HIV Porn Panic Returneth: The Latest HIV Gay Porn Scare, And The AHF/CalOSHA Attempt To Stoke Peak BS For Their Condom Mandate

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

HIV Porn Panic 2014: Cameron Bay Goes Interviewing With TRPWL's Michael Whiteacre To Clear Herself, But Raises More Questions Than Answers

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

Condom Mandate Update: CalOSHA "Landmark" Ruling In Treasure Island Media Case Seals The Debate On Condoms In Porn...Or, Doesn't.

Interesting event happened on Friday that might have some major bearing on the entire Condom Mandate battle in Los Angeles County....and beyond, even nationwide.

In 2009, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed a grievance with CalOSHA against a San Francisco-based gay porn production studio, Treasure Island Media, in which they claimed that by not using condoms as part of their scenes, TIM was in violation of the "bloodborne pathogen" standard requiring the use of "barrier protection" in all scenes as a means of STI protection. Never mind that no one in any one of those scenes were found to be HIV- or STI-positive, or to have been infected with HIV or any other STI as a result of those scenes; the point was, according to AHF, to establish CalOSHA's power to impose the condom mandate at will against any porn production company statewide. CalOSHA had sanctioned TIM in Feburary of last year with two violations of the standard, to which TIM appealed to CalOSHA's built-in judicial appeal process.

Well...last Friday, CalOSHA Administrative Law Judge Mary Dryovage made her ruling on the case; siding with CalOSHA and upholding the sanctions against Treasure Island Media. In her ruling, she essentially rehashed the standard AHF propaganda points that condoms were the only true means of preventing disasterous outbreaks of STI's, and that porn performers absolutely must be regulated as "employees" for their own "protection", and have condoms forced on them for their own "good".

Naturally, AHF is crowing loud about this "landmark" decision, saying that it effectively ends the debate on condoms in porn by establishing CalOSHA's inevitable right to regulate bareback porn out of business. Here's AHF's spokesperson Ged Kenslea, riffing on, via proven AHF sycophant...errrrrrrrrr, LA Weekly regular columnist Dennis Romero:

AHF spokesman Ged Kenslea told us that one of the most important aspects of the ruling ...
 ... is its affirmation that performers are indeed employees due protection under under workplace safety rules. The group has long argued that federal law prohibiting exposure to bloodborne pathogens such as sperm at the workplace applies to California's adult performers.
The industry has said that porn stars are very part-time workers who paid per "scene" as independent contractors.
The ruling by Judge Mary Droyovage wrote that, without condoms, there is "substantial probability that employees would suffer serious exposure resulting in serious physical harm or death if violation occurred."
Kenslea said AHF's stance is that the ruling applies only to condom use and that it does not mandate dental dams, surgical masks, eye protection, gloves and other gear feared by the industry.
The case involved a "bareback" sex tape by Bay Area studio Treasure Island Media. The video featured multiple partners on film, none apparently using condoms. Treasure Island appealed Cal/OSHA's sanctions, leading to the ruling.
The AHF was "a catalyst for" the ruling, Kenslea said, because the case included a complaint from the organization. He said he was surprised the studio appealed.

The decision was also praised by yet another even more pro-AHF sycophant, former producer Mike South, who breathlessly repeated the same old AHF talking points that this all but clinched the condom debate....not to mention that not only could Cal-OSHA could set the rules regarding the condom mandate, but because their rules could be expanded nationwide by the federal OSHA, they could be enforced everywhere in the US. In other words, to rephrase AHF President Michael Weinstein's well quoted saying: "Whereever they go, we will follow them."

Case closed, then?? Ahhhhh....not quite.

There is another side of the story, of course, and The Real Porn Wikileaks just so happened to get Treasure Island Media's response to the ruling and subsequent barrage of BS from AHF.

For starters, they noted that while Judge Dryovage did sustain the original CalOSHA sanctions, she did significantly reduce the fines involved: totally eliminating the fine for one count (from $9,000 to $0); and reducing the fine for the other count from $9K to $6,300.

And secondly, they loudly announced that the principle of defending sexual freedom demanded that they further appeal the decision to an even higher court. Here's attorney Karen Tynan, who represents TIM, speaking via TRPWL:

[...] “Having the fines lowered by a total of nearly two-thirds is a very significant win for us,” said Karen Tynan, Treasure Island Media’s attorney.


Tynan went onto say, “We will be appealing the decision with a Petition for Reconsideration on the grounds that the decision was unsupported by the facts.” Among the issues regarding the sufficiency of evidence: Cal/OSHA’s star witness was a disgruntled former employee who had been terminated in 2010 and their medical expert was an osteopath (a branch of medical practice that emphasizes the treatment of medical disorders through the manipulation and massage of the bones, joints, and muscles.) who last treated communicable diseases almost twenty years ago.

Apparently, AHF went to the tried-and-true tactics of antiporn crusaders of yesteryear: the old "OMG...OMGOMGOMGOMG...the SHOCK AND HORROR of such disgusting, nasty, filthy buttsexin' goin on!!!" card.

At issue was The 1000 Load Fuck, directed by Morris. The 2009 video pushes the envelope, taking porn into taboo regions of the forbidden and depraved. In a bold and unprecedented experiment, one young man voluntarily takes a gallon of semen up his ass.

“We watched the video over and over and over. Then we watched it in slow motion, reverse, and paused it on almost every frame,” said TIM General Manager Matt Mason, who testified for almost a day and a half and withstood hours of cross examination by Cal/OSHA attorney Kathryn Woods. “The state prosecutors took special interest in the turkey baster and the liquid fun in that scene.”

In effect, AHF used this movie the way antiporn prosecutors used Ira Issacs' alleged scat videos, or Gail Dines used "gonzo" porn: as a means of shocking and scaring and shaming "aberrant" sexual practices to illicit the usual response of anger and disgust and "There outta be a law against that!!!" meme. Or, in this case, "They better cover that up with a condom!!!"

It remains to be seen how the appeal process will resolve this case...or if this "landmark" decision really is the end of the line for bareback porn....although, I'm sure Isadore Hall and Michael Weinstein are already writing the speeches that Hall will use to integrate this ruling into their next legislative attempt to force Measure B statewide, or to aid CalOSHA to craft the ever evolving "bloodborne pathogen barrier protection" regs as a wedge to be imposed nationwide.

And, I'm just as sure that those who perform and enjoy bareback porn -- whether gay or straight or bi or whatever combination thereof -- will equally battle to defend their freedom and right to do so.

Either way, this isn't over, by any means. Stay tuned.

How To Run A Smear Campaign, The Sequel: Have Cal-OSHA Employees Been Trolling Porn Sites Propagandizing For Condom Mandate?? Is Water Wet??

Not that this will be a big blockbusting surprise to you all, but it does stir the pot a bit.

Over at The Real Pornwikileaks, Sean Tompkins has just dropped an article there, citing "a well placed source" which charges that employees of Cal-OSHA, the state agency responsible for maintaining health and safety standards, were not quite as non-partisan as they are sworn to be regarding proposed regulations concerning "barrier protection" within porn shoots.

Actually, it's more like Cal-OSHA officials actively colluding with advocates for mandatory condoms such as Michael Weinstein's AIDS Healthcare Foundation, even going as far as anonymously and pseudomonsly posting pro-condom mandate propaganda on various porn websites and message boards.

Keep in mind that Cal-OSHA is currently in the process of drawing up new regulations involving the transmission of "infectious materials" in the production of adult films, of which part of the new proposed standards would include mandatory condoms for most if not all penetrative sex acts, dental dams for oral sex acts amongst female performers, and other forms of "protection" such as goggles, gloves, and other forms of protection for "bloodborne pathogens". (An addendum to those regulations would exempt oral sex from the mandate, but only under the conditions of rigorous testing and vaccination, with expensive follow up by a verified physcian.) This is totally independent of the successful campaign by AHF to induce the LA city council to pass into law their "condom mandate" bill which would require all porn shoots getting FilmLA permits to go condom only.

Now, some of you would have guessed that Cal-OSHA was in on the fix all along, considering the paternalistic attitude that folk like safety officer Deborah Gold showed at that classic June 7th hearing of theirs, when plenty of performers showed up to defend their right to their own choice of protection and to question why this was needed in the first place.

But, if that still wasn't enough to convince you of the gross collusion between Cal-OSHA and the AHF, perhaps this will seal your concerns:

FSC has been endeavoring to work with the Standards Board to develop new, industry-appropriate regulations to replace those haphazardly applied to the adult industry years ago absent any consultation with industry leaders. But many observers within the adult community have long believed that the fix is in.

This view was bolstered by the recent leak of a cache of AHF emails that seem to indicate a cozy relationship between AHF and Cal/OSHA officials.

The emails include references to Cal/OSHA records being sent to AHF, as well as apparent assurances by OSHA leaders that the process was tilted in favor of AHF’s agenda.

A May 24, 2011 email, from AHF attorney Brian Chase to Weinstein, indicates that, while Senior Safety Engineer Deborah Gold and attorney Amy Martin, confided they were “not at all happy about” a motion made by L.A. councilman Richard Alarcon that sought to create a mechanism of local enforcement for workplace standards for porn, the two Cal/OSHA leaders nonetheless “confirmed that the new Chief [Ellen Widess] is onboard with adding a specific [Cal/OSHA] regulation requiring condoms in the production of adult films.”

Weinstein then asked, “Will Jim Clark be the attorney for Cal/OSHA? If so we may have to educate him on the employer/employee relationship between performers and producers.”

If the latest reports are true, elements within Cal/OSHA have already made up their mind about what’s best for the porn industry, and have taken to porn news and gossip sites to spread pro-AHF rhetoric.

That would be these emails, folks.

The TRPWL article goes on to list the names of Cal-OSHA officials who might be trolling for propaganda; I'll simply refer you to their article for finding out if you've been buttonholed or shook down. I just wonder how much money Weinstein's giving them under the table...if you catch me drift.

Condom Mandate Now Officially Law In LA: Revelations And Repercussions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Porn Panic 2011: The Endless Loop Continues: Could Cal-OSHA Get A Big Hammer From The Cali Assembly?? SB 459 And The "Employees" vs. "Individual Contractors" Question

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