Like I said...plenty to talk about today.
Alongside the potential shoe drop of the condom mandate, the other shoe threatening to drop on the porn industry actually did so this weekend.
The .XXX level domain, so loved by those wanting to screen adult content into its own ghetto to be exploited for their own profits, so hated by both sides of the porn debate (it's something when Morality in Media AND the Free Speech Coalition are on the same side on an issue); and so despised by many Internet geeks....was cleared for takeoff by the Internet Corporation of Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), the board that supervises and approves top level domain (TLD) suffixes like [dot]com, [dot]net, and others.
Never mind that both pro- and antiporn organizations had virulently opposed adding the domain, for their own reasons. (The FSC, backed by many of porn's biggest honchos, due to the implied threat of regulation forcing adult websites into the .XXX ghetto and the costs of acquiring a .XXX domain name; the antiporn groups because it would "legitimize" content that they would much rather wipe out via obscenity laws.)
Never mind that even the ACLU had gone on record against .XXX, citing the potential abuse by cybersquatters seeking to blackmail legitimate owners of .COM and .NET sites, not to mention the windfall for illegal "tube" sites wanting to use .XXX as a license to steal.
And, never mind the fact that the proposal had been reccommended for rejection by ICANN's own Government Advisory Committee, made up of representatives from several companies, and that a similar effort in 2007 was handily defeated.
What was the difference this time around? Well, the .XXX proponents sold the proposal this time around as a means of protecting both the adult content from censorship AND as a means of protecting children from unwanted access by herding all adult content into the .XXX domain and making it easier for censorware and filters to block access to such material.
Mostly, however, they simply flooded the board with lots of money.
Because a .XXX domain will cost plenty more compared to a .COM or a .NET ($70 for a year sub as compared to $10 for other domains), the process of forcing adult websites into .XXX will produce a virtual money forest for ICM Registry, the group which owns the .XXX domain. According to ICM head Stuart Lawley, he's already secured enough presubscriptions from scared adult webmasters fearing piracy or censorship to rake in nearly $26 million...and that was before it was even passed. Lawley has even boasted that the potential killing from .XXX could reach as high as $200 million...not too bad in a recession.
Of course, all this means nothing unless current adult webmasters are forced into .XXX...which brings me to the one political force that may be open to imposing .XXX: Third Way Democrats and "Moderate" Republicans.
Already, US Senator Max Baucus (he of the Big Insura Forced Mandate/Bailout, aka "Health Care Reform") has introduced legislation forcing ISP's to require sites to move all adult content into the .XXX domain or face criminal penalties; and I'm sure that others will follow suit. Though most on the Right (especially the TeaPublicans) tend to be closer to the "just ban 'em" position of MiM and Porn Harms, they might be persuaded to support ghettoizing adult sites into .XXX as a stopgap measure to hold them out until they get enough power for outright censorship. As for the Left...well, suffice it to say that their stance has been somewhat incoherent, but I'd say that the 'protect children while maintaining a space for adult sites" logic will probably prevail over them enough to get their support as well.
Unfortunately, merely slapping a .XXX domain on a site brings forth some real issues.
Like....what about blogs like this one (or The Sexademic, or Julie Meadows, or Tiny Nibbles) who are not necessarily sexually explicit in imagery, but who report on issues regarding porn and include linkage to actual sites?? Would Blogger or WordPress be forced to impose a .XXX domain on popular porn blogs, or sex-education sites, or even sex bloggers?? Or..would they simply relent and just purge adult content from their platforms like Facebook and MySpace have already done?? And...would antiporn activist sites like StopPornCulture.com get exemptions based on their ideology alone??
And...who would be the arbeteurs of what constitutes "sexually explict" and whether a site would meet the criteria of being forced into the .XXX domain and enriching the back pockets of ICM?? The Miller Standards?? A local censor board?? Congress??
Remember, Lawley and ICM can't make their killing if current sites can continue to remain in .COM or .NET and pay the much less yearly sub fees for renewing their current domains. But..if such a law was passed, couldn't the case be made that it constituted content-based discrimination to force legal adult websites to pay more simply to exist for the benefit of a private organization??
Oh, who the hell am I kidding....this is Max Baucus I'm talking about!! Same Max Baucus known for taking corporate money under the table from the health care companies...so why wouldn't he do the same with ICM and ICANN??
Either way, the issue is far from resolved, even if ICANN and ICM is already accelerating the process for .XXX domain applications. The FSC has promised full action to review and repeal the decision, and I'm guessing that the antiporn folks are already blasting the ears of their reps in Congress to stop this.
We'll see soon if this really does become a bustout...or simply a bust.
Violet Blue (of Tiny Nibbles) has an excellent overview of the entire sitch over at the ZDNet site...feel free to go there and read up. Also...see Julie Meadows.
A sanctuary for supporters of sexual free expression and the adult sexual media.
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Porn Panic 2011 Updates: Cal-OSHA Moves Closer To Issuing Condom Mandate Regulations; Mike Weinstein Prepares His Victory Lap; And Ministeress Lubben Testifies...Again
Plenty to update you on this morn, so I'll get right to it.
First off, the Cal-OSHA/AHF drive for imposing mandatory condoms on porn shoots is beginning to reach its climatic showdown slowly but surely. Another hearing was held last Thursday (March 17th), and in it Cal-OSHA's Chief Safety Engineer Deborah Gold announced that a rough draft for proposed changes to the regulations concerning treatment of "blood borne pathogens" was being prepared for issuance at the next scheduled meeting on July 7.
Mark Kernes was at the meeting, and filed his usual standard analysis for AVN.com. Snippage:
Complicated?? Not really, since there is NO precedent anywhere in California law that states that porn performers (even contract performers) are in any way considered to be "employees" rather than "individual entrepreneurs". But, the condom mandators never let that stop them, now didn't they??
Kernes also noted this other discrepancy regarding the proposed regulations:
You can tell that because the primary booster and benefactor of the condom mandate was rather quick to declare victory.
A group calling itself the American Public Health Association (APHA) immediately after the meeting sent out a press release all but congratulating the Cal-OSHA board on their stand and heartily endorsing the condom mandate, with nothing but praise for the efforts of AHF in protecting performer safety. Of course, from the language used in their press release, one could wonder if APHA wasn't an astroturf group invention of AHF itself.
The LA Weekly also posted their own article by Dennis Romero which seems to also endorse the condom mandate, though in a teasingly indirect way:
But the Cal-OSHA meeting had its other moments as well. As usual, the industry was completely shut out, with only a rep from the Free Speech Coalition there to give the anti-condom mandate position any airtime. As usual, last year's HIV scare involving Derrick Burts was quoted as the main justification for issuing the condom mandate. As usual, the "22 performers tested HIV+ since 2004" Big Lie meme was quoted as fact, regardless of the real evidence.
And, as usual, Shelley Lubben was there to testify in her own special way for the "rescuing" of porn performers. (Hopefully, in a better state than her Cambridge debate debacle.) Quoteh Mark Kernes:
Between this and the .XXX debacle, this may be a long year for the adult sexual media industry.
First off, the Cal-OSHA/AHF drive for imposing mandatory condoms on porn shoots is beginning to reach its climatic showdown slowly but surely. Another hearing was held last Thursday (March 17th), and in it Cal-OSHA's Chief Safety Engineer Deborah Gold announced that a rough draft for proposed changes to the regulations concerning treatment of "blood borne pathogens" was being prepared for issuance at the next scheduled meeting on July 7.
Mark Kernes was at the meeting, and filed his usual standard analysis for AVN.com. Snippage:
"During the advisory meeting on blood-borne pathogens and other infectious diseases, hazards in this industry were discussed," Gold told the standards board. "These other infections not considered to be blood borne include chlamydia and gonorrhea and human papilloma virus, which is associated with cancer. While the barrier methods required by Section 5193 reduce the risk of transmission depending on the specific disease, they may not completely control the risk. Therefore, additional routine and post-exposure medical services may need to be adopted to reduce these risks. Over the next two months, the division will be working on a draft of a proposal that would specifically address the hazards in this industry and plans to have that draft ready for discussion at the June 7 advisory meeting that's planned for Los Angeles, and then, depending on that discussion, the division would then start moving forward on rulemaking or not."
After Gold finished her presentation, board member Jack Kastorff brought up a subject of concern to many adult industry performers and companies.
"As I understand our function, the Cal/OSHA regs are to protect employees, and part of the question here is, who's an employee, and if they are indeed employees, who is the employer? Have we verified that?" he asked.
"We make that determination in every inspection that we conduct, not only in this industry but in every industry," Gold replied. "But there are court decisions that go to that, that have found that [performers] in this industry are employees of specific producers or production companies or whatever. And we have found in our investigations enough evidence to move forward against individual companies on the basis that these performers are employees. ... We have had the advice that generally speaking, the people who are working in this industry have an employee status, whether or not that is recognized for federal tax purposes. It's complicated legally." [cited from full AVN.com article]
Complicated?? Not really, since there is NO precedent anywhere in California law that states that porn performers (even contract performers) are in any way considered to be "employees" rather than "individual entrepreneurs". But, the condom mandators never let that stop them, now didn't they??
Kernes also noted this other discrepancy regarding the proposed regulations:
Gold's mention of non-blood-borne infections prompted board member Willie Washington to ask, since the petition (designated Petition #513) filed by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) was specifically directed to the section of the health code dealing with blood-borne pathogens, how Gold's committee could be discussing regulations regarding those non-blood-borne diseases?Of course..because this is NOT in any way about blood-borne pathogens at all...but about exploiting porn panic to impose condoms on performers against their stated will. And....getting paid.
Gold responded that that had been part of the ongoing discussions of the committee, and the possibility of separating out those non-blood-borne diseases from the proposed rule changes was currently under consideration.
You can tell that because the primary booster and benefactor of the condom mandate was rather quick to declare victory.
A group calling itself the American Public Health Association (APHA) immediately after the meeting sent out a press release all but congratulating the Cal-OSHA board on their stand and heartily endorsing the condom mandate, with nothing but praise for the efforts of AHF in protecting performer safety. Of course, from the language used in their press release, one could wonder if APHA wasn't an astroturf group invention of AHF itself.
The LA Weekly also posted their own article by Dennis Romero which seems to also endorse the condom mandate, though in a teasingly indirect way:
While California already requires condoms in porn (but doesn't really enforce the rule), the new language would specifically address "routine and post-exposure medical services may need to be adopted to reduce these risks" of contracting non-blood-born STDs, Gold said last week, according Adult Video News.Romero also included this statement from Mike Weinstein:
Sounds like mandatory testing to us.
AHF thinks condoms will be more specifically addressed. State and federal rules say you shouldn't be mixing blood at work. Sounds good to us. Cal/OSHA officials say that means condoms.
But state officials "are drafting rules that are specific to the industry" for the first time, AHF spokeswoman Lori Yeghiayan tells the Weekly
"It is our hope is that the amendments will make specific reference to condoms," she says.
The porn world in L.A. already tests its performers regularly. But that hasn't stopped diseases, including an HIV-positive scandal for one gay performer last year.
As a global HIV and STD medical care provider, we've seen it as our duty to pursue action on this issue of safety in the workplace--in these instances, unprotected sex acts taking place in albeit non-traditional workplaces--the porn sets located in the San Fernando Valley and throughout California. We heartily thank Deborah Gold for her tireless work on this issue and for speaking out publicly on Cal/OSHA's behalf last week about these proposed new safety amendments.Of course...because going to performers' homes with syringes and vials and ordering them to give blood samples wasn't good enough, Mike??
But the Cal-OSHA meeting had its other moments as well. As usual, the industry was completely shut out, with only a rep from the Free Speech Coalition there to give the anti-condom mandate position any airtime. As usual, last year's HIV scare involving Derrick Burts was quoted as the main justification for issuing the condom mandate. As usual, the "22 performers tested HIV+ since 2004" Big Lie meme was quoted as fact, regardless of the real evidence.
And, as usual, Shelley Lubben was there to testify in her own special way for the "rescuing" of porn performers. (Hopefully, in a better state than her Cambridge debate debacle.) Quoteh Mark Kernes:
During her speech, Lubben claimed that she was "still suffering from the long-term effects of these sexually transmitted diseases and the other traumatization [sic] from the adult film industry. I was involved in many high-risk, unprotected sex acts filmed in private locations with totally unsupervised and unregulated porn sex where anything goes. I was coerced and forced into sex acts that involved things like double penetration, double anal, double vaginal, repeated facial ejaculations. I was required to work without condoms in order to maintain employment. When I complained, I was threatened with no pay, lawsuits, verbal and physical threats."And...she brought some reinforcement, too.
Although Lubben never complained to authorities about the alleged "forced sex acts" even after completing her short stint in the industry—17 movies between 1993 and 1995—she nonetheless told the standards board, "The scenario for young women is not unlike today, and actually, the work conditions are much worse."
"I know what these performers go through, and that's the reason why you don't see many of them here today: Because they're frightened," Lubben claimed. "Why is it for the past year when we've been having these meetings, only maybe a few female adult performers or even non-performers come? They're afraid for their lives, they're afraid they'll lose their jobs. Right here in Van Nuys, I've personally invited the porn industry to come face this meeting, and where's the female porn actresses to speak on their behalf? They're not here because they know that they're going to be threatened, and they're going to be blacklisted for telling the truth about what's really going on, and a lot of them honestly don't know that it is illegal for this kind of treatment."
Lubben went on to describe many current performers as "young, dumb females who couldn't read a contract," and who "can't even understand words like 'litigation' or 'arbitration.'"
The board also heard from another Lubben acolyte, Jennie Case, an ex-performer with a career even more brief than Lubben's: 13 movies over two years between 1994 and 1996—although she claimed that she been "in the sex industry for most of my adult life," leaving attendees to wonder how she spent the past 15 years after making movies.You'd think that Ministeress Lubben could find some performers that were a bit more recent??
"I performed in many adult films," Case claimed. "During that time, I contracted chlamydia, which caused pain in my abdomen, bacterial infections, urinary tract infections, a damaged cervix so bad that Planned Parenthood interns had to come take a look at it in the room, the examination room. Condoms were never used during this time, any time that I did any filming, there were no condoms used whatsoever. I thought I was safe, and of course, you can't complain, it's part of the job. The job does require you to have other—many bodily fluids inside and outside of you including semen, and I fully support the blood-borne pathogens laws that apply to everyone, that you apply to the adult film employers in the adult film industry as well."
Between this and the .XXX debacle, this may be a long year for the adult sexual media industry.
Friday, March 11, 2011
Why This Blog Still Matters: Stephanie Swift's Conversion To The Dark Side, and Refuting An Anonymous Hater's Stupidity)
When I first joined this blog when Renegade Evolution created it in 2007 out of a desire to see pro-pornography/pro-sex viewpoints get their own vehicle to refute and balance out the distortions and lies put forth by antiporn activists (both the feminist "Left" and Christian fundamentalist Right varieties), I posted an introductory essay which explained why I thought that being "pro-porn" (or being anti antiporn) mattered so deeply to me. They remain as true today as the day I first wrote them, when I was merely a contributor and full-time commentator:
Then the HIV/Porn Scares of 2009 and 2010, Shelley Lubben, Michael Weinstein, and The Great Condom Mandate Debate arrived to rekindle both my interest and the debate over the legitimacy of porn in general...and business picked back up enough for me to continue on.
And, thankfully, this blog has become more and more a go to place for a point of view that usually doesn't make the rounds of porn debate circles.
Even better is that it seems that the acceptability of porn has began to make some fundamental strides in the real world, too. The recent media circus over Charlie Sheen and his "goddess" Bree Olson (not to mention his past history with porn/erotica starlets) has brought forth the immense popularity (or noteriety, depending on your POV) of porn's reach, as well as the recent loving testimonials of actress Cameron Diaz -- who openly stated her love of porn in a recent interview on Jimmy Kimmel's TV show -- and the recent victory of the porn-positive opinion in the recent Cambridge Union debate in England.
Nevertheless, it remains a long battle for people like us who see pornography as a potentially positive social and societal good to overcome the prevailing prejudices and assumptions about both the performers who create and produce sexually explicit media and the people who eagerly consume it.
I'll just give you two examples of what we are up against, and why we need to continue the struggle, so to speak.
When updating this blog this morning with commentary on the Shelley Lubben documentary post, I came upon a drive-by comment by an anonymous user that usually wouldn't find the light of day here, since it is not our perogative to give people who demonize and deligitimize us any more platforms than they already have. Nevertheless, his comment does say quite a lot about the prevailing attitude that folk like him have deep inside towards people like us, and just before I vaporize it to the Internet ether it belongs, I'll give it a bit of analysis. This was originally supposed to be a comment to Iamcuriousblue's initial post to the blog, "Why I'm pro porn..".
Once again, I wouldn't even post this nonsense, except to show what kind of mentality we are up against here. You can literally count on both hands and run out of fingers on all the usual assumptions and strawpeople that our Mensa relies on to prove our "stupidity". Of course, porn starlets aren't the only ones who engage in sex with different men; in fact, I'd bet that outside of the job they are paid to do in performing sex scenes, most performers are strictly monogamous. Heck, many performers are even monogamous within the scope of their jobs, only performing with their significant others or with women. (Funny how girl/girl sex escapes our commentator's mental grasp...I guess that he would see that as an asset for his voyeruism??) Besides, if a woman in or out of porn decides that she wants to engage in pleasurable sex with more than one person in her life, and she's willing to protect herself, what is it to us to deny or criticize her for that?? Even if it's more than one man at once??
And, oh, how funny, this "make a good history of their country"...as if porn starlets or sexually active women aren't capable of being successful outside of their sexual exploits. I mean, I guess that Nina Hartley only slept her way to earning that magna cum laude degree in nursing at San Francisco State University, right?? And, Vicky Vette's success in her early life as a mid-level executive and home builder prior to her entering the adult industry was only a myth in her brain, because she can only function when she's on her knees sucking Scott Nails; dick...am I correct, Anon?? And, what about the many performers whom actually served their country in the military prior to entering adult...are they merely reducable to a bunch of silly sluts, too??
Maybe Anon needs to stop projecting HIS stupidity onto others and actually talk to and listen to active performers before he shoots his mouth off next time.
But, fools like our Anonymous usually come a dime a dozen, fueled by their willfull ignorance and refusal to open their minds to the world. Far, far more problematic and injurous are the progeny of so-called "rescue organizations" who exploit the same misguided beliefs and assumptions to exploit the many varied experiences of performers in order to both promote a reactionary, neo-Puritan agenda, and to get paid.
I don't have to reset the antics of Shelley Lubben since you know plenty about her....but you might not quite know about the XXXChurch.com ministry.
Founded by Craig Gross around 2008, this organization sells itself as a hip, cool, vivacious youth ministry who, like Lubben's Pink Cross Foundation, glams around porn conventions and awards shows attempting to sell their message of redemption and salvation from the evil dangers of porn. They also include a seperate ministry known as X3, which claims to "save" formerly promiscuous women back to a "Godly" life of sexual "restraint". In effect, they are the "ex-slut" equivalent to the "ex-gay" ministries, and their damage to psyches and escape from reality is equally recorded and appalling.
Unfortunately, they, like some sexual predators, will sense enough of a weakness from someone whom has suffered legitimate injury or psychological harm to be able to turn him or her against their better sense. Such is the case, I'd say, with Stephanie Swift, who is the latest former performer to fall victim to (or, if you have a different point of view, be saved by) the clutches of Gross and the XXXChurch.
Swift's story is indeed not a particularly happy one: an Hall-of-Fame performer who gained superstar status during the middle- to late-1990s with over 370 videos to her credit, she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2009, and began chemotheraphy treatments between then and the end o 2010. Apparently, while undergoing the therapy, she had a distinct change of heart and philosophy, and XXXChurch was able to impact her beliefs enough that she became "born again" and repudiated her porn past. The fact that the industry had pulled together to raise thousands of dollars to help her recovery apparently didn't factor into her ennui, since she doesn't even bother to mention such generosity; only claiming that "having breast cancer saved her life". As if porn had anything to do with her contracting breast cancer in the first place?
Ms. Swift was quick to join XXXChurch.com upon her "salvation", and they didn't take long to publicize their newest convert with a vengence; a section of their website dedicated to Swift includes not only a brief written testimony, but also a video clip where Ms. Swift shares her joy of being "saved" and converted to "the blood of Jesus" via Craig Gross' organization.
Now...this is in no way intended to be an attack on Ms. Swift or her personal conversion of faith; like many women who find comfort in religion at times of stress, she is totally entitled to her views and beliefs, and she deserves nothing but the best wishes for her recovery, both physical and emotional.
On the other hand, though...the role of XXXChurch and their methods of targeting impressionable performers for shaming and humiliating, and especially for distorting and denying the legal experiences and beliefs of other performers not so willing to feel shame for their profession or their personal lives, is more than worthy of analysis and even some derision.
Until recently, XXXChurch was though up to be the "good cop", feel good style of ex-slut evangelism, at least compared to the more ham-fisted, Bible in your face, off-the-wall, fire-and-brimstone approach of Ministeress Lubben. Recently, apparently due to either the competition and publicity of Lubben or the recent HIV scares, they have become far more aggressive in both their pursuit of candidates for conversion and their hard sell techniques. In particular, they have launched campaigns targeting active church members on their supposed "addiction" to porn, and how "porn addiction" negatively affects both individuals and the society as a whole. (During Super Bowl XLV Sunday, they hosted a campaign called "Porn Sunday", where they targeted churches throughout the country with testimonials from NFL players and coaches about the damages caused by "porn addiction".)
Their ministry is equally as aggressive in targetting young people who they consider to be especially receptive to their message about sexual shame and denial and the wonders of "modesty" as well as the alleged dangers of porn and mastrubation and all other forms of un-Godly sexual acts. The same webpage that featured Stephanie Swift also included another "story of grace" where Gross describes how his efforts to "save" Montana Fishburne from her recent porn outtings were taken to heart by another "18 year old girl" (funny how they are all "girls" even though legally they are adult enough to make their own choices, right??) whom supposedly was devastated when nude photos she did of herself on the Internet ended up becoming public against her will.
That in and of itself would not by much of a problem...except for the fact that like Ministeress Lubben, Gross and his gang are more than willing to stretch more than a few facts in order to sell their message of salvation from sexual sin. Lydia Lee (the former Julie Meadows) actually did a decent analysis of some of the more outlandish claims about "sex addiction" and porn's alleged connection with same, and came up with and throughly debunked some wild inaccurate claims. One such example:
Of course, there are those performers who absolutely stand by their decisions to do porn; who see their profession as not only a decent job, but also an empowering, even liberating influence on their personal
sex lives...not to mention the nice paycheck and the means to explore their sexuality and their exhibitionism. Problem is, though, these women don't quite get the attention or publicity of the tragedies and tales of "defiliation" and destruction and salvation through Jesus (or through radical feminism) that dominate the conventional wisdom that flows from the dominant media. A few brave souls attempt to sell the idea that porn can be just as much a source of public good and liberation as it can be a source of tragedy...but most likely, they are simply shouted down by the fierce volume of anger from the antiporn crowd...if they are even allowed a place to speak to begin with.
And that's the main reason why BPPA exists today...to offer at least one more place where those who believe in the positive potential of porn can at least have a microphone to speak our peace. We may not have the money of XXXChurch or the stridency of Shelley Lubben or Gail Dines or the censoriousness of the GenderBorg radfems or the Morality in Media cartel...but we do have the commitment to accuracy, truth, and pleasure on our side. And sometimes, that all that counts.
As for the XXXChurch...well, I'll let Lydia Lee have the last word on them, since she says things so well.
In my view, the majority of porn that is out there merely depicts sexual activity amongst humans that real people already enjoy immensely; whether mere acts of beautiful women and handsome men masturbating and touching and groping and tasting and kissing; or whether it's a full blown orgy of mass fucking and sucking; or whether it's merely a couple finding each other's hot buttons. Unless you are of the view that the activities themselves are somehow "immoral" and a threat to "society" and "civilization", it would be highly hypocritical, in my view, to come down on the written or displayed depictions of consensual and mutally pleasurable sexual activity amongst adults.Since that time, this blog has gone through plenty of changes. Some of the original founders, such as Trinity, Amber Rhea, and Verte, have dropped out and moved on to other venues; the founding mother Ren Ev got so burned out by all of the controversy that she basically has opted out for the safety of her own blog; and while many of the other original contributors like Ernest Greene and Iamcuriousblue will comment on occasion, it sometimes feels like this is a one man (or more appropriately, a one 'Dog) show, especially since Ren Ev granted me the powers of head admin in April of last year. There was even a time during a relatively slow period when I was at my lowest point when I even considered just leaving and shutting the place down due to what I perceived to be a lack of interest.
Plus, those who are so quick to condemn porn so gravely miss the most important reason for its existence: to turn people on and get people off. In a world that can be quite lonesome, cruel, and unfeeling, anything that allows a lonely soul or two or fifty even some minimal measure of pleasure cannot be so bad after all....as long as no others are harmed by his/her actions.
Then the HIV/Porn Scares of 2009 and 2010, Shelley Lubben, Michael Weinstein, and The Great Condom Mandate Debate arrived to rekindle both my interest and the debate over the legitimacy of porn in general...and business picked back up enough for me to continue on.
And, thankfully, this blog has become more and more a go to place for a point of view that usually doesn't make the rounds of porn debate circles.
Even better is that it seems that the acceptability of porn has began to make some fundamental strides in the real world, too. The recent media circus over Charlie Sheen and his "goddess" Bree Olson (not to mention his past history with porn/erotica starlets) has brought forth the immense popularity (or noteriety, depending on your POV) of porn's reach, as well as the recent loving testimonials of actress Cameron Diaz -- who openly stated her love of porn in a recent interview on Jimmy Kimmel's TV show -- and the recent victory of the porn-positive opinion in the recent Cambridge Union debate in England.
Nevertheless, it remains a long battle for people like us who see pornography as a potentially positive social and societal good to overcome the prevailing prejudices and assumptions about both the performers who create and produce sexually explicit media and the people who eagerly consume it.
I'll just give you two examples of what we are up against, and why we need to continue the struggle, so to speak.
When updating this blog this morning with commentary on the Shelley Lubben documentary post, I came upon a drive-by comment by an anonymous user that usually wouldn't find the light of day here, since it is not our perogative to give people who demonize and deligitimize us any more platforms than they already have. Nevertheless, his comment does say quite a lot about the prevailing attitude that folk like him have deep inside towards people like us, and just before I vaporize it to the Internet ether it belongs, I'll give it a bit of analysis. This was originally supposed to be a comment to Iamcuriousblue's initial post to the blog, "Why I'm pro porn..".
Not every Pro-Porn person is stupid...but every stupid person is Pro-Porn... So, if you are talking about a kid who knows her/his mom just have sex with all the men she met?? do you think that sexually positive?? porn people is selfish because they always talk about human rights, pleasure, etc...but there are so much people out there who want to have a great kid who make a good history of their country, not just to have sex with people.....So, that is why I said, only stupid people is Pro-Porn.
Once again, I wouldn't even post this nonsense, except to show what kind of mentality we are up against here. You can literally count on both hands and run out of fingers on all the usual assumptions and strawpeople that our Mensa relies on to prove our "stupidity". Of course, porn starlets aren't the only ones who engage in sex with different men; in fact, I'd bet that outside of the job they are paid to do in performing sex scenes, most performers are strictly monogamous. Heck, many performers are even monogamous within the scope of their jobs, only performing with their significant others or with women. (Funny how girl/girl sex escapes our commentator's mental grasp...I guess that he would see that as an asset for his voyeruism??) Besides, if a woman in or out of porn decides that she wants to engage in pleasurable sex with more than one person in her life, and she's willing to protect herself, what is it to us to deny or criticize her for that?? Even if it's more than one man at once??
And, oh, how funny, this "make a good history of their country"...as if porn starlets or sexually active women aren't capable of being successful outside of their sexual exploits. I mean, I guess that Nina Hartley only slept her way to earning that magna cum laude degree in nursing at San Francisco State University, right?? And, Vicky Vette's success in her early life as a mid-level executive and home builder prior to her entering the adult industry was only a myth in her brain, because she can only function when she's on her knees sucking Scott Nails; dick...am I correct, Anon?? And, what about the many performers whom actually served their country in the military prior to entering adult...are they merely reducable to a bunch of silly sluts, too??
Maybe Anon needs to stop projecting HIS stupidity onto others and actually talk to and listen to active performers before he shoots his mouth off next time.
But, fools like our Anonymous usually come a dime a dozen, fueled by their willfull ignorance and refusal to open their minds to the world. Far, far more problematic and injurous are the progeny of so-called "rescue organizations" who exploit the same misguided beliefs and assumptions to exploit the many varied experiences of performers in order to both promote a reactionary, neo-Puritan agenda, and to get paid.
I don't have to reset the antics of Shelley Lubben since you know plenty about her....but you might not quite know about the XXXChurch.com ministry.
Founded by Craig Gross around 2008, this organization sells itself as a hip, cool, vivacious youth ministry who, like Lubben's Pink Cross Foundation, glams around porn conventions and awards shows attempting to sell their message of redemption and salvation from the evil dangers of porn. They also include a seperate ministry known as X3, which claims to "save" formerly promiscuous women back to a "Godly" life of sexual "restraint". In effect, they are the "ex-slut" equivalent to the "ex-gay" ministries, and their damage to psyches and escape from reality is equally recorded and appalling.
Unfortunately, they, like some sexual predators, will sense enough of a weakness from someone whom has suffered legitimate injury or psychological harm to be able to turn him or her against their better sense. Such is the case, I'd say, with Stephanie Swift, who is the latest former performer to fall victim to (or, if you have a different point of view, be saved by) the clutches of Gross and the XXXChurch.
Swift's story is indeed not a particularly happy one: an Hall-of-Fame performer who gained superstar status during the middle- to late-1990s with over 370 videos to her credit, she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2009, and began chemotheraphy treatments between then and the end o 2010. Apparently, while undergoing the therapy, she had a distinct change of heart and philosophy, and XXXChurch was able to impact her beliefs enough that she became "born again" and repudiated her porn past. The fact that the industry had pulled together to raise thousands of dollars to help her recovery apparently didn't factor into her ennui, since she doesn't even bother to mention such generosity; only claiming that "having breast cancer saved her life". As if porn had anything to do with her contracting breast cancer in the first place?
Ms. Swift was quick to join XXXChurch.com upon her "salvation", and they didn't take long to publicize their newest convert with a vengence; a section of their website dedicated to Swift includes not only a brief written testimony, but also a video clip where Ms. Swift shares her joy of being "saved" and converted to "the blood of Jesus" via Craig Gross' organization.
Now...this is in no way intended to be an attack on Ms. Swift or her personal conversion of faith; like many women who find comfort in religion at times of stress, she is totally entitled to her views and beliefs, and she deserves nothing but the best wishes for her recovery, both physical and emotional.
On the other hand, though...the role of XXXChurch and their methods of targeting impressionable performers for shaming and humiliating, and especially for distorting and denying the legal experiences and beliefs of other performers not so willing to feel shame for their profession or their personal lives, is more than worthy of analysis and even some derision.
Until recently, XXXChurch was though up to be the "good cop", feel good style of ex-slut evangelism, at least compared to the more ham-fisted, Bible in your face, off-the-wall, fire-and-brimstone approach of Ministeress Lubben. Recently, apparently due to either the competition and publicity of Lubben or the recent HIV scares, they have become far more aggressive in both their pursuit of candidates for conversion and their hard sell techniques. In particular, they have launched campaigns targeting active church members on their supposed "addiction" to porn, and how "porn addiction" negatively affects both individuals and the society as a whole. (During Super Bowl XLV Sunday, they hosted a campaign called "Porn Sunday", where they targeted churches throughout the country with testimonials from NFL players and coaches about the damages caused by "porn addiction".)
Their ministry is equally as aggressive in targetting young people who they consider to be especially receptive to their message about sexual shame and denial and the wonders of "modesty" as well as the alleged dangers of porn and mastrubation and all other forms of un-Godly sexual acts. The same webpage that featured Stephanie Swift also included another "story of grace" where Gross describes how his efforts to "save" Montana Fishburne from her recent porn outtings were taken to heart by another "18 year old girl" (funny how they are all "girls" even though legally they are adult enough to make their own choices, right??) whom supposedly was devastated when nude photos she did of herself on the Internet ended up becoming public against her will.
That in and of itself would not by much of a problem...except for the fact that like Ministeress Lubben, Gross and his gang are more than willing to stretch more than a few facts in order to sell their message of salvation from sexual sin. Lydia Lee (the former Julie Meadows) actually did a decent analysis of some of the more outlandish claims about "sex addiction" and porn's alleged connection with same, and came up with and throughly debunked some wild inaccurate claims. One such example:
Our interest, though, is in XXXChurch's essential denial that any porn performer could have an expierence or history in porn other than dire slavery or sin or shame. For obvious reasons, Gross' crew simply reduces the experiences of women in porn to its least common and most destructive denomination, as nothing less than the Devil's trial by fire. Apparently women whose experiences in porn were a bit more positive and fullfilling than Stephanie Swift's was are simply rejected as either tools of the Devil in need of prayer and shaming to convert them to "God's love", or simply dismissed as mindless sluts who deserve all the pain and hurd they're supposed to get...and the eternal damnation in Hell as well. Never mind that there are active performers in porn who are also regular churchgoers (Mary Carey, the former nominee for governor of California being an example), and there's also those performers/models whom have suffered tragic, traumatic life-changing situations and not quite moved to blame them all on porn or their sex habits (model Taylor Stevens currently fighting her own bout of cancer, for example). None of them will manage to make Craig Gross' salvation list...and that's quite unfortunate for him.If I Google “how many Americans visit porn sites,” the first link talks about privacy on the internet, the second talks about how the FBI uses fake hyperlinks to snare child porn suspects (bravo there!) – validating the first links suspicions about privacy? – and the third talks about how an adult entertainment company evaluated the backgrounds of people buying porn and, as it turns out in February 2009, anyway, more conservatives and religious people bought porn than anyone else. Benjamin Edelman at Harvard Business School states,
- 4.7 million Americans visit porn sites in excess of 11 hours per week
“Some of the people who are most outraged turn out to be consumers of the very things they claimed to be outraged by.”This is the kind of thing that I find usually happens when I’m left to research other’s information.
Of course, there are those performers who absolutely stand by their decisions to do porn; who see their profession as not only a decent job, but also an empowering, even liberating influence on their personal
sex lives...not to mention the nice paycheck and the means to explore their sexuality and their exhibitionism. Problem is, though, these women don't quite get the attention or publicity of the tragedies and tales of "defiliation" and destruction and salvation through Jesus (or through radical feminism) that dominate the conventional wisdom that flows from the dominant media. A few brave souls attempt to sell the idea that porn can be just as much a source of public good and liberation as it can be a source of tragedy...but most likely, they are simply shouted down by the fierce volume of anger from the antiporn crowd...if they are even allowed a place to speak to begin with.
And that's the main reason why BPPA exists today...to offer at least one more place where those who believe in the positive potential of porn can at least have a microphone to speak our peace. We may not have the money of XXXChurch or the stridency of Shelley Lubben or Gail Dines or the censoriousness of the GenderBorg radfems or the Morality in Media cartel...but we do have the commitment to accuracy, truth, and pleasure on our side. And sometimes, that all that counts.
As for the XXXChurch...well, I'll let Lydia Lee have the last word on them, since she says things so well.
What did irritate me about the confession (or testimony, if you will), was the point where she said that if there had been someone from the industry encouraging her not to do porn, she would have listened. I’m sorry, but I can’t think of a more disingenuous statement. People in pornography are in it because they want to be there. It’s too easy to blame an anti-porn porn person for not warning her. This gives kudos to XXX Church for being present at an adult convention. This may not be the blatant Lubben testimony of “The Devil made me do it,” “modern day slavery,” “I have herpes but God cured me,” schtick, but it still takes responsibility and transfers it onto someone else. I have so many mixed feelings right now. Sad because she feels she has to publicly insult an industry that made her a super star, heartbroken that she suffered sexual abuse, disgust that XXX Church is stooping to the same Lubben-esque standards of exploiting the model for more publicity and donations, anger that the general public does not know, especially by videos like this, that the majority of industry people are not seedy, weird losers that prey on people, and resolve to finish The Devil and Shelley Lubben and point at the exploitative organizations that mirror the porn industry. Pornography is a blatant and honest exploiting of the body. Honest! It does not lie about glamour, it does not lie about STDs and risk, and anyone in the world would tell you that. You don’t have to be from the adult industry to know that it’s not glamourous and that there is risk of STDs. That is the dumbest argument these ridiculous people pose. I lost a childhood friendship for wanting to get into the industry. I had no illusions about my choice to be in porn. And what did losing that friendship teach me? That she wasn’t really my friend. But these people exploit the soul. They exploit the darkest elements of human nature and offer salvation through your endorsement and donations, but they lie in order to do it, and I will take the adult industry over these heathens ANY DAY! I feel dirty visiting their sites, I feel gross watching them and listening to them. I wish Swift the best in her life, but I’m grossed out by these people and their tactics and the way they infiltrate an honest industry and use it because no one knows better. It is the most misunderstood and least exposed legal industry. They want it to go away so they can attack homosexuality and single mothers and all the things that don’t fit into a picture posed by a book they couldn’t possibly understand because of how old it is and how many times it’s been translated. They are obsessed. They suffer from addiction. Addicts need an addiction, and if you give up one, you have to replace it with something else, because that is the nature of addiction. Now their addiction is religion.If only more performers could be as up front and unabashed as Lydia Lee. THAT, my friends, is why this blog keeps going...and thanks to women like her, will keep going strong.
I’ve already heard some pretty gross things about Craig Gross. I won’t publish it because I was told in confidence, but believe me, he’s in the same league with the Lubbens of the world. I wrote about him on Mike South’s site, and I don’t care how many people like him. He is an enemy of truth. And again, I’m not against spirituality, but I am against the mass hysteria these people promote and perpetuate, and I don’t believe the man that I have read about would agree that idol worship and judging and giving money to people who promote such things is the only way to experience salvation. You know what I would like to see? Someone from the industry not sell out and kick it around just because they need a new gig. If Stephanie is happy, great, but the blame-shifting is sickening. It just smacks of bullshit to me. The industry rallied around her to raise money for her. I can’t tell you how many internet posts I saw about fundraisers and how many “Help Stephanie Swift” announcements… Certainly her fans were supportive? Did she talk about that in the video? No. No love. No love at all.
Monday, February 21, 2011
"The Devil And Shelley Lubben" (A Whiteacre/Lee Production) -- Reloaded And Extended
It seems that Micheal Whiteacre and Lydia Lee have created a monster.
Their documentary series "The Devil And Shelley Lubben" has gotten plenty of rave reviews...and it's also gotten banished from YouTube due to complaints from Ministress Lubben's peeps.
But, never say our duo doesn't react..they now have embedded permenant copies of their videos over at their site, TheDevilAndShelleyLubben.com, and they've made to embed codes available to anyone willing to share in the exposure of the many lies and deceptions.
And, they've even managed to create an extended version of Part 2, with additional testimony refuting Lubben's claims about rampant abuse in the industry.
Doing our part, here's the updated videos...and all thanks and credit go to Michael and Lydia for all they have done.
The Devil And Shelley Lubben: Episode 1
The Devil And Shelley Lubben: Episode 2 (extended)
Their documentary series "The Devil And Shelley Lubben" has gotten plenty of rave reviews...and it's also gotten banished from YouTube due to complaints from Ministress Lubben's peeps.
But, never say our duo doesn't react..they now have embedded permenant copies of their videos over at their site, TheDevilAndShelleyLubben.com, and they've made to embed codes available to anyone willing to share in the exposure of the many lies and deceptions.
And, they've even managed to create an extended version of Part 2, with additional testimony refuting Lubben's claims about rampant abuse in the industry.
Doing our part, here's the updated videos...and all thanks and credit go to Michael and Lydia for all they have done.
The Devil And Shelley Lubben: Episode 1
If you can see this text, you have Java Script disabled.
The Devil And Shelley Lubben: Episode 2 (extended)
If you can see this text, you have Java Script disabled.
Tuesday, February 15, 2011
"The Devil And Shelley Lubben" (A Whiteacre/Lee Production): The Definitive Takedown Of A Fanatical Lunatic (Updated)
[Updated....scroll to bottom.]
Well....what was once potential is now officially real and visible.
The previous post had promised an expose/documentary of Shelley Lubben....and today, Michael Whiteacre and Lydia Lee (aka Julie Meadows) have delivered on thei promise with the first two episodes of their documentary.
Needless to say, "The Devil and Shelley Lubben" packs the full punch.
Episode 1 gives us the background of the method behind Ministeress Lubben's madness regarding her views on porn and her history as a sex worker turned fundamentalist antiporn activist in denial of her own responsibility for her own actions and words.
Episode 2 goes into Lubben's pet theories about how porn inevitably leads to abuse and disease and rape, using testimony from active and former performers (including Nina Hartley and Lydia Lee/Julie Meadows herself) to directly and forcefully repudiate all of the memes she has sprouted and promoted. It also includes one of the co-stars of one of Lubben's videos refuting forcefully her claim of being "raped" in the shooting of said video.
You can find the episodes both at Mike Whiteacre's YouTube channel and at Julie Meadows' blog....but in the interest of full exposure, I will also post the vids here after the jump. They are THAT damn powerful.
Just listen in and pass your own judgment.
The Devil And Shelley Lubben" Episode 1 (Blip.tv)
Well....what was once potential is now officially real and visible.
The previous post had promised an expose/documentary of Shelley Lubben....and today, Michael Whiteacre and Lydia Lee (aka Julie Meadows) have delivered on thei promise with the first two episodes of their documentary.
Needless to say, "The Devil and Shelley Lubben" packs the full punch.
Episode 1 gives us the background of the method behind Ministeress Lubben's madness regarding her views on porn and her history as a sex worker turned fundamentalist antiporn activist in denial of her own responsibility for her own actions and words.
Episode 2 goes into Lubben's pet theories about how porn inevitably leads to abuse and disease and rape, using testimony from active and former performers (including Nina Hartley and Lydia Lee/Julie Meadows herself) to directly and forcefully repudiate all of the memes she has sprouted and promoted. It also includes one of the co-stars of one of Lubben's videos refuting forcefully her claim of being "raped" in the shooting of said video.
You can find the episodes both at Mike Whiteacre's YouTube channel and at Julie Meadows' blog....but in the interest of full exposure, I will also post the vids here after the jump. They are THAT damn powerful.
Just listen in and pass your own judgment.
Update (2-16-11):
The virus -- or, should I say, the antivirus -- seems to be spreading far and wide. Here's a sampling of the blogs/sites which have either reposted or commented on the Lubben documentary so far:
Julie Meadows' Blog (appropriate, since she co-produced the damn thang)
Michael Whiteacre (via his YouTube channel -- see above)
Dr. Chantelle Tibbals (Porn Valley Vantage - PVV)
Danny Wylde (Trve West Coast Fiction)
Monica Foster (via her blog)
A special shoutout goes to Mark Kernes Tom Hymes over at AVN, who just posted a very detailed summary/synopsis of the first two episodes.
Bonus: A website has now been set up where you can see the entire collection of the documentary, as well as the preparatory trailer.
One additional note: Jessi Fischer over at The Sexademic, whom also posted the vids at her site as well, is scheduled to debate Ministeress Lubben this weekend over at Cambridge University in London. Good luck, Jessi..and break her legs. Figuratively speaking, of course.
As more sites/blogs post the series, or when the next set of vids comes out, they will be acknowledged here.
Update #2 (2-20-11):
Well..it seems that Shelley's peeps aren't too happy to have people outing her..because they complained loud enough to YouTube enough to have them pull Episode 2 from view.
Interesting that they focused more of their ire on the second episode, which was much less personal, than the first one?? Maybe it was because they didn't like the competition from folks like Nina Hartley, Melissa Monet, Lydia Lee, and Kayden Kross??
But, never fear, Clones...Mike and Lydia weren't born yesterday....they had a backup plan.
If the video doesn't appear, you can still find it here:
Thursday, December 23, 2010
HIV Porn Scare 2010 (Back to the Series): AHF Goes Full Court Press On The Press; LA Daily News Rebukes Them, And A Potential Ministress Lubben Expose
Some interesting developments today in the ongoing saga:
First: Mike Weinstein and the AIDS Health Foundation decided to up the ante a bit today by putting out an all out ad blitz, buying ad space in newspapers such as the LA Weekly, the LA Times, and others calling for the LA County Officials to permanently shut down any and all porn studios not mandating condoms on set. A copy of the AHF press release, produced by the BusinessWire.com website, follows:
And, it just as blissfully ignores the basic fact that Derrick Burts, the aformentioned "Patient Zeta" of last October's HIV scare, was found to be the only performer who tested positive for HIV, and had even admitted that he contracted the virus through acts outside of the industry.
Then again, since when did facts get in the way of a polically and financially motivated witchhunt?
Fortunately, there are people beginning to expose the sham for the power grab it is.
Strangely enough, the LA Daily News today posted an editorial on the issue which not only defended AIM's right of existence, but also came down pretty hard on the attempts of LACHS and AHF to browbeat industry performers in order to shove condoms (and dental dams, and other more primitive means of "protection") dowm their throats. The editorial, reposted to XBiz.com, follows:
And...you might recognize that crafty man testifying about the hypocrisy of the mostly pro-gay rights AHF teaming up with the rabidly anti-gay Lubben...but I'm not giving any hints.
First: Mike Weinstein and the AIDS Health Foundation decided to up the ante a bit today by putting out an all out ad blitz, buying ad space in newspapers such as the LA Weekly, the LA Times, and others calling for the LA County Officials to permanently shut down any and all porn studios not mandating condoms on set. A copy of the AHF press release, produced by the BusinessWire.com website, follows:
AHF to Dr. Fielding: Shut Down Non-Condom Porn Sets NOW
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) today launched an advertising and online e-advocacy campaign aimed at urging Dr. Jonathan Fielding, M.D., M.P.H., Director of Los Angeles Department of Public Health, to shut down Los Angeles-area adult film shoots that do not use condoms. An ad, appearing in today’s LA Weekly, lists the organizations that have come out in support of mandatory condom use in porn, including: Los Angeles Times, American Medical Association, American Public Health Association and the California STD Controllers Association.LA Weekly Ad and Online Campaign Launches Today; Supporters Asked to Contact Dr. Jonathan Fielding, Director of LA’s Dept. of Public Health, Urge Him to “Enforce Condom Use in Porn NOW!”“What Else Are You Waiting For to Protect the Public’s Health?” Asks AHF
The ad then poses the question to Dr. Fielding: “What else are you waiting for to protect the public’s health?” and directs viewers to call Dr. Fielding at his office (213) 240-8117 or to go to www.aidshealth.org to send an e-letter. In conjunction with the ad, AHF has also launched an online advocacy campaign asking the Foundation’s tens of thousands of e-community members to contact Dr. Fielding.
“AHF calls on Dr. Fielding to join the growing chorus of thought leaders and health organizations who support mandatory condom use in adult films, and shut down all non-condom porn shoots in the County,” said Michael Weinstein, President of AIDS Healthcare Foundation. “Unfortunately, despite clear regulatory requirements and actions taken by public officials, the adult film industry remains convinced it is above the law and continues to place its own interests above the health of performers. Dr. Fielding and County Public Health have done little to address the fact that the health and safety of adult film workers are being placed in jeopardy on film sets throughout Los Angeles County every day. At this point, inaction on the part of the County can only be seen as disregard for the lives of the thousands of young people who work in the industry as well as the health of the public at large.”
Earlier this month, a motion introduced by L.A. City Councilmember Bill Rosendahl directed the City Attorney to report back in 45 days “to explain the mechanisms necessary to enable the City’s film permit process to require workplace safety in the production of all adult films.” The motion concludes: “The producers of adult films are required by California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 5903 et seq. to employ barrier protection, including without limitation condoms, to shield performers from contact with potentially infectious material during the production of adult films. I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council request the City Attorney to report back within 45 days to explain the mechanisms necessary to enable the City’s film permit process to require workplace safety in the production of all adult films.”
That action came on the heels of explosive news that L.A. health officials closed the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation (AIM)—a Sherman Oaks clinic funded by and serving the adult film industry—after California state officials denied AIM a community clinic license. The facility had been operating without a proper license for over a decade. AHF had called for County health officials to shut down the clinic after Derrick Burts, a 24 year-old adult film performer who tested HIV-positive on October 9th, spoke out regarding the poor treatment he received at AIM. Burts, who became known as the industry’s ‘Patient Zeta’ after the news first broke, spoke about the harsh treatment, neglect and indifference he experienced from AIM officials after his diagnosis, and he also championed the use of condoms in all adult film productions to prevent STD and HIV transmission among performers.Of course, the AHF press release blissfully ignores the fact that it was the California Department of Pulbic Health, not LACHS, who denied AIM the license, and that it was only temporary due to a syntatical error involving the official name of the organization.
STDs in the Industry in Los Angeles County
Los Angeles County’s Department of Public Health is aware of an ongoing and pervasive sexually transmitted disease crisis in LA’s pornography industry, a fact that is well documented. DPH has cited numerous figures confirming an STD epidemic among performers in adult films, including the fact that performers in hardcore pornography are ten times more likely to be infected with a sexually transmitted disease than members of the population at large.
According to figures cited by DPH, there were 2,013 documented cases of Chlamydia among LA porn performers between 2003 and 2007. In the same period, 965 cases of gonorrhea were documented. Many performers suffer multiple infections. In the period April 2004 to March 2008 there have been 2,847 STD infections diagnosed among 1,884 performers in the hardcore industry in LA County. DPH attributes the epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases in the porn industry to a lack of protective equipment for partners, including condoms. The agency recommends condoms be used during production, but has never taken steps to ensure their use, or to protect the performers who are essentially required to endanger their health in order to remain employed.
“This is not just about one industry, but about our entire community, as the spread of disease among adult film performers endangers themselves as well as their sexual partners in and outside the industry,” added AHF’s Weinstein. “Los Angeles County Public Health officials cannot keep passing the buck on this by playing ping pong on this with the state and the industry itself. That is why we are calling on Dr. Fielding to take action now to protect adult film industry workers and the public at large by shutting down all non-condom porn sets immediately.”
And, it just as blissfully ignores the basic fact that Derrick Burts, the aformentioned "Patient Zeta" of last October's HIV scare, was found to be the only performer who tested positive for HIV, and had even admitted that he contracted the virus through acts outside of the industry.
Then again, since when did facts get in the way of a polically and financially motivated witchhunt?
Fortunately, there are people beginning to expose the sham for the power grab it is.
Strangely enough, the LA Daily News today posted an editorial on the issue which not only defended AIM's right of existence, but also came down pretty hard on the attempts of LACHS and AHF to browbeat industry performers in order to shove condoms (and dental dams, and other more primitive means of "protection") dowm their throats. The editorial, reposted to XBiz.com, follows:
Straight society has a hard time dealing with the porn industry. On the one hand, it doesn't want to legitimize the business or the adult film actors in any way. On the other hand, it wants the industry and workers to conform to strict — and restrictive — rules and standards.
And, if there were another hand, on it would be the millions of customers who keep adult movies in high demand and the source of one of the San Fernando Valley's most profitable enterprises.
This societal schizophrenia is exhibited in the hopefully temporary closure earlier this month of one of the industry's most important health centers — AIM, or the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare Foundation. The Sherman Oaks-based clinic is the main screener of sexually transmitted diseases for adult film workers. It also acts as an advocate for an industry that others consider untouchable.
Citing what sounds like extremely minor paperwork violations, state public health officials ordered AIM to close on Dec. 9, the day after an adult film star announced publicly that he was treated poorly at the clinic after he tested positive for HIV in October and didn't get treatment as fast as he could.
In fact, it appears just ammunition in the long-standing feud between Los Angeles County Public Health officials and AIDS activists and AIM and its co-founder Sharon Mitchell over the issue of condoms in adult films. State law requires that adult film stars use condoms, but many performers eschew them. While AIM supplies free condoms, it focuses on testing performers as opposed to enforcing condom rules.And on another front....former porn performer Julie Meadows (aka in real life Lydia Lee) has been one of the leading advocates for performer choice and against the heavy handedness and hypocrisy of the condom mandate movement. Today, Julie and fellow activist Michael Whiteacre teamed up to promote an upcoming expose featuring the firebreathing fundamentalist rhetoric of one of their principal spokespeople: former performer turned fundamentalist Christian activist Shelley Lubben. A clip from that expose is now available at Whiteacres's YouTube page and also at Julie's blog...but I will post a copy of that clip here as well.
Mitchell, a former porn star herself, sees the closure as a conspiracy. But there's been nothing secret about how she and AIM have been targeted. After AIM was shut down, for example, Michael Weinstein, the executive director for AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a provider of medical treatment for AIDS and HIV patients, made it clear his goal is getting the adult film industry shut down if it doesn't use condoms.
While his concern about the spread of AIDS and HIV is admirable, he's misguided if he thinks persecuting AIM or adult film actors will make the public safer. It's likely to have the opposite effect.
AIM provides important support for adult film stars. AIM tests about 1,500 clients a month. And some have said that if AIM didn't do these screenings, they probably wouldn't happen. In fact, losing centers like AIM will likely force adult film production underground or to other states, endangering workers and public health even further.
If the county and other health officials truly care about public health, and not just punishing an organization that won't do what they want it to, they will find a way to work with AIM and the people engaged in this risky business, and not against them.
And...you might recognize that crafty man testifying about the hypocrisy of the mostly pro-gay rights AHF teaming up with the rabidly anti-gay Lubben...but I'm not giving any hints.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
A Refreshing Breather From The Negativity: How You Can Pay Nina Hartley Forward For All She's Done For Sex, Porn, And Humanity
Usually, I'd be in bed right about this time...but I just read something that made me jump out of my sleep, and I have to share it with you.
Happily, it's not another Porn Srare update...this is much more positive. But, it will require a little of your time...and, if you can spare, a dime or two. Don't worry...the cause is worthy. The person involved is so much worthier.
If there is one performer who exemplifies all what's good and positive and right in the adult sexual media, it has to be Nina Hartley. The record speaks for itself: 27 years of service. 600 film credits. 4 AVN awards. Induction into EVERY (as in ALL) adult media Halls of Fame. A top-selling sex educational/informational video series (the Nina Hartley Sex Guides series). A top selling book based on said series (Nina Hartley's Guide to Goof Sex). Numerous essays, web columns, print articles, speeches, and other forms of media informing the public on the virtues and pleasures of safer sex and sexual empowerment of women and men. And the undisputed title of the most progressive and smartest woman to embrace the field of hardcore erotica. And I haven't even gotten to...THE ASS.
Well...Nina's never had to rely on anyone but herself, her family, and her husband Ernest Greene for her livelihood, but today she faces a situation that could potentially break even the strongest person. Note the word "potentially". No, she's not terminally ill with cancer. HELL TO THE NO, she's not HIV+. (And no, Ministress Shelley, she's not suffering from STD's either...feel free to move along.)
What she is facing is this: If you have followed her, you know that she suffers from fibroid tumors in her uterus. The tumors are benign, and will remain such, so cancer is not the issue. They are, though, quite unsightly, and with time and age are beginning to affect her in other ways. Originally, Nina had hoped that the passage of time and menopause would relieve the sitch, but to no avail. So, she has decided on a more permanent solution: surgery to remove the tumors.
The procedure, according to Nina, is tenatively set to be performed this coming January or Feburary of next year; and will involve a 2-4 week recovery period following the surgery. She does have insurance to cover the surgery and the hospitalization...but the recovery period is another thing altogether. Like most performers, Nina has been hit hard by the twin blows of the recession and the lack of work recently in the porn biz (and now you also know why she is fighting mad against content thievery, too); and money is a bit short at the moment. Ernest is doing his best..but he faces the recession and his own health issues as well; and family help is not an option, either..
And here is where you come in. If you ever wanted to, as the saying goes, "pay it forward" and show your gratitude and love for everything that Nina has given us, well now is the perfect time to do so.
The Free Speech Coalition, HUSTLER Magazine, and Cindi Lofus's LadieZ Night blog have set up a special donors page over at GiveForward.com where people can contribute money to Nina's recovery fund. She's said that she doesn't need much, but every dollar donated would do so much to help her get back to the strong, sexy Goddess that she is.
The fundraiser has just started, and the goal is to raise $20,000 by the end of January of next year. I plan on making a donation or two as my finances allow...and though I recognize that times are rough economically for everyone, helping Nina get through this is not only the right choice, it's a down payment for her life and legacy touching every one of us who have been educated by her.
Just think of what porn would be like without her. Then...pay it forward, and pay the Goddess!!! Trust me, it's worth it.
Happily, it's not another Porn Srare update...this is much more positive. But, it will require a little of your time...and, if you can spare, a dime or two. Don't worry...the cause is worthy. The person involved is so much worthier.
If there is one performer who exemplifies all what's good and positive and right in the adult sexual media, it has to be Nina Hartley. The record speaks for itself: 27 years of service. 600 film credits. 4 AVN awards. Induction into EVERY (as in ALL) adult media Halls of Fame. A top-selling sex educational/informational video series (the Nina Hartley Sex Guides series). A top selling book based on said series (Nina Hartley's Guide to Goof Sex). Numerous essays, web columns, print articles, speeches, and other forms of media informing the public on the virtues and pleasures of safer sex and sexual empowerment of women and men. And the undisputed title of the most progressive and smartest woman to embrace the field of hardcore erotica. And I haven't even gotten to...THE ASS.
Well...Nina's never had to rely on anyone but herself, her family, and her husband Ernest Greene for her livelihood, but today she faces a situation that could potentially break even the strongest person. Note the word "potentially". No, she's not terminally ill with cancer. HELL TO THE NO, she's not HIV+. (And no, Ministress Shelley, she's not suffering from STD's either...feel free to move along.)
What she is facing is this: If you have followed her, you know that she suffers from fibroid tumors in her uterus. The tumors are benign, and will remain such, so cancer is not the issue. They are, though, quite unsightly, and with time and age are beginning to affect her in other ways. Originally, Nina had hoped that the passage of time and menopause would relieve the sitch, but to no avail. So, she has decided on a more permanent solution: surgery to remove the tumors.
The procedure, according to Nina, is tenatively set to be performed this coming January or Feburary of next year; and will involve a 2-4 week recovery period following the surgery. She does have insurance to cover the surgery and the hospitalization...but the recovery period is another thing altogether. Like most performers, Nina has been hit hard by the twin blows of the recession and the lack of work recently in the porn biz (and now you also know why she is fighting mad against content thievery, too); and money is a bit short at the moment. Ernest is doing his best..but he faces the recession and his own health issues as well; and family help is not an option, either..
And here is where you come in. If you ever wanted to, as the saying goes, "pay it forward" and show your gratitude and love for everything that Nina has given us, well now is the perfect time to do so.
The Free Speech Coalition, HUSTLER Magazine, and Cindi Lofus's LadieZ Night blog have set up a special donors page over at GiveForward.com where people can contribute money to Nina's recovery fund. She's said that she doesn't need much, but every dollar donated would do so much to help her get back to the strong, sexy Goddess that she is.
The fundraiser has just started, and the goal is to raise $20,000 by the end of January of next year. I plan on making a donation or two as my finances allow...and though I recognize that times are rough economically for everyone, helping Nina get through this is not only the right choice, it's a down payment for her life and legacy touching every one of us who have been educated by her.
Just think of what porn would be like without her. Then...pay it forward, and pay the Goddess!!! Trust me, it's worth it.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
HIV Porn Scare 2010 -- The Series (Supplemental): DBurris Drops New Scud On AIM: A Second Crossover Infection?? And...Why All This Is Important
Well, well, well...it seems that Derrick Burris is learning the art of propaganda pretty fast.
Darrah Ford just released at her blog what she calls an "exclusive" where she reveals through her "sources" that Derrick Burts (aka Cameron Reid, aka "Patient Zeta") has now made the claim that there was in fact a second crossover performer whom had tested positive for HIV under the same testing system AIM had used on him. Burts claims that that was NOT the performer whom he shot his last scene with, but another performer entirely, that may have ultimately infected him.
The main source for Darrah's "exclusive" seems to be an article over at the gay gossip site RadarOnline.org, where DBurts brings forth some quite explosive charges that not only is he not the only one whom is HIV+ and still was able to work in porn, but he claims that "several other" active performers, including what he calls "some well known" ones, are being hidden in the quarantine list of HIV+ performers kept by AIM...at least allegedly.
The money graphs from the RadarOnline article:
How was he able to get access to the quarantine list to begin with?? Through their medical records?? Isn't such a list supposed to be strictly confidential and not to be released to anyone other than the people infected, the production companies using it to screen out potential carriers in order to protect their other talent, and the local health authorities who are required to keep such materials per local law?? (Remember, AIM is REQUIRED to release information about a positive test for HIV to the authorities immediately upon a positive test result...that's not an voluntary option. Certainly AIM can't be that stupid to leave those records accessible to someone like Derrick Burts, can they?? Or...is his new BFF;s at AHF through the LA County board that does keep such info feeding him information to aid their ambush and vendetta against AIM and their campaign to take over the industry??
Also, there is this: remember that both here and last year's scare, no one else (at least, no one active in the straight porn industry) was found to be infected with HIV as a result of the testing. So, could it be that merely being on the quarantine list is not necessarily a sign that a performer was openly shooting straight porn?? Either AIM's testing regime is lying through its teeth and there are rogues about infecting tens of hundreds of porn performers...or Derrick's making shit up again. Considering that he still hasn't made up his mind exactly how he got infected to begin with, until I see some more hard evidence I'm still leaning towards Scenario #2.
Nevertheless, Derrick has his supporters and fans...and Darrah Ford, who happens to share her namesake's hatred for the industry, just so happens to be one of them. A piece of snippage from her rant follows:
Now, I respect Darrah for her passion, and defend to the death her right to speak her mind on anything and everything. And HELL TO THE NO, she does not deserve death threats or threats to out her, either.
But, ma'am, do pardon me if I don't quite march in perfect step with your love fest with Cameron.
First off, for all of the exposing that he claims to be doing, he still hasn't named any names of whom the other "well known performer(s)" happen to be. And the fact that people aren't "going after him" for not exposing them simply means that they probably don't buy his story to begin with.
And secondly, Darrah....you do know that gay porn is NOT under the same rules as straight porn, right?? In straight porn, condoms are either voluntary or utilized by the performer's choice. In gay porn, condoms are generally mandatory for the large studios; but bareback porn is far more popular with the "independent" studios who play to the consumers who simply can't stomach condoms getting in the way of their fantasy. In straight porn, testing and peer pressure not to infect those you fuck combined with selective and individual choice for condom usage, combined with selective choice of partners for sex scenes predominate because the main goal is to screen out infected people from scenes to begin with.
In gay porn, on the other hand, it's simply assumed that a performer will be HIV+ at some time, since the center of gay production is in the free fire zone of the HIV/AIDS pandemic; therefore condom usage combined with segregation of infected from non-infected performers doing bareback scenes is their norm. A few gay studios, though, have began to institute testing as a means of protecting themselves, but the default position of most is to simply ban bareback porn entirely and impose condoms exclusively. (This is the position of Chi Chi LaRue, who is so passionate about this that she loudly resigned from VIvid when they did away with their brief "condom only' policy about a year ago.)
The problem, of course, becomes more acute when male performers attempt to cross over and play both sides of the street, due to economic troubles and simply bi-lust. Some are straights who go the "gay for pay" route; others are true bisexuals who cross over for the "twink" value and to earn more money in these recessed times. Here is where the goal of protecting the assets and talent in straight porn clashes head on with the fear of not discriminating against and scapegoating gay men...unleashing both rampant homophobia and legitimate fear.
And then add to that mix another couple of factors: (1) the desire of professional bureaucrats and health care officios and certain ceritfied "sex positive" experts to use the porn industry as an easy scapegoat and guinea pig for all their beliefs about what "safe sex" should be and how it should be "modeled" to the public as a means of safety; and (2) the exploitation of government grants and other public finances to protect and develop political turfs and machines that feed on both the cash and the fear to gain political power and wealth.
Both Mike Weinstein (for the pro-gay "safe sex" liberal side) and Shelley Lubben (for the fundamentalist Christian "born again ex-slut" side) have not only become fabulously popular for their "activism" due to the prevailing wisdom that active sex workers and porn performers are just too plain stupid or abused or "diseased" or slutty or bound by The MAN (or, if successful and happy, merely mouthpieces of THE MAN); but have also the potential to score big paydays as well. Weinstein is poised to become the main Porn Czar in taking over the testing regim not only in LA but nationwide; and Lubben is just one FOX News interview with Sarah Palin away from scoring that multi-million dollar book deal. The jury is still out, though, on whether Derrick Burts will cash in as the next new Victim of Porn.
Much less popular, and being shunted aside and dismissed in all the horror and specatle, are the existing porn performers who manage to eke out a semulance of a life in the industry, yet whose stories don't fit the lurid fantasies of abject shame and horror and disease and death and loathing. If their industry is forced underground by those who still have it their heads that shoving condoms and dental dams down the throats and up the other orfices of performers without asking them how it feels, and regardless of whether or not the public who pays their checks by buying their works would be willing to accept wrapped dicks, though, then what will the response of people like Darrah Ford be then?? They may have Kink.com or a recondomized Vivid or Femme t....but those who like , say Brazzers or Bizzare or Naughty America won't be so lucky. Or...maybe they'll just have to go through pirating and tube sites to get the bareback they crave, or move to sites with less of a hastle, and less protection for the performers. I guess that's a small price to pay to promote safe sex and save lives...right??
That, folks, is why we must fight this and keep performer choice (with maximum protection) in the performers' hands. And also, even with all their faults, why we have to stand with Sharon Mitchell and AIM against this high tech lynch mob aimed at them. Sorry, Darrah, but I'lr respect Mitch over Shelley Lubben any day of the week..even if Doc Sharon only plays a doctor. It's far more preferable to Ministeress Lubben playing a human being.
Darrah Ford just released at her blog what she calls an "exclusive" where she reveals through her "sources" that Derrick Burts (aka Cameron Reid, aka "Patient Zeta") has now made the claim that there was in fact a second crossover performer whom had tested positive for HIV under the same testing system AIM had used on him. Burts claims that that was NOT the performer whom he shot his last scene with, but another performer entirely, that may have ultimately infected him.
The main source for Darrah's "exclusive" seems to be an article over at the gay gossip site RadarOnline.org, where DBurts brings forth some quite explosive charges that not only is he not the only one whom is HIV+ and still was able to work in porn, but he claims that "several other" active performers, including what he calls "some well known" ones, are being hidden in the quarantine list of HIV+ performers kept by AIM...at least allegedly.
The money graphs from the RadarOnline article:
Burts, 24, who until now has only been publicly identified as ‘Patient Zeta,” held a press conference in Los Angeles on Wednesday morning and told RadarOnline.com that he’s not the only porn star whose life has changed due to possible exposure to HIV and says there are other well-know performers on a quarantine list.Now, this brings up some interesting questions. What quarantine list was Derrick talking about?? The one that was used for testing all the first- and second-generation performers that may have been affected by his acts?? Or, the overall quarantine list encompassing all those who were infected with HIV (which would include not only Marc Wallace, Lara Roxx, Joey Montana, Darrin James, and all others who unfortunately were infected?
"I can’t give out names or anything or anybody that was on the quarantine list. I can say that there were well-known stars who were on the quarantine list. I don't know their status. “I was told...there was another person. What Jennifer Miller [AIM director] did tell me, she said that there was another person who tested positive; It was a male performer, I do know that. And she told me it was somebody who did crossover work....meaning gay and straight porn. That's all she would tell me. I said I think I have an idea of who it is, I threw a name out there and she said 'no, it's not him." I was reading stuff on the porn boards and that's all she left it at."
How was he able to get access to the quarantine list to begin with?? Through their medical records?? Isn't such a list supposed to be strictly confidential and not to be released to anyone other than the people infected, the production companies using it to screen out potential carriers in order to protect their other talent, and the local health authorities who are required to keep such materials per local law?? (Remember, AIM is REQUIRED to release information about a positive test for HIV to the authorities immediately upon a positive test result...that's not an voluntary option. Certainly AIM can't be that stupid to leave those records accessible to someone like Derrick Burts, can they?? Or...is his new BFF;s at AHF through the LA County board that does keep such info feeding him information to aid their ambush and vendetta against AIM and their campaign to take over the industry??
Also, there is this: remember that both here and last year's scare, no one else (at least, no one active in the straight porn industry) was found to be infected with HIV as a result of the testing. So, could it be that merely being on the quarantine list is not necessarily a sign that a performer was openly shooting straight porn?? Either AIM's testing regime is lying through its teeth and there are rogues about infecting tens of hundreds of porn performers...or Derrick's making shit up again. Considering that he still hasn't made up his mind exactly how he got infected to begin with, until I see some more hard evidence I'm still leaning towards Scenario #2.
Nevertheless, Derrick has his supporters and fans...and Darrah Ford, who happens to share her namesake's hatred for the industry, just so happens to be one of them. A piece of snippage from her rant follows:
How dare the people who attended that press conference allow this to not be reported!! You were there and none of you told the people in your own industry that there’s probably another crossover who tested HIV positive. Continue telling everyone how they can trust this diabolical establishment. But the reality is that none of you care whether these performers live or die. To many of you, there will always be a younger, prettier, less expensive version waiting right behind them to take their place. You’re all vampires sucking the life out of these people who put their lives on the line. If anyone else has been unknowingly infected because you didn’t report there was a second crossover, their blood is on your hands.
Don’t claim that Cameron must be lying. He’s naming names which means they can go after him if it’s not true. Because they haven’t yet in my opinion only means everything he’s claimed to this point is absolutely 100% true.
Now, I respect Darrah for her passion, and defend to the death her right to speak her mind on anything and everything. And HELL TO THE NO, she does not deserve death threats or threats to out her, either.
But, ma'am, do pardon me if I don't quite march in perfect step with your love fest with Cameron.
First off, for all of the exposing that he claims to be doing, he still hasn't named any names of whom the other "well known performer(s)" happen to be. And the fact that people aren't "going after him" for not exposing them simply means that they probably don't buy his story to begin with.
And secondly, Darrah....you do know that gay porn is NOT under the same rules as straight porn, right?? In straight porn, condoms are either voluntary or utilized by the performer's choice. In gay porn, condoms are generally mandatory for the large studios; but bareback porn is far more popular with the "independent" studios who play to the consumers who simply can't stomach condoms getting in the way of their fantasy. In straight porn, testing and peer pressure not to infect those you fuck combined with selective and individual choice for condom usage, combined with selective choice of partners for sex scenes predominate because the main goal is to screen out infected people from scenes to begin with.
In gay porn, on the other hand, it's simply assumed that a performer will be HIV+ at some time, since the center of gay production is in the free fire zone of the HIV/AIDS pandemic; therefore condom usage combined with segregation of infected from non-infected performers doing bareback scenes is their norm. A few gay studios, though, have began to institute testing as a means of protecting themselves, but the default position of most is to simply ban bareback porn entirely and impose condoms exclusively. (This is the position of Chi Chi LaRue, who is so passionate about this that she loudly resigned from VIvid when they did away with their brief "condom only' policy about a year ago.)
The problem, of course, becomes more acute when male performers attempt to cross over and play both sides of the street, due to economic troubles and simply bi-lust. Some are straights who go the "gay for pay" route; others are true bisexuals who cross over for the "twink" value and to earn more money in these recessed times. Here is where the goal of protecting the assets and talent in straight porn clashes head on with the fear of not discriminating against and scapegoating gay men...unleashing both rampant homophobia and legitimate fear.
And then add to that mix another couple of factors: (1) the desire of professional bureaucrats and health care officios and certain ceritfied "sex positive" experts to use the porn industry as an easy scapegoat and guinea pig for all their beliefs about what "safe sex" should be and how it should be "modeled" to the public as a means of safety; and (2) the exploitation of government grants and other public finances to protect and develop political turfs and machines that feed on both the cash and the fear to gain political power and wealth.
Both Mike Weinstein (for the pro-gay "safe sex" liberal side) and Shelley Lubben (for the fundamentalist Christian "born again ex-slut" side) have not only become fabulously popular for their "activism" due to the prevailing wisdom that active sex workers and porn performers are just too plain stupid or abused or "diseased" or slutty or bound by The MAN (or, if successful and happy, merely mouthpieces of THE MAN); but have also the potential to score big paydays as well. Weinstein is poised to become the main Porn Czar in taking over the testing regim not only in LA but nationwide; and Lubben is just one FOX News interview with Sarah Palin away from scoring that multi-million dollar book deal. The jury is still out, though, on whether Derrick Burts will cash in as the next new Victim of Porn.
Much less popular, and being shunted aside and dismissed in all the horror and specatle, are the existing porn performers who manage to eke out a semulance of a life in the industry, yet whose stories don't fit the lurid fantasies of abject shame and horror and disease and death and loathing. If their industry is forced underground by those who still have it their heads that shoving condoms and dental dams down the throats and up the other orfices of performers without asking them how it feels, and regardless of whether or not the public who pays their checks by buying their works would be willing to accept wrapped dicks, though, then what will the response of people like Darrah Ford be then?? They may have Kink.com or a recondomized Vivid or Femme t....but those who like , say Brazzers or Bizzare or Naughty America won't be so lucky. Or...maybe they'll just have to go through pirating and tube sites to get the bareback they crave, or move to sites with less of a hastle, and less protection for the performers. I guess that's a small price to pay to promote safe sex and save lives...right??
That, folks, is why we must fight this and keep performer choice (with maximum protection) in the performers' hands. And also, even with all their faults, why we have to stand with Sharon Mitchell and AIM against this high tech lynch mob aimed at them. Sorry, Darrah, but I'lr respect Mitch over Shelley Lubben any day of the week..even if Doc Sharon only plays a doctor. It's far more preferable to Ministeress Lubben playing a human being.
HIV Porn Scare 2010 -- The Series (Ongoing): AHF Calls In Its LA City Council Chips; St. James Infirmary Hosts Sex Worker/Performer Forum; And DBurts Gets A Lie Detector Challenge
I wish that this wouldn't be a daily occurence, but the news is breaking fast and furious.
And today, the tornado hit the sewage plant....figuratively speaking...in LA, with perhaps the biggest threat to the porn industry's existence since the Freeman decision was handed down. From AVN.com:
And, of course, the councilmen involved in this action are solely concerned about the welfare of the performers. It would have nothing to do with political contributions from Weinstein, right? RIght???
Yeah, right. Quoting a followup article from Mark Kernes at AVN.com:
Now, nothing has happened as of yet, and the resolution would allow for a 45 day period for recommendations from the LA City Attorney's office to the full City Council to require FilmLA (the governing board for movie production in LA) to "enforce" the proposed laws. What's so funny is that none of the regulations proposed would be enforced against mainstream films, where the risk of bodily fluid and hazardous material contact is a bit greater than mere kissing or fucking or sucking. (And I wonder how the hell would they enforce these rules against softcore films, exactly??)
Nevertheless, merely the threat of such regulation was enough to place the industry on alert. Now that the threat is now out in the open, maybe it may be time for performers to get off their butts and defend their rights before they are taken away from them??
Fortunately, some are beginning to fight back. Or, at least talk about fighting back.
The St. James Infirmary in San Francisco has been one of the premier resources of sex-positive activism for quite a long time; providing testing and support services in the Bay Area for sex workers, pornographer, and other sexual activists. Today, they announced, in association with the sex worker activist blog Bound, Not Gagged, the formation of a special forum to be held at SJI on December 18th specifically for porn performers to discuss the "shut down" of AIM and the overall climate for mandating condoms and other regulations. Quoting Stacey Swimme, the forum creator and blogmistress at BnG:
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Derrick Burts/Cameron Reid saga gets weirder and weirder.
Now it seems that DBurts has gotten a bit of a challenge from porn producer Mark Spiegler, who used a post on the porn gossip blog LukeIsBack.com to call out Cameron as a phony out for the quick buck and whom is using the porn industry to cover up his own extracurricular activities. Basically, Spiegler all but dared DBurts to take a lie detector test to prove that he was infected on a "straight" porn set. Strangely enough, Derrick has been quoted to have agreed to this.
Lie detector tests are notorious for masking the truth as much as illuminating it, which is why they are not considered viable in jury trials...but it still makes for great theatre while we get to the bottom of this affair. I guess we all should stay tuned.
And today, the tornado hit the sewage plant....figuratively speaking...in LA, with perhaps the biggest threat to the porn industry's existence since the Freeman decision was handed down. From AVN.com:
Quite obviously, the ringleader of this coup was totally satisfied with this development.L.A. City Council: Deny Film Permits to Non-Condom Shoots
In its latest bid to drive adult production companies out of business or out of the state, AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) has managed to get four Los Angeles City Councilmembers to support a motion to deny filming permits to adult companies unless the permits contain special conditions requiring condoms, dental dams, face shields and/or goggles for all sex acts.
"The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health has documented widespread transmission of sexually transmitted diseases associated with the activities of the adult film industry within the City of Los Angeles," begins the motion proposed by Councilmember Bill Rosendahl and seconded by members Ed Reyes, Paul Koretz and Eric Garcetti.
"The producers of all films within the City of Los Angeles, including adult films, are required to obtain permits issued by the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and administered by FilmL.A., Inc. under certain contracts between FilmL.A., Inc. and the City of Los Angeles," the motion continues. "Such permits for film production within the City of Los Angeles may include conditions to protect public safety and health."
"The producers of adult films are required by California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 5903 et seq. to employ barrier protection, including without limitation condoms, to shield performers from contact with potentially infectious material during the production of adult films."
"I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council request the City Attorney to report back within 45 days to explain the mechanisms necessary to enable the City’s film permit process to require workplace safety in the production of all adult films."
AHF president Michael Weinstein, whose organization pushed for the motion, lauded Rosendahl for the action.The question of why Weinstein would also include dental dams and PPE (Personal Protection Equipment) such as gloves and goggles to such a resolution probably wasn't asked of him...but I'm sure he'll take that as long as he gets his wish of jamming condoms up the industry.
"Tying condom use to adult-film production permits is absolutely the responsible thing to do, protecting adult film industry performers who—under the current system of testing—are routinely asked to risk their lives and health in order to continue working," Weinstein told the BusinessWire.com site. "Unfortunately, despite clear regulatory requirements and actions taken by public officials, the adult film industry remains convinced it is above the law."
Enlisting the City Council is the latest move in AHF's war on the adult industry. Wednesday, it sponsored a press conference where alleged HIV-positive adult performer Derrick Burts claimed to have been maltreated by AIM Healthcare—a charge which AIM has categorically denied—and yesterday it convinced LA Health Department director Dr. Jonathan Fielding to serve a cease-and-desist order on AIM even after the California Department of Health gave AIM 60 days (from November 30) to correct the name on its application for an operating permit as a community clinic.
At this point, it's difficult to assess what effect the Rosendahl motion will have on the adult industry. The motion itself merely calls for the City Attorney to report on how FilmL.A., Inc., the agency which contracts with the city to issue filming permits, can be made to require adult companies seeking permits to require that those companies use condoms, dental dams and face shields/goggles in their productions or, presumably, to be denied the permit. The City Attorney has 45 days to make its report, and it is unknown what recommendations the City Attorney will make.
And, of course, the councilmen involved in this action are solely concerned about the welfare of the performers. It would have nothing to do with political contributions from Weinstein, right? RIght???
Yeah, right. Quoting a followup article from Mark Kernes at AVN.com:
Now...if the name Paul Koretz sounds faintly familiar to you, it might be because of the following blast from the recent past:Permit Bill Sponsors Got Donations from AIDS Healthcare
LOS ANGELES—An investigation by AVN has found that the author of a City Council motion to require adult companies to use condoms, dental dams and face shields/goggles during sex scenes or be denied a City of Los Angeles filming permit has received campaign donations from AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) president Michael Weinstein, as has one of the motion's co-sponsors.
District 11 Councilmember William "Bill" Rosendahl has received $1,000 in campaign contributions from Weinstein personally: $500 in 2004, when Rosendahl was first running for City Council, and two further contributions of $250 each in the spring of 2005 to Rosendahl's general campaign fund. In addition, Weinstein also contributed a total of $600 to District 5 Councilmember Paul Koretz: $500 in January of 2009, two months before Koretz, who had "termed out" as a state assemblymember, stood for his first election to City Council in March of 2009, and $100 one month after Koretz's election.
Koretz, it will be remembered, held a public meeting in 2004, shortly after one industry performer who had worked overseas proved to be HIV-positive and infected three other performers before being detected by AIM Healthcare Foundation's regular testing regime, and later wrote an "open letter" to adult producers calling for condom use during adult productions and intimating that if condoms were not "voluntarily" mandated, that the state assembly would require their use.That, of course, was the Darrin James/Lana Roxx scare of 2004. James has reemerged as a critic of AIM and a backer of the condom mandate, but somehow he's escaped becoming a henchman for Weinstein the way Derrick Burts and Shelley Lubben have become.
Now, nothing has happened as of yet, and the resolution would allow for a 45 day period for recommendations from the LA City Attorney's office to the full City Council to require FilmLA (the governing board for movie production in LA) to "enforce" the proposed laws. What's so funny is that none of the regulations proposed would be enforced against mainstream films, where the risk of bodily fluid and hazardous material contact is a bit greater than mere kissing or fucking or sucking. (And I wonder how the hell would they enforce these rules against softcore films, exactly??)
Nevertheless, merely the threat of such regulation was enough to place the industry on alert. Now that the threat is now out in the open, maybe it may be time for performers to get off their butts and defend their rights before they are taken away from them??
Fortunately, some are beginning to fight back. Or, at least talk about fighting back.
The St. James Infirmary in San Francisco has been one of the premier resources of sex-positive activism for quite a long time; providing testing and support services in the Bay Area for sex workers, pornographer, and other sexual activists. Today, they announced, in association with the sex worker activist blog Bound, Not Gagged, the formation of a special forum to be held at SJI on December 18th specifically for porn performers to discuss the "shut down" of AIM and the overall climate for mandating condoms and other regulations. Quoting Stacey Swimme, the forum creator and blogmistress at BnG:
More information on how performers can get involved with the forum can be found over at BnG's blog via here.Background: The California Occupational Health and Safety board have been reviewing studio practices based on complaints made to them, some from performers, some anonymous. The Aids Healthcare Foundation has been lobbying hard with limited input from people who actually work in the industry. In June of 2010 AIM applied for a community clinic license and on December 9th they received a cease and desist order after that application was denied.We’re concerned that performers are being under- and mis-represented in these discussions and that it is critical for a diverse range of workers to come together to establish a unified voice to advocate for a rights-based approach to regulation.Of course, our ultimate goal is for all performers to be as healthy and prosperous as possible! Please join us and share how you think these issues can best be approached. Please spread this message far and wide.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the Derrick Burts/Cameron Reid saga gets weirder and weirder.
Now it seems that DBurts has gotten a bit of a challenge from porn producer Mark Spiegler, who used a post on the porn gossip blog LukeIsBack.com to call out Cameron as a phony out for the quick buck and whom is using the porn industry to cover up his own extracurricular activities. Basically, Spiegler all but dared DBurts to take a lie detector test to prove that he was infected on a "straight" porn set. Strangely enough, Derrick has been quoted to have agreed to this.
Lie detector tests are notorious for masking the truth as much as illuminating it, which is why they are not considered viable in jury trials...but it still makes for great theatre while we get to the bottom of this affair. I guess we all should stay tuned.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
HIV Porn Scare 2010 -- The Series Continues: Darrah Ford Joins The Prosecution of AIM; Justin Long Goes Off For The Defense, Tears Derrick Burts A New Orfice...And Is Condom-Free Porn Free Speech?
cSome interesting developments today in the ongoing saga of Porn Scare Smackdown! 2010.
Darrah Ford, who has essentially taken over the mantle of porn critic formerly held by Luke Ford, has been one of the most consistent and strident critics of AIM's testing in particular and the porn industry in general...and she has been mostly the main defender online of not only Shelley Lubben but also of the efforts of Michael Weinstein and AHF to mandate condoms in porn. Today, at her personal blog, she went off on what she caled "blind defenders" of AIM, basically ripping them for not caring about the welfare of their talent; and she defended Derrick Burts/Cameron Reed as the victim of their indifference. She also went on to defend the actions of the LA County Public Health officials in shutting AIM's clinic down, citing everything from the alleged rape of a porn starlet by Max Hardcore to the 1999 outbreak involving Tony Montana to last year's HIV scare where a performer contracted HIV through outside activity, but due to allowing her test period to laspe, ended up doing an oral scene after she was infected. (Fortunately, no one else was infected there, either.) Some key snippage of Darrah's rant follows:
Also...while the one-month period between testing is admittedly too long and should be shortened to better protect the performers; it wasn't AIM's fault that the former "Patient Zero" of last year decided to delay getting tested, or that that particular studio that hired her to do the fateful scene was so willing to cut corners and ignore the lapsed time of her last test. Their job was not to comfort her, but to protect others from getting infected; and from the looks of the results, they did their job then...just as they did this time with Derrick Burts.
Darrah goes on to reset some other past vendettas she had with AIM, based on some previous crises:
And here's her justification for defending LA County Health's actions:
Now this is really funny that Darrah attempts to blame AIM for all this, especially given the known collusion between LA County, Cal-OSHA, and AHF in directly targeting AIM for sanction or even shutdown, the fact that while AIM had been an active clinic for nearly 15 years, the state Department of Health only this July conveniently discovered this requirement for a license; and that said department did NOT openly deny AIM the license, but just had them resubmit it based on a technicality regarding their title, with an 80-day period of correcting the record. And as for the "secret draw stations":?? They aren't so secret, Darrah; you can locate them over at AIM's website.
Going back, though, to Derrick Burts, though...Darrah has promised to all that she's going to interview "Cameron" and allow him to give the full story...as soon as she gets approval from her sources.
Unfortunately for DBurts, though, it seems that his story isn't gaining any clout from anyone outside of the LA Times or AHF or Darrah Ford. And now, more actual porn performers are starting to call him out on what they perceive to be his BS story.
And here is where I get to say "Welcome back, Justin Long."
You may remember Justin Long from the shitstorm he raised when he publically announced last summer that he would no longer do interracial scenes because he felt that White female performers were lowballing his rates and using him only as a stepping stone for higher fees rather than interracial lust.
Well, Mr. Long -- who is a 12 year veteran of the profession -- decided that he didn't quite le the way that DBurts was attempting to use his story to slam the industry...and in a comment to the most recent article on the debacle over at the LA Weekly blog, Justin took aim and fired some verbal Scuds Cameron's way. The whole comment -- in Long's usual freestyle form -- simply can't be synopticized effectively, so I will simply repost it here in its entirity, without annotation.
Oh...and why do I detect that the next Cal-OSHA meetings will have Mike Weinstein adding DBurts to the lists of teary-eyed speakers (after all, relying on a fundie gay-basher like Ministress Shelley won;t quite make it with the hip liberal crowd...antiporn radical feminists excluded) bawling about how Teh EVIL AIM Porn Machine destroyed their lives by exposing them to all these incurable diseases??
After all...if "ROXY!!!!!" isn't enough to sell their bullcrap, then I guess that The Magician Turned Twink Escort Turned Bi Porn Pioneer Turned Victim Tale just might be the tipping point that seals the deal.
Finally, I discovered this pair of tweets from porn starlet Angela Aspen (@angelaaspenxxx) that sets up what could be an interesting argument should there by any lawsuits to impose condom usage:
Darrah Ford, who has essentially taken over the mantle of porn critic formerly held by Luke Ford, has been one of the most consistent and strident critics of AIM's testing in particular and the porn industry in general...and she has been mostly the main defender online of not only Shelley Lubben but also of the efforts of Michael Weinstein and AHF to mandate condoms in porn. Today, at her personal blog, she went off on what she caled "blind defenders" of AIM, basically ripping them for not caring about the welfare of their talent; and she defended Derrick Burts/Cameron Reed as the victim of their indifference. She also went on to defend the actions of the LA County Public Health officials in shutting AIM's clinic down, citing everything from the alleged rape of a porn starlet by Max Hardcore to the 1999 outbreak involving Tony Montana to last year's HIV scare where a performer contracted HIV through outside activity, but due to allowing her test period to laspe, ended up doing an oral scene after she was infected. (Fortunately, no one else was infected there, either.) Some key snippage of Darrah's rant follows:
[...]Of course, the fact that AIM was bound by confidentiality laws from revealing personal records, that they were obligated by the positive test to alert not only the producers but also run their required tests to determine if anyone else was infected on set probably had something to do with their supposed lack of publicizing the crisis.
Many of you still insist that everyone wants to get tested at AIM. The truth is that AIM has held a monopoly throughout the industry for years when it comes to testing. Studios, directors, and producers have told performers how they have to get tested at AIM or they won’t be allowed to work. Many have wanted to test elsewhere but were told they couldn’t.
The female performer who tested positive last year was tested on June 4, 2009. Her last negative test was on April 29. The results of the June 4 test were received on June 6. She performed a scene on June 5 before the test results were back. She was working with a 37-day-old test.
When AIM was first contacted about the rumors last year, they denied everything and said there were no HIV infections. The only reason we knew anything is because it was first revealed on one of the forums. AIM was forced to make a statement on June 10, 2009 because of the forum posting.
When I had looked at AIM’s website on June 11, 2009, there was still no mention about the new HIV infection. It had been a whole week and AIM still hadn’t updated their own website yet alerting the industry.
Also...while the one-month period between testing is admittedly too long and should be shortened to better protect the performers; it wasn't AIM's fault that the former "Patient Zero" of last year decided to delay getting tested, or that that particular studio that hired her to do the fateful scene was so willing to cut corners and ignore the lapsed time of her last test. Their job was not to comfort her, but to protect others from getting infected; and from the looks of the results, they did their job then...just as they did this time with Derrick Burts.
Darrah goes on to reset some other past vendettas she had with AIM, based on some previous crises:
Tony Montana was diagnosed with HIV back in 1999. AIM never notified him. Rocco Siffredi had called him to say how sorry he was after hearing the news. Tony had no idea what he was talking about. Because of Sharon Mitchell and AIM, Tony could have kept on working and infected his costars without ever knowing.Of course, Darrah's well known for throwing up charges like these to justify her beliefs. Now, if she would actually offer evidence to justify those claims other than merely hearsay or rumor...
Former porn star Neesa left the industry four years ago and says the worst moment in her life was being raped by Max Hardcore. She says after the rape, she tested positive for Chlamydia/Gonorrhea in the throat. She claims she went to Sharon Mitchell and Sharon called her a liar and was extremely rude to her. She alleges that AIM only cares about money and believed Max over her because he was a large client of theirs.
And here's her justification for defending LA County Health's actions:
County public health officials did not become aware that AIM was operating without a license until this April. In May, they sent AIM officials a letter advising them that as a nonprofit, they could not operate under an affiliated physician’s license and needed to apply instead for a clinic license. AIM officials were notified on Tuesday that their license application had been denied. They had applied on June 7 but state officials said the application was incomplete.
Name me any other clinic that would still be allowed to stay open after these circumstances? AIM had to be shut down for your own safety.
Why support a clinic with this track record? Stop complaining about AIM being shut down. They were operating without a license for all these months. The county became aware of this in April. How long before April were they running without a license before county officials found out? AIM can no longer provide new services but we’re now hearing all the rumors that secret draw stations have been set up to test performers. Any clinic who is still running without a license is hiding something. They had to be shut down.
Now this is really funny that Darrah attempts to blame AIM for all this, especially given the known collusion between LA County, Cal-OSHA, and AHF in directly targeting AIM for sanction or even shutdown, the fact that while AIM had been an active clinic for nearly 15 years, the state Department of Health only this July conveniently discovered this requirement for a license; and that said department did NOT openly deny AIM the license, but just had them resubmit it based on a technicality regarding their title, with an 80-day period of correcting the record. And as for the "secret draw stations":?? They aren't so secret, Darrah; you can locate them over at AIM's website.
Going back, though, to Derrick Burts, though...Darrah has promised to all that she's going to interview "Cameron" and allow him to give the full story...as soon as she gets approval from her sources.
Unfortunately for DBurts, though, it seems that his story isn't gaining any clout from anyone outside of the LA Times or AHF or Darrah Ford. And now, more actual porn performers are starting to call him out on what they perceive to be his BS story.
And here is where I get to say "Welcome back, Justin Long."
You may remember Justin Long from the shitstorm he raised when he publically announced last summer that he would no longer do interracial scenes because he felt that White female performers were lowballing his rates and using him only as a stepping stone for higher fees rather than interracial lust.
Well, Mr. Long -- who is a 12 year veteran of the profession -- decided that he didn't quite le the way that DBurts was attempting to use his story to slam the industry...and in a comment to the most recent article on the debacle over at the LA Weekly blog, Justin took aim and fired some verbal Scuds Cameron's way. The whole comment -- in Long's usual freestyle form -- simply can't be synopticized effectively, so I will simply repost it here in its entirity, without annotation.
Justin Long says:
Derrick Burts,
Is simply seeking media to try to drive a cash machine. I feel for him for contracting HIV as I would for anyone, no matter by what means they got it, even if those means were of there own accord.
He would have had me shut up, if he had been yelling the industry was shit, condoms only and crap needed to be changed publicly as late as even the week before he was given a positive test.
However he wasn't !!!
He was sitting there shooting with + HIV gay performers, takin the reported 2k rates for gay scenes and then putting his girl and straight performers at risk with HIS RISKY BEHAVIOR. This is exactly WHY straight performers have issue with crossover performers !!! Plain and freakin simple !!!
I won't even go into the fact that he was a male prostitute and money buys bareback just as it does anything else. Bottom line is he was a twink and got caught up in the game he was playing.
So from his own admission after not being happy with AIM went to AHF and was seen by docotrs and DID NOT inform them he was patient zeta !! He was being treated & that was that. Only a week later & Voluntarily he called who ? the CEO of AFH and then wanted to stand in front of the news cameras !!! he didn't call the LA Times which would had took the interview no worries, instead he went for AHF because of the controversy ...
His motivation isn't condoms.. it's money !!!
Can you say BITCH MOVE !!! F U you homie !!! you been in this game 3 months, and you gonna try to effect change, and further put people at risk by being influential in trying to get shut down the only testing center where talent can verify other talents test as genuine ??? YOU HAVE HIV BECAUSE YOU SOLD YOUR SOUL HOMIE !!! YOU CHOSE TO WORK WITH PEOPLE YOU KNEW TO BE HIV POSITIVE !!! IT"S YOUR OWN DAMN FAULT DUMBASSS !!!
No body has even talked about the fact that AHF regularly helps patients with financial compensation from what i am being told from a reliable source in my eyes ie; rent money, continuing education, bills, medical treatment and meds and food.
From what I understand they actually have food stores in there building.. So pay my rent, bills, give me food, and free medical and med (to the tune of thousands)and send me to school...
Shit where does my black ass sign up.. I might even give you some booty
if this is true then I can see why he allowed himself to be used as a pawn and paraded like a bitch in front of the media by AHF.. can we say pay off ..
According to him in his gay scenes he ONLY used condoms !!! So then where did he get the HIV?? It wasn't and he has never claimed it came from a straight set !!! He is monogamous with his girl !! & he dont trick right ???? Sorry there has NEVER been a Reported case of HIV transmission Through Female to Male or Male to Male oral sex !!!
So then why the need for condom???? Maybe he should had wore a condom with his boyfriend and/or john ?? My opinion but that's where it came from, or freak transmission through condom on his +HIV gay set. Sorry but it's probably the truth.
Christianxxx & I have had the discussion before, even with Viagra Cialas or levitra you still have to be turned on to get wood. So if you are not turned on by guys then all the supplements or meds in the world minus cabber jacking (shooting your penis up with a solution dont ask i couldn't tell ya damn needles)So if you aren't attracted to guys then you aint getting wood.
So much for the gay for pay theroy LMAO for real.. You have to be at minimum BI to get wood for a dudes ass .. sorry but that is a call from a straight guy with agreement from a very BI guy (not me)
So if you are attracted to guys then you probably as a porn star are having sex with guys on & off set..
Just cause he says he was faithful to his girl don't mean it to be the truth. I mean he hasn't been honest from the jump minus the fact that he is a BI male working in both industry and participating in risky behavior like sleeping with people that are HIV+ !! This is a no brainer !!Hold up....you mean that AHF -- an organization with millions and MILLIONS of dollars in gevernment aid as an NGO, would actually bribe an ex-porn performer who contracted HIV through escorting, and who openly boasted of being HIV+ and even threatened to deliberately infect another performer who dissed him, to deliberately infect innocent straight performers merely to entrap their sworn nemesis and have them shut down?? Merely so that they could collude with some government officios to take over the testing regime and shove condoms down the throats and up the other orfices of performers...or even force them out of California so that only the "progressive", "hot" safer sex studios would remain, and everyone else driven underground into a far less protected and far more dantgerous venue simply to survive?? And..so that condom makers like Lifestyles and Durex and Trojan would get a big fat payday off the backs of performers?? And Shelley Lubben would get a fresh supply of recruits for her ex-slut ministry?? And certain health "professionals" and bureaucrats would get their guniea pigs to "role model" their sex education" efforts??
He has HIV = very sad and regrettable
He got it + from HIS OWN risky behavior
He's after = Anyone to pay he feels responsible (not taking responsibility for his own actions)
Wants = Money
This is my opinion and opinion are like Aholes, everyone has got one.
However mine is one of a 12+ year veteran in porn (straight) and a Hall of Fame inductee (July 2011)..
Me,
Justin Long
Adult Film Star
Posted On: Saturday, Dec. 11 2010 @ 12:11PM
Oh...and why do I detect that the next Cal-OSHA meetings will have Mike Weinstein adding DBurts to the lists of teary-eyed speakers (after all, relying on a fundie gay-basher like Ministress Shelley won;t quite make it with the hip liberal crowd...antiporn radical feminists excluded) bawling about how Teh EVIL AIM Porn Machine destroyed their lives by exposing them to all these incurable diseases??
After all...if "ROXY!!!!!" isn't enough to sell their bullcrap, then I guess that The Magician Turned Twink Escort Turned Bi Porn Pioneer Turned Victim Tale just might be the tipping point that seals the deal.
Finally, I discovered this pair of tweets from porn starlet Angela Aspen (@angelaaspenxxx) that sets up what could be an interesting argument should there by any lawsuits to impose condom usage:
RT:Am I the only performer that believes n rapid hiv testing on set and that condom free is FREEDOM OF SPEECH????
Consumers/Actors: do you really want to see porn go to condom- only??? Cause… thats… where is… is going 2011.Step Up:Freedom of SpeechNow, there are legitimate issues with having on-site testing on demand, but if someone like Angela Aspen -- who might not have the intellectual depth of a Nina Hartley or a Vicky Vette -- can get that their rights are being violated and it might be a good time for the industry to come together in their defense, then there still may be some hope for this industry after all. Given the circumstances and the privailing political winds, they will need plenty of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)