speech Coalition's PASS announced that the final remaining test of all first generation performers whom had shot with the performer whom had been recently infected with HIV had come up negative, like all the other tests. Thusly, it was now safe to lift the moratorium on porn production that had been imposed last Friday, and resume shooting as of today (December 13th).
In addition, FSCPASS announced that the date for acceptable tests for clearance to shoot had been rebooted to December 5th, in accordance with their protocols that production cease for two weeks after any possible exposure to HIV. Since the infected performer's last shoot was on November 21st, the two-week latency period would fall due on Dec. 5th. (The actual positive test was confirmed on December 6th; the Aptima HIV test used by FSCPASS has a 7 to 10 day latency period for catching infected DNA. FSCPASS allows for a 2 week period for additional coverage and protection.)
So, once again, the system worked exactly as planned, and people should be celebrating...right??
You'd think so...but, there is a minority but growing number of skeptics around the porn disapora who aren't so sure that lifting the moratorium this soon is a good idea.
Their basic argument is that the Aptima test might be well and good for initial detection and screening, there is that small chance that it may miss someone who has the HIV virus running dormant, and if that person is cleared for shooting and infects someone else, you could get a disasterous outbreak. To them, the proper protocol should be to follow up with reinforced testing of the first-gen partners in two weeks following the initial Aptima testing, and then even further testing in six to eight weeks just to be sure that the HIV virus is completely removed from the system.
And some critics of FSCPASS even go further than that; they believe that the costs of not shooting are too great, and that FSCPASS has way too much power to control production in the midst of a crisis...so, they argue that production should continue while the protocols are being followed....as long as condoms are used.
Both arguments have some bit of merit, but ultimately they both fail the smell test for me.
Argument #1 might have more merit if the dominant tests used for STI's was something like ERISA, an antibody test that did tend to miss out early cases; but Aptima has been proven to be very accurate in the screening and detection of acute cases of HIV. Plus, the new 14-day testing protocol imposed by FSCPASS all but eliminates the latency period where someone can get infected before testing and sneak through the cracks of the tests. It should also be remembered that the HIV testing protocols used by FSCPASS also include ERISA and Western Blot assays in addition to Aptima, for full coverage.
Another note is that while it is technically possible, there has been no recorded case -- even with the multiple HIV panics this year -- of any first-gen performer being cleared initially but testing positive in followup testing while shooting. Indeed, there has not even been one case, not even since the original "outbreak" of 2004, where a performer has even gotten infected on the straight side of the industry directly from a porn shoot. (And in that one case, Darren James brought his HIV infection in from the outside. No, Derrick Burts doesn't count, either, because his infection occured in a condom-only gay shoot, though allegedly not while actually shooting.)
Argument #2, on the other hand, was the argument thrown out by Porno Dan Leal after his attempted coup against FSCPASS in bucking the moratorium: "Because Immoral Productions is condom only, and none of their models were part of the first-gen list, they should have been allowed to shoot; and condom-only shops should be able to shoot content during the moratorium period. Performers gotta eat and pay their bills, you know."
That sounds more less like a concern for safety, and more a concern about not getting paid; and it also sounds like a surrender to the Condom Nazis over at the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, who would gladly exploit such a division to say that even industry giants think that condoms are the best form of prevention, so why not just make it mandatory and abolish bareback sex altogether??
It also ignores the basic fact that my friend Ernest Greene has argued repeatedly: you cannot have mandatory testing and mandatory condoms together, because California antidiscrimination laws do not allow for the removal or even the screening of employees for HIV. AHF's argument has long been that with condoms, you don't need testing to begin with, because barrier protection really is the only legitimate form of protection from STI's..and "safe sex" can be pretty hot, and anyone who doesn't like condoms are simply putting performers at risk of death and destruction. One look at the HIV/AIDS death toll of gay performers on their side of the industry (where condoms rather than testing is the default) will dissuade most people of that fallacy.
Thankfully, there seems to be developing a sense of unity among performers and the industry, mostly because they are finally fed up with being AHF's punching bag for the past three years, and also because after three scares this past year, the sense of urgency to do something before AHF and CalOSHA overrides them has finally soaked into their brains. Let's hope that this unity lasts by the time the next panic hits...which, if I know AHF's deep pockets and ability to buy their own instigators, probably won't be too long coming.
Last night, the Free Speech Coalition's PASS announced that the final remaining test of all first generation performers whom had shot with the performer whom had been recently infected with HIV had come up negative, like all the other tests. Thusly, it was now safe to lift the moratorium on porn production that had been imposed last Friday, and resume shooting as of today (December 13th).
In addition, FSCPASS announced that the date for acceptable tests for clearance to shoot had been rebooted to December 5th, in accordance with their protocols that production cease for two weeks after any possible exposure to HIV. Since the infected performer's last shoot was on November 21st, the two-week latency period would fall due on Dec. 5th. (The actual positive test was confirmed on December 6th; the Aptima HIV test used by FSCPASS has a 7 to 10 day latency period for catching infected DNA. FSCPASS allows for a 2 week period for additional coverage and protection.)
So, once again, the system worked exactly as planned, and people should be celebrating...right??
You'd think so...but, there is a minority but growing number of skeptics around the porn disapora who aren't so sure that lifting the moratorium this soon is a good idea.
Their basic argument is that the Aptima test might be well and good for initial detection and screening, there is that small chance that it may miss someone who has the HIV virus running dormant, and if that person is cleared for shooting and infects someone else, you could get a disasterous outbreak. To them, the proper protocol should be to follow up with reinforced testing of the first-gen partners in two weeks following the initial Aptima testing, and then even further testing in six to eight weeks just to be sure that the HIV virus is completely removed from the system.
And some critics of FSCPASS even go further than that; they believe that the costs of not shooting are too great, and that FSCPASS has way too much power to control production in the midst of a crisis...so, they argue that production should continue while the protocols are being followed....as long as condoms are used.
Both arguments have some bit of merit, but ultimately they both fail the smell test for me.
Argument #1 might have more merit if the dominant tests used for STI's was something like ERISA, an antibody test that did tend to miss out early cases; but Aptima has been proven to be very accurate in the screening and detection of acute cases of HIV. Plus, the new 14-day testing protocol imposed by FSCPASS all but eliminates the latency period where someone can get infected before testing and sneak through the cracks of the tests. It should also be remembered that the HIV testing protocols used by FSCPASS also include ERISA and Western Blot assays in addition to Aptima, for full coverage.
Another note is that while it is technically possible, there has been no recorded case -- even with the multiple HIV panics this year -- of any first-gen performer being cleared initially but testing positive in followup testing while shooting. Indeed, there has not even been one case, not even since the original "outbreak" of 2004, where a performer has even gotten infected on the straight side of the industry directly from a porn shoot. (And in that one case, Darren James brought his HIV infection in from the outside. No, Derrick Burts doesn't count, either, because his infection occured in a condom-only gay shoot, though allegedly not while actually shooting.)
Argument #2, on the other hand, was the argument thrown out by Porno Dan Leal after his attempted coup against FSCPASS in bucking the moratorium: "Because Immoral Productions is condom only, and none of their models were part of the first-gen list, they should have been allowed to shoot; and condom-only shops should be able to shoot content during the moratorium period. Performers gotta eat and pay their bills, you know."
That sounds more less like a concern for safety, and more a concern about not getting paid; and it also sounds like a surrender to the Condom Nazis over at the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, who would gladly exploit such a division to say that even industry giants think that condoms are the best form of prevention, so why not just make it mandatory and abolish bareback sex altogether??
It also ignores the basic fact that my friend Ernest Greene has argued repeatedly: you cannot have mandatory testing and mandatory condoms together, because California antidiscrimination laws do not allow for the removal or even the screening of employees for HIV. AHF's argument has long been that with condoms, you don't need testing to begin with, because barrier protection really is the only legitimate form of protection from STI's..and "safe sex" can be pretty hot, and anyone who doesn't like condoms are simply putting performers at risk of death and destruction. One look at the HIV/AIDS death toll of gay performers on their side of the industry (where condoms rather than testing is the default) will dissuade most people of that fallacy.
Thankfully, there seems to be developing a sense of unity among performers and the industry, mostly because they are finally fed up with being AHF's punching bag for the past three years, and also because after three scares this past year, the sense of urgency to do something before AHF and CalOSHA overrides them has finally soaked into their brains. Let's hope that this unity lasts by the time the next panic hits...which, if I know AHF's deep pockets and ability to buy their own instigators, probably won't be too long coming.
Tuesday, December 10, 2013
HIV In Porn Panic, Round Three: Now With 150% Extra Porno Dan Blowback!!
Good to the ness.
So, now we have Porn Panic #3 for 2013, as on Friday the Free Speech Coalition's testing group PASS announced that a performer had tested positive for HIV, and a new moratorium is now in place, pending the prerequiste testing of first-generation partners.
Of course, the usual fear and panic has enabled the usual peanut gallery of rogues to call for mandating condoms in porn as the only alternative....but if you know this space, you know why those arguments are simply bogus.
The Real Porn Wikileaks has been the go-to source for updated info and background during this current debacle, and at least FSCPASS has been out in front from the very beginning. (A particularly timely essay by FSC CEO Diane Duke explaining the moratorium process can be found here.)
For now, it seems like this event isn't going to explode like the Cameron Bay/Rod Daily fiasco; since the affected performer has been fully cooperative with the process; and since the protocols put into place was followed, there are fewer first-gen performers to locate and test. So, it's looking like he was the only one affected, and there has been no on-set transmissions.
However...that doesn't mean that this event hasn't produced its own fireworks. When the original announcement of the positive test came out, there was the usual firestorm on Twitter from some second-level performers screaming that this latest proved the total failure of the FSCPASS system, and that only condoms would provide the better means of protection. (One such performer announced that she would only shoot condom only from here on...though she had been generally inactive from shooting porn in the past year anyways.) The AIDS Healthcare Foundation put out their usual "How long, oh how long,will we allow this industry to skip the law?" BS press release, but otherwise they have been a bit quieter than usual.
And then, there was Dan Leal of Immoral Productions.
Saturday night, FSCPASS updated that they had obtained and tested all the infected performer's first-gen partners, and that it appeared that the moratorium would probably last only a week at most when all the test results would be posted. Apparently, that was enough for "Porno Dan", because right after that announcement, he tweeted this bit:
Keep in mind, folks, that Immoral Productions has been very much in the spotlight in the Condom Wars; they have been a direct target of Los Angeles County health officials, having had their facility raided last year under the guise of Measure B; and "Porno Dan" has been pretty outspoken about both abiding by the law and about the current outbreaks.
However, this attempt to jump the FSCPASS moratorium falls under a not quite so thinly veiled agenda of undermining FSC, aided and abetted by many of the same agents that have historically not played so well with that particular agency.
After getting absolutely fricaseed and gangslammed by industry heavyweights such as Julia Ann, Axel Braun, Melissa Monet, Keiran Lee, and Brad Armstrong, among others, Leal reacted that he was just stirring stuff up, and that he would not challenge the moratorium after all. But, he got off these parting shots at Diane Duke and the FSC:
Funny, but I didn't know that FSC was obligated to get the approval of LATATA or Talent Testing Services in order to enact a measure intended to protect performers from getting infected with a potentially life-threatening disease. Plus, wasn't one of the main criticisms of the FSC during the Bay/Daily fiasco that they acted too quickly to lift the moratorium and resume shooting before all of the testing processes had been resolved??
I guess maybe that Dan Leal would much prefer Michael Weinstein determining production, then??
Don't get me wrong here, the issue of who should control performer testing is an important one, and agents, production companies, and performers should have a healthy and free debate on that matter.
When a performer becomes infected, however, all debate and infighting should cease and desist, and the focus should be placed on two issues: comforting and assisting to the full extent possible the performer(s) affected, and rallying to protect the other performers from getting infected. Anything else become simply distractions that only aid and abet the goals of Michael Weinstein and the Condom Fascists.
And in the meantime, perhaps this will fiinally galvanize the industry to unify themselves towards a single, standardized testing and screening regime for ALL performers, reinforced by full reimbursement of fees for testing, AND a pool of insurance to cover all the costs of treatment and care for those who do get sick. Either the industry gets off it and fights for their performers, or AHF and the government Condom Police will take over..with not so healthy results.
See also Dr. Chauntelle Tibals' essay on accountability here.
So, now we have Porn Panic #3 for 2013, as on Friday the Free Speech Coalition's testing group PASS announced that a performer had tested positive for HIV, and a new moratorium is now in place, pending the prerequiste testing of first-generation partners.
Of course, the usual fear and panic has enabled the usual peanut gallery of rogues to call for mandating condoms in porn as the only alternative....but if you know this space, you know why those arguments are simply bogus.
The Real Porn Wikileaks has been the go-to source for updated info and background during this current debacle, and at least FSCPASS has been out in front from the very beginning. (A particularly timely essay by FSC CEO Diane Duke explaining the moratorium process can be found here.)
For now, it seems like this event isn't going to explode like the Cameron Bay/Rod Daily fiasco; since the affected performer has been fully cooperative with the process; and since the protocols put into place was followed, there are fewer first-gen performers to locate and test. So, it's looking like he was the only one affected, and there has been no on-set transmissions.
However...that doesn't mean that this event hasn't produced its own fireworks. When the original announcement of the positive test came out, there was the usual firestorm on Twitter from some second-level performers screaming that this latest proved the total failure of the FSCPASS system, and that only condoms would provide the better means of protection. (One such performer announced that she would only shoot condom only from here on...though she had been generally inactive from shooting porn in the past year anyways.) The AIDS Healthcare Foundation put out their usual "How long, oh how long,will we allow this industry to skip the law?" BS press release, but otherwise they have been a bit quieter than usual.
And then, there was Dan Leal of Immoral Productions.
Saturday night, FSCPASS updated that they had obtained and tested all the infected performer's first-gen partners, and that it appeared that the moratorium would probably last only a week at most when all the test results would be posted. Apparently, that was enough for "Porno Dan", because right after that announcement, he tweeted this bit:
Keep in mind, folks, that Immoral Productions has been very much in the spotlight in the Condom Wars; they have been a direct target of Los Angeles County health officials, having had their facility raided last year under the guise of Measure B; and "Porno Dan" has been pretty outspoken about both abiding by the law and about the current outbreaks.
However, this attempt to jump the FSCPASS moratorium falls under a not quite so thinly veiled agenda of undermining FSC, aided and abetted by many of the same agents that have historically not played so well with that particular agency.
After getting absolutely fricaseed and gangslammed by industry heavyweights such as Julia Ann, Axel Braun, Melissa Monet, Keiran Lee, and Brad Armstrong, among others, Leal reacted that he was just stirring stuff up, and that he would not challenge the moratorium after all. But, he got off these parting shots at Diane Duke and the FSC:
Funny, but I didn't know that FSC was obligated to get the approval of LATATA or Talent Testing Services in order to enact a measure intended to protect performers from getting infected with a potentially life-threatening disease. Plus, wasn't one of the main criticisms of the FSC during the Bay/Daily fiasco that they acted too quickly to lift the moratorium and resume shooting before all of the testing processes had been resolved??
I guess maybe that Dan Leal would much prefer Michael Weinstein determining production, then??
Don't get me wrong here, the issue of who should control performer testing is an important one, and agents, production companies, and performers should have a healthy and free debate on that matter.
When a performer becomes infected, however, all debate and infighting should cease and desist, and the focus should be placed on two issues: comforting and assisting to the full extent possible the performer(s) affected, and rallying to protect the other performers from getting infected. Anything else become simply distractions that only aid and abet the goals of Michael Weinstein and the Condom Fascists.
And in the meantime, perhaps this will fiinally galvanize the industry to unify themselves towards a single, standardized testing and screening regime for ALL performers, reinforced by full reimbursement of fees for testing, AND a pool of insurance to cover all the costs of treatment and care for those who do get sick. Either the industry gets off it and fights for their performers, or AHF and the government Condom Police will take over..with not so healthy results.
See also Dr. Chauntelle Tibals' essay on accountability here.
Dan
had cited no specific medical basis for his decision, other than a
subsequent tweet to the effect that he knew something the rest of us
don’t. Regardless of any medical rationale, however, the political and
perceptual problems caused by a public display of division on an issue
of such magnitude would, as members of the adult community quickly
noted, play right into the hands of those presently at war with the
adult business.
Most industry veterans who spoke to TRPWL offered a simple theory to explain Dan’s move: the goal was to underscore and foster disunity, and to make the point that he and certain “others” opposed adult trade association Free Speech Coalition’s stewardship of industry matters.
In short, insiders viewed it as a purely contrarian move; an opportunistic volley in an industry power struggle. Few thought he’d actually go through with his promise to resume shooting.
- See more at: http://therealpornwikileaks.com/porno-dan-hoist-petard-announcing-defy-production-moratorium/#sthash.GrsUZ6FB.dpuf
Most industry veterans who spoke to TRPWL offered a simple theory to explain Dan’s move: the goal was to underscore and foster disunity, and to make the point that he and certain “others” opposed adult trade association Free Speech Coalition’s stewardship of industry matters.
In short, insiders viewed it as a purely contrarian move; an opportunistic volley in an industry power struggle. Few thought he’d actually go through with his promise to resume shooting.
- See more at: http://therealpornwikileaks.com/porno-dan-hoist-petard-announcing-defy-production-moratorium/#sthash.GrsUZ6FB.dpuf
Dan
had cited no specific medical basis for his decision, other than a
subsequent tweet to the effect that he knew something the rest of us
don’t. Regardless of any medical rationale, however, the political and
perceptual problems caused by a public display of division on an issue
of such magnitude would, as members of the adult community quickly
noted, play right into the hands of those presently at war with the
adult business.
Most industry veterans who spoke to TRPWL offered a simple theory to explain Dan’s move: the goal was to underscore and foster disunity, and to make the point that he and certain “others” opposed adult trade association Free Speech Coalition’s stewardship of industry matters.
In short, insiders viewed it as a purely contrarian move; an opportunistic volley in an industry power struggle. Few thought he’d actually go through with his promise to resume shooting.
- See more at: http://therealpornwikileaks.com/porno-dan-hoist-petard-announcing-defy-production-moratorium/#sthash.GrsUZ6FB.dpuf
Most industry veterans who spoke to TRPWL offered a simple theory to explain Dan’s move: the goal was to underscore and foster disunity, and to make the point that he and certain “others” opposed adult trade association Free Speech Coalition’s stewardship of industry matters.
In short, insiders viewed it as a purely contrarian move; an opportunistic volley in an industry power struggle. Few thought he’d actually go through with his promise to resume shooting.
- See more at: http://therealpornwikileaks.com/porno-dan-hoist-petard-announcing-defy-production-moratorium/#sthash.GrsUZ6FB.dpuf
Dan
had cited no specific medical basis for his decision, other than a
subsequent tweet to the effect that he knew something the rest of us
don’t. Regardless of any medical rationale, however, the political and
perceptual problems caused by a public display of division on an issue
of such magnitude would, as members of the adult community quickly
noted, play right into the hands of those presently at war with the
adult business.
Most industry veterans who spoke to TRPWL offered a simple theory to explain Dan’s move: the goal was to underscore and foster disunity, and to make the point that he and certain “others” opposed adult trade association Free Speech Coalition’s stewardship of industry matters.
In short, insiders viewed it as a purely contrarian move; an opportunistic volley in an industry power struggle. Few thought he’d actually go through with his promise to resume shooting.
- See more at: http://therealpornwikileaks.com/porno-dan-hoist-petard-announcing-defy-production-moratorium/#sthash.GrsUZ6FB.dpuf
Most industry veterans who spoke to TRPWL offered a simple theory to explain Dan’s move: the goal was to underscore and foster disunity, and to make the point that he and certain “others” opposed adult trade association Free Speech Coalition’s stewardship of industry matters.
In short, insiders viewed it as a purely contrarian move; an opportunistic volley in an industry power struggle. Few thought he’d actually go through with his promise to resume shooting.
- See more at: http://therealpornwikileaks.com/porno-dan-hoist-petard-announcing-defy-production-moratorium/#sthash.GrsUZ6FB.dpuf
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)