Porn Panic 2014 Update: AB 1576 Passes First California Senate Committee Test, But Not Without Fun And Frivolity (And More AHF BS)

First, the bad news: It's beginning to look more and more like Isadore Hall's bill for mandatory condoms and "barrier protection" and testing and verification, House Bill #AB1576, may stand a chance of passing after all, following its initial clearance throug the California State Senate's Labor and Industrial Relations Committee.

It still has to go through the Appropriations Committee and then pass the full Cali Senate before reaching Governor Jerry Brown's desk for his possible signature; but considering the money the AIDS Healthcare Foundation has to lobby legislators, and the apparent total dismissal of the concerns of porn performers and producers against the bill due to the latest sex panics, it's a lot closer to passage than could ever be conceived even a month ago.

I wish that I could be less pessimistic about the outcome, but from what I saw and heard about the Labor Committee hearing on the bill that took place on Wednesday, it's not looking so good. Not even the articulate arguments of performer Lorelei Lee or Free Speech Coalition CEO Diane Duke could outdo the razzle-dazzle, presto-changeo, minstrel show clown act that Izzy Hall and AHF brought to the committee. This wasn't just a doubling down of propaganda and bullshit; this was a raising of two magnitudes of the usual AHF talking points, driven to new heights of hot, runny stinky garbage.

I'm using Mark Kernes' review of the committee hearing over at AVN as my template for commentary, since that's all we have right now.

First off, Izzy Hall kicked off the comedy act with his usual bait-and-switch.

For example, the first words out of Assemblymember Isadore Hall III's mouth as he attempted to explain the bill to the committee were, "AB 1576 is a workplace safety measure that would require employer-paid mandatory STD testing of adult film actors at least every 14 days, and use of a condom or other protective equipment in all adult films produced in California." Indeed, Hall wasn't the only one who's changed direction and called this primarily a mandatory testing bill rather than a mandatory "condom or other protective equipment" bill—and it should be noted that Hall referred to "other protective equipment" at least three times during the hour-long session.

This is particularly hilarious because previously Hall and his AHF cronies have effectively denied repeatedly that any part of this bill, or any of the proposed changes in "bloodborne pathogen"/"sexually transmitable bodily fluid" regulations by CalOSHA, would involve anything other than mandated condoms. Not face shields or goggles or dental dams or any other form of personal protective equipment required for industrial use...only condoms would be required. Riiiiiight. Never mind that the proposed CalOSHA regulations would not only force "barrier protection" for anal/oral sex, but would also ban even external ejaculation over any areas (face, vaginal, anal) where the possibility of "transmission" could occur, as well as any internal ejaculation in the vagina or booty not wrapped up.

Also...the newly formed respect for testing flies in the face of previous testimonials by AHF President Michael Weinstein stating that testing by itself is a fundamental failure and that with condoms, testing becomes a moot point. The previous attempts at mandating condoms did not even mention testing at all.

Hall also declared, "In 2013 alone, there were up to five documented cases of HIV transmission of adult film actors," even though, as activist/performer Lorelei Lee and Free Speech Coalition CEO Diane Duke later noted, it has been proven that such transmissions did not take place on any adult movie set.

Yeah, five cases. Of which, three were confirmed cases of HIV caught by the PASS system (Cameron Bay, "Performer #3", and an unnamed gay male condom-only performer); the other was Rod Daily (Cam Bay's boyfriend, who managed to skip the PASS system right when he got infected and became, like Bay, AHF's paid missionary for the condom mandate); and the fifth turned out to be a false positive. Not to mention, no other performer who worked with Bay or Daily in any straight shoot turned up HIV+ either during or since they (Bay/Daily/P#3) tested positive for HIV.

Hall also claimed, as he did before the Assembly Appropriations Committee, "For all the talk that the industry will flee to Nevada, Nevada is already clear on its regulation of sex work. Sex work is not legal in Las Vegas. The counties that do allow sex work, condom use is mandatory, period. This is in addition to the fact that only two states in the U.S. allow for the legal production of adult film; that's California and New Hampshire. The adult industry's home is and will be in California. The fact is that the industry isn't going anywhere, and frankly, I don't them to go anywhere but in California, where they employ thousands of Californians, generating millions of dollars in tax revenues."
Doesn't matter that adult film acting is not considered "sex work" under either California or Nevada law, and that as Duke later noted, "A $30 million company from the Valley moved out of state earlier this year, and is happily working in Las Vegas, where they have welcomed us with open arms. They want the jobs, they want the ancillary jobs that come with this industry."

 The general gist of Hall's rant here is that the adult industry needs Cali more than Cali needs them, and that if they know what's good for them, they will just knuckle under and accept the condom mandate like good little menschs. Problem is, brothels aren't the only place to film porn; people can still use their smartphones and PC's/laptops to produce porn at home and bypass the regs, and porn can be made outside of even the US. Also..in Nevada brothels, condom usage is imposed on the clients of brothel prostitutes, not the prostitutes themselves. Plus, the opposite of "legally protected through legal precedent" is NOT "illegal"; there simply hasn't been a case like the Freeman case that has been tried as a template to determine the legality of porn as free speech expression.

Next up in the Clown Show was AHF legal counsel Rand Martin with a variation of the same-old same-old.

Rand Martin of AIDS Healthcare Foundation apparently sought to derail some of the opponents' arguments by claiming that condoms are already mandatory in California under CalOSHA regulations (even though nowhere in those regulations does the word "condom" appear); that the testing protocols in the bill are superior to those currently used by the industry (except that the bill mandates the CDC-recommended antibody test for HIV while the industry uses the far-more-accurate PCR-RNA test); and that performers' medical information won't be exposed to employers or government employees (although the bill clearly states that employers are required to certify that "the employee consented to disclosing to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health that the employee was the subject of a human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) test," and how would they know that without some sort of access ot the test results themselves?

Yeah...."superior". Because a 24 hour swab using an ELISA antibody test that has a 3-6 month latency period is far superior to the Aptima test with a 6-10 day latency period, backed up by Western Blot and three Elisa analyses tests, right? And, condoms never tear or break, of course. And....lots and lots and lots of lube.

And this nonsense that the documentation of adherence to testing and condom usage won't fall into government (or AHF) hands for misuse or abuse? Why require such things to begin with if you don't want "government employees" to have such information? And, once that info is gathered, what's to prevent it from being sold and channeled to private sources for either blackmail or propaganda or spamming purposes? Remember, it was 2257 info that was used to out Desi Foxx and for the original Porn Wikileaks (D****y L**g's version, NOT the modernized current version run by Sean Tompkins). Is there anything preventing, say, a Gail Dines or Shelley Lubben peep from attempting a FOIA action to reveal the medical records (and real names) of a performer whom is documented under this bill, and using it for nefarious means?

Martin also claimed performers shouldn't be allowed to make their own decisions about whether to use condoms (and, one assumes, the "other protective equipment") themselves much as, "We don't let construction workers decide whether they're going to wear hardhats. We do not let welders decide whether they're going to wear goggles. We do not let doctors and nurses decide whether they're going to wear gloves in the operating room." But as Lorelei Lee pointed out later, in discussing vaginal chafing, or "condom rash" as it's called, which can cause micro-tears in the vagina which in turn cause an "increased risk of STI's," "Construction workers are not often harmed by their hardhats."

Of course, wearing hardhats at construction sites and goggles during welding and gloves during surgeries to protect against injury is a bit different from engaging in sex for long periods of time. People have been doing that for millenia without acquiring any STI's at all. In fact, the overwhelming majority of performers have been free and clear of disease and infection for themselves....mostly thanks to their own discipline in selection of on-screen partners and their own personal care in protecting themselves, and also thanks to the PASS screening system that AHF and Izzy Hall want to simply obliterate, all their bloviating aside.

But, that was only a prelude to the pathos of their chief victim/witness, Ms. Cameron Bay herself. And she executed her role perfectly, even adding an extra dose of conspiracy never before heard of.

"I was an adult performer last year between May and August," she stated to the committee. "July 31 was my last shoot. I got a job working for Kink.com as an adult—which is an adult film studio in San Francisco, and I was tested for STDs and I was available for work. When I got there, there was up to about 75 extras on set and none of them were tested. During filming, the main performer I worked with had cut his penis and then was bleeding. They stopped shooting the scene to clean up the blood. I wanted to use a replacement, and there was a replacement there on set, but they chose not to because they could not pay the performer, so in turn, I had to continue working with the injured performer and we did not use a condom. They did not have an effective exposure control plan and I had to carry on the scene without any protection at all. If I had asked for a condom, another performer could have replaced me or would have replaced me. I would not have been paid and I would have had to pay my fee to my agent, which means I would have been out of pocket close to $400 out of a payment that I never would have received."

Now, there is plenty of sympathy and empathy in me for Ms. Bay, who is indeed going through the crucible of a life-changing drama which will affect her for the rest of her life. Problem is, her story has more than a few, shall we say, issues with stated facts. Like: the known fact that it was her who bit into and ultimately bloodied Xander Corvis' penis, causing the stoppage. Or, the known and proven fact that neither he nor any other hetero performer (other than Bay and Rod Daily) who did that Kink.com shoot has tested positive for HIV either then or since. Or, also, the testimonial from other sources at that shoot who specifically stated that when the performance was halted, Bay was given the options of continuing the shoot both with and without a condom, or even having boyfriend Daily step in to finish the shoot, but chose to continue on as before, thinking that she would be OK.

Cam Bay's revelation that she would be removed if she didn't finish the shoot without the condom is a new charge that she never pushed in her previous testimonials...and it would violate Kink.com's protocols in their basic Model Rights, which explicitly states that once a performer is under contract and performs in their scenes, they are entitled to full pay even if they bail out of a scene due to any concern of injury.

But that wasn't the only bomb Cam dropped at that hearing:

Somewhat chilling was Bay's statement, "I could have continued working that whole week that I found out I was HIV positive, because my test said that I was still good to go in the PASS system. I still had a checkmark next to my name stating that I was cleared to work, and I could have infected a lot of people because I was in my most infectious state at that time. I followed the adult film industry's self-regulations and I stand here before you today HIV-positive."

Aside from Bay's repeated implication that she contracted her HIV on set, her statement taken at face value would suggest that she was not tested by an industry testing service because she would then have been mareked as "unavailable" in the PASS system. However, no matter where the test would have been taken, an HIV-positive result would have prevented her from working. [Emphasis added by me.] What she likely meant to communicate, though, was that there was a period of time (she characterizes it as a week) during which she was positive with the virus but had not yet been detected via a test, and it is her contention that she could have worked that week and unknowingly exposed others.*

Remember that Bay's positive HIV test was confirmed on August 21th using the PASS system; and her last clean test was on July 27th, also using PASS. Also remember that the minute a test shows "reactive", a performer immediately goes off the clear list database and is informed and referred for followup testing. The infamous Kink.com shoot was done on August 31st, four days after Bay was cleared for shooting. The Aptima test can detect traces of the HIV virus in a person's RNA basically within the first 6 to 10 days of serotransmission. That would mean that if Bay was initially tested on or around August 14th - 17th, the latest that the test would be able to find transmission would be August 4th. Also, based on the 14-day testing schedule enforced by PASS, Bay would have to have been retested no later than August 14th. It may be that Bay used a private doctor that was not part of the PASS system for her initial diagnosis before it was verified on the 21st, but there was no indication of that publically by her or anyone else....other than a series of suggestive tweets she posted to her Twitter account on September 3rd.

Now, it is functionally true that with 14-day testing, there is a small window where an infected performer could possibly work without his/her infection being detected until the next series of tests, thusly threatening other performers. However, the counter to that is that most reputable porn production companies insist on 2-3 day old clean tests in addition to clearance from the PASS database prior to hiring someone for shooting, and some performers require even stronger standards than that before they shoot scenes. Between that and the exercise of off-the-clock discipline and selectivity in sexual partners/sexual acts, this greatly reduces if not eliminates the risk of infection; and the cases where all infections since the Darren James episode of 2004 have been found to be off set with no other performers striken verifies that fact.

It should also be known that female-to-male HIV transmission outside of direct blood-to-blood contact is very rare in real life, let alone in the porn industry. The only possible scenarios even plausible would be that either: 1) Cam Bay (or more likely Rod Daily) was already infected by the time they did that Kink.com shoot, but somehow miraculously managed not to infect Xander Corvus....although given the short time frame between her last clean test and that shoot, that would be a statistical impossibility; or 2) Cam Bay was infected off the clock either right at the time of or soon after that shoot, most likely either by her boyfriend Rod Daily or through some other extracurricular activity she or he had. That would put to serious question whether her current "I am a victim" testimony (and that of Daily as well) is simply bending her (and his) experiences to fit the template of the condom mandate talking points in exchange AHF paying for her treatment (and, allegedly, other perks and goodies).

The rest of the pro-1576 testimony was anticlimatic, with nine persons speaking in favor....but one of those people raises some intrigue.

After the testimony by Hall, Martin and Bay, nine people registered their support for the bill, including one Sofia Delgado, who said she was HIV-positive and also implied that she had contracted it on a set—even though she has appeared in a grand total of two adult movies, both all-girl, and two solo scenes for SexuallyBroken.com.

My initial impresion upon reading this was that this could potentially be "Performer #3", the female performer that was confirmed on September 3rd to be HIV+; however, according to the expose done by TRPWL, that performer had done a boy-girl scene prior to the calamity of testing positive. However, there is that perfomer in 2012 that was a confirmed positive test using the original APHSS (the predecessor to PASS) system. Unfortunately, Mr. Kernes gives no followup info about whether Ms. Delgado tested using PASS/APHSS, or whether her claims of getting infected with HIV on set can even be verified.  Then again, AHF isn't known for their vetting of their advocates, as Derrick Burts can clearly attest.

 After that, the opposition, in the form of Lorelei Lee and Diane Duke, backed by a written petition signed by nearly 600 other performers and the physical testimony of 20 others, got their chance to shine. For reasons of space and out of respect for Mark Kernes' excellent journalism, I'll simply refer you to his article for the testimonials.

The next series of fireworks came with the questions from the committee members...and the answers were as awe inspiring as ever....in the same way a multi-train wreck is awe inspiring. I'll get to that in Part 2 of this essay, anon.

The Rebuttal Too Smart For CounterPunch To Publish: Whereas I Rebuke Gail Dines' Bullshittery

 [Since it is apparent that CounterPunch has no intention of publishing my response to Gail Dines' recent screed at their website, where she attempts one more time to malign and distort the facts of the latest HIV porn scare, as well as attempts some drive-by pot shots at her critics, including yours truly (in the process butchering the name of my personal blog), I thought that it would be a good idea to share with you the essay that I had prepared for them. The original is still up over at my Red Garter Club blog, but I figure that since industry pros read BPPA a lot more often then my personal blog, this might be an interesting read. Do with it as you will, folks.  -- Anthony]

A Rebuttal From The "Red Garter Belt" 

How Gail Dines Fails Miserably On The Latest HIV In Porn "Outbreak"

by Anthony Kennerson


Perhaps I should be grateful to Professor Gail Dines that she mentions me, or at least my Red Garter Club blog (no belts involved, I'm afraid), in passing as part of her latest essay regarding the current HIV scare in the Los Angeles-based pornography industry. Having been one of her most trenchant critics from the Left, and being both a fan and consumer of mainstream porn and an unabashed supporter of what some decry as "sex-positive" feminism, it doesn't surprise me at all that she would tend to avoid folk like me if at all possible.

The problem is, though, that Professor Dines seems to have an inverse relationship with the art of fact checking, and a continuous habit of letting her antiporn ideology get in the way of interpreting facts that don't mesh perfectly with her beliefs and assumptions about porn and its performers, producers, and consumers. This latest essay, I'm afraid, is simply an extension of those previous habits.

First, let's review the trigger mechanisms that spawned all this. In mid-August, a porn performer named Cameron Bay was verified to have tested positive for HIV, the virus associated with AIDS, through the industry's regular testing protocols. Later that week, her long-time boyfriend, Rod Daily, also a on/off again performer, but operating on the gay side of the industry, announced that he had gotten infected with the virus as well. After a two week period of testing of first generation shooting partners of Bay turned up negative, an imposed moratorium against shooting porn scenes was lifted after two weeks....but was reimposed again on September 9th after a third performer was verified as having tested positive for HIV. "Performer #3", as we will refer to her, has been verified to be intimately related with both Bay and Daily, having worked with them prior to entering the LA based industry in early June. Subsequent testing of all her partners have turned up no further infections; and based on that, the second moratorium was lifted on September 22nd. (WARNING: embedded link NSFW)

Meanwhile, the mega healthcare organization, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, under the direction of its president, Michael Weinstein, has been doing its best to exploit the panic of these infections as a wedge to advance their crusade for destroying the screening and testing system that the mainstream porn industry has been using for the past 10 years, and replacing it with a system based on mandatory condom usage and other means of "barrier protection". In effect, AHF and Weinstein wants the "straight" side of the porn industry to adapt the policies of the gay side, in which it is assumed that HIV-positive performers should be allowed to continue to shoot content, and that seromatching HIV+ performers as well as condoms are the more effective approach to preventing mass infection. Given as much as a 30% rate of seropositivity among active gay male performers, and nearly 117 deaths from gay male actors striken with HIV/AIDS in the past 10 years (as compared to only 2 confirmed infections from shoots from the "straight" side during that period), it's an open question which system has proven more effective.

But, AHF's efforts have also been reinforced by some "sex-positive" health activists and reproductive health specialists, who say that requiring condoms in porn shoots would go a long way towards their efforts in non-judgmental sex education of the masses, as well as having a positive effect by "mentoring" the common folk in the repetition of good behavior.

In addition, some of the more avant garde backers of the alternative erotic subgenre known as "feminist porn" have latched on to promoting condoms as both a prominent selling point of "hot safer sex" and establishing a more progressive and eco-friendly sexual ethic. Not all of them have gone fully towards supporting a legislated condom mandate as AHF does advocate, but many have decided to use the present crisis as a boost for their own promotion of "condom only" ethics.

One such person is long-time sex educator and feminist porn producer Tristan Taormino, who announced last week that she would in the future require both testing and condoms for anyone performing in her future shoots. This week, she was joined in her stance by another esteemed female producer, Nica Noelle, who announced her own condom only conversion on the pages of Salon.com.
While both Taormino and Noelle have been generally praised for their conversions and stances within and outside of the industry, there has been some concern over whether the timing of these conversions would serve to divide and conquer and supress legitimate questions about the effectiveness of condoms as a sole barrier against HIV, as well as the aftereffects of undercutting the present screening/testing system that has served the industry well.

Nina Hartley, perhaps known to CounterPunch readers as one of the most eloquent advocates for sexual expression, feminist porn, and sexual safety, as well as being a 30 year veteran of the porn industry as an actor, director, and producer, has posted a very effective essay in which she explicitly makes her case that the condom mandate would be counterproductive in STI prevention, that AHF's crusade is more likely to make porn production less safe by driving performers underground into more dangerous venues, and that true performer choice on whether to use condoms on porn shoots should be left to the actual performers rather than outsourced to legislators or other self-identified "experts".

Hartley's husband, Ira Levine (also known under his producer alias of Ernest Greene), is a decorated porn producer and director under his own right, as well as having been one of the architects of the screening/testing system for the mainstream porn industry during his tenure at the Adult Industry Medical (AIM) Foundation. (Both Greene and Hartley have served on its Board of Directors.) AIM was ultimately driven under due to the efforts of AHF and other pro-condom mandate groups; its functions have been taken over by the Free Speech Coalition through their Performer Accessibility Screening Services (henceforth PASS or FSCPASS). It is the latter which monitors and maintains the current screening program, which uses the latest and most accurate testing assays to isolate and screen out infected people from the performance pool. Both Greene and Hartley were also collaborators and supporters of Taormino who have been respectfully critical of her position change on condoms; see Greene's critique over at the Blog of Pro Porn Activism. (Disclosure: I am Chief Editor of that blog, and Ernest Greene is a regular contributor and commentator there.)

I have posted my own respectful critique of Taormino in two parts at my own Red Garter Club blog, and that is probably what flagged Dines to add me to her hit list, albeit without mentioning my real name and butchering up the name of my blog.

But, that I can forgive and toss out as a case of a rush to print or simply not enough sleep or the rush of deadlines. What can't be so easily forgiven is Professor Dines' slips of half truths and outright misassumptions about the actions taken place, and her rewriting of facts to fit her ideology.

For starters, she attempts to use Cameron Bay's remarks at the September 18th press conference hosted by the AHF as the gospel truth when it comes to the porn industry's alleged abuse of women. That's right, Professor, that would be September 18th, not 19th...you were just one day off.

But that pales compared to the slipshod factchecking that immediately follows:

Last month porn performer Cameron Bay tested positive for HIV, and since then three other performers have come forward, making a total of four who have been diagnosed with acute HIV infection. At first the porn industry expressed sympathy, but now they are circling the wagons and sharpening their knives, going after the infected performers who took part in an AHF press conference on September 19.

That would be partly true that four performers who were HIV+ did speak at that presser. Problem was, the four that did speak weren't the four that Dines implies were affected. Cameron Bay and Rod Daily (whom Dines neglects to mention until just in passing later, and never as Bay's boyfriend) did indeed speak....but the other two HIV+ former performers to speak were Darren James and Derrick Burts..who just so happenn to be paid employees of AHF as well as being the respective Patient Zeros of the 2004 and 2010 porn HIV "outbreaks".

Weinstein did bring forth two former performers -- one live, one via teleconference -- who made a claim that they were HIV+ due to the current "outbreak", but they made no attempt to verify any evidence that they were indeed affected at all.

The "live" addition, a gay male model named Patrick Stone, testified that he had heard of his supposed "infection" from an email sent to him by PASS saying that he was HIV positive...in complete contradiction of stated PASS policy which states that any positive testing performer be physically recalled for followup testing and counseling and informing possible partners. Stone also claimed that he had tested negative in subsequent tests, and was awaiting final testing before declaring his original results as a false positive.

The other "addition" was an unidentified performer who claimed that he had been infected "nearly six months ago"...but gave no other information about where he got his positive test or how he got infected.

For all it seems, these two new additions were just plants by Weinstein to artificially inflate the casulty count in this "outbreak" and scare people into supporting his condom mandate crusade. Yet, Dines simply accepts their claims as fact and recruits them as supports in her general war against porn.

Dines' attempt to recruit Cameron Bay as the prototype victim now under attack by the Vast Porn Corporate Lobby is equally fascinating for the misassumptions and outright lies spilled forth in almost every paragraph. For someone who claims to do detailed research, Professor, would it be a bit of a stretch to actually get FSC CEO Diane Duke's name correct?

After essentially plagarizing Kathleen Miles' Huffington Post reset of Bay's telling of that infamous shoot for Kink.com's Public Exposure,  Dines riffs thusly:

Following the press conference, The Free Speech Coalition (the lobbying arm of the porn industry) did what most industry organizations do: blame the victim. According to Diana Duke, the CEO of FSC, “While producers and directors can control the film set environment, we can’t control what performers do in private. We need to do more to help performers understand how to protect themselves in their private lives”. That the performers contracted HIV in their private lives is now the official line of the porn industry. Mouthing almost the same words, Steven Hirsch, CEO of Vivid Entertainment, is quoted as saying, “Unfortunately, we can’t control what people do off-set”.

What evidence does the industry have for making such claims? According to Mark McGrath of the AHF, “In order to definitively prove how HIV was transmitted, you would need to do detailed molecular analysis of the HIV strains of known cases. This includes genotyping the viral strains, determine nucleotide sequences, then compare these sequences phylogenetically to comparable sequences from available reference strains.” Of course, no such research has been done by the industry; it has been too busy digging up dirt on the performers.

Considering that all subsequent testing of all performers working with Cameron Bay since her last negative test have turned up negative with NO new infections, the conclusion that she got infected from activity outside of porn might have a bit more relevance and truth than what Dines will allow. Then again, if you are willing to get your information on HIV serotransmission from someone like Mark McGrath, whom is one of AHF's chief ideologues for the condom mandate, and who has been implicated in paying Derrick Burts' legal charges among others, then I guess that the truth would seem fungible.

As for Dines' attempt to turn the Public Disgrace shoot into the Point Zero of the current outbreak....well, it doesn't turn out so well. Turns out that the performer who did get his penis cut (by Bay biting down too hard, no less), did in fact offer to step aside before continuing with the scene and allow Rod Daily to fill in and complete things...but Bay decided to continue on, saying that as long as he wasn't hurt, it was all good. And, that performer -- named Xavier Corvus -- has tested negative multiple times since that shoot, as has the only other performer that Bay performed sex on (a blow job).

And, her effort of accusing The Real Porn Wikileaks of a smear campaign against Cameron Bay and Derrick Burts? Nice try, but no cigar...I'll just reference you to TRPWL themselves for that defense. (Warning, potential link NSFW)

But the real cynicism comes when Professor Dines attempts to give a left-handed smack to Tristan Taormino for her change of heart. Keep in mind that Dines has no love lost for "feminist porn" in general and especially "sellouts" like Taormino in particular, since she sees that genre as simply window dressing that cloaks the supposedly far more popular body-punishing "hate sex" that men use to degrade and humiliate women. Nevertheless, any port that can help exacerbate the storm is a good port for Dines:

Not surprisingly, Taormino, the only porn producer who has acknowledged that there may well be health risks on porn sets, is now being hung out to dry as a traitor to the industry. She was until last week the golden girl of the porn industry because she branded herself as a fun, cool, hip “feminist” who could build a female consumer base (even though she has been filming condom-free anal sex scenes for a decade and seems to have shown no concern whatsoever for the health risks until now). Now the industry is after her like a pack of wolves, arguing that her condom-only policy is a cynical PR ploy aimed at building an image of herself as a feminist pornographer who cares about performer safety.

Ernest Greene, a well-known director of violent porn (Roxie Loves Pain, Jenna Loves Pain, McKenzie Loves Pain) and one-time Taormino collaborator, wrote a scathing article accusing the latter of jumping ship because “she tacks with the political wind however she perceives it to blow”.  Similarly, the blogger Red Garter Belt Club denounces Taormino for putting “her own personal enrichment and political posturing above the principle of defending true performer choice and the actual facts and merits of protecting performers,” but doesn’t actually explain how performers are better served by having unprotected sex.

Ummm, Professor Dines??  I do not and did not "denounce" Ms. Taormino; I respectfully disagreed with her position for the reasons I stated in my posts. The same goes for Ernest Greene....though, considering your natural hatred for him and his wife Nina Hartley (Oops, I'm sorry...did I say some bad words, Professor??), I perfectly understand your confusion of critique for "trashing".

And, so sorry, Professor Dines, but nowhere in either parts of my posts do I defend "unprotected sex"; since I happen to believe that performers themselves, as should people in real life, should be the ones to best define how to protect themselves based on their own individual situations. Or, does Dines think that even married couples who are totally clean and monogamous with each other should be forced by the State to use condoms just for the sake of sex education?

BTW....BDSM porn is not "violent", and cherry picking three titles out of the hundreds of erotic BDSM movies that Greene has done over his 25 years of production merely because they contain the word "pain" in them, does not say much about Professor Dines' expertise. At least, nothing other than her lack thereof.

I suppose I should be pumping my chests for being mentioned as one of the industry heavyweights since I moderate BPPA and own Red Garter Club, in spite of not only not receiving ONE RED CENT from the porn industry, and actually paying $50 a month of web hosting fees to keep my blogs alive.
However, that's far from the issue, and I'd never deny Gail Dines her right to make as much money off her book or her activism, however hypocritical she may be calling herself an "anticorporatist". Or, a "radical feminist", in spite of defending a woman whom has a verified criminal record of abusing other women and threatening a fellow sex worker with "gang rape". Or, a supporter of mandated condoms as a "performer choice", in spite of defending a former gay escort whom still can't explain how exactly he managed to get infected on a condom only gay male shoot. (Warning: embedded links NSFW)

Then again, I'd much rather be working poor with integrity and decency and mutual respect, than to get rich off lies and deceit and distorting facts to fit groupthink.

And at the very least, I get the names right. It's called "owning it", Professor Dines. Some of that would do you some good.


[Anthony Kennerson is a part-time blogger on progressive and sexual expression issues who blogs on his off hours when not working his night job. He is the Chief Editor of the Blog of Pro Porn Activism (http://bppa.blogspot.com), and operates his own Red Garter Club Blog (http://www.redgarterclub.com/RGClubNetwork/rgclub3dot2).]

Finally, An Organization For The Good Guys/Gals To Protect Adult Choice: APC4C Emerges To Fight Measure B And AB 332

The fact that this probably should have been formed, like, three years ago, doesn't lessen the importance of it being formed right now. It was and is way, way, waaaaaay past time that porn performers coalesce and stand up for their rights and defend themselves against the Weinsteins and Lubbens and Dineses of the world who would infantalize them for their own profits.

Best to simply repost the full XBiz.com article and let you read for yourself.

And, yes, that would be THIS Lydia Lee.

APC4C Formed to Combat AB 332, Measure B

Former adult actress Lydia Lee and the FSC’s Diane Duke and Joanne Cachapero have formed the Adult Performers Coalition For Choice (APC4C), an outreach organization dedicated to toppling Measure B and barring the passage of AB 332.

“FSC does a lot on its own, but they are constantly wrapped up in [litigation over federal record-keeping law] 2257 and other pursuits far more specific to the legal side of things,” Lee told XBIZ. “They don't always have the time to reach out to every specific group. Having spent some time with these two great ladies ... it became our understanding that performers should have a coalition of their own.”

The trio has been working on the project since the last AB 332 hearing on April 24, inspired by the performer turnout there and at previous legal battlegrounds concerning AB 332 and Measure B, Lee said.

She added that, as a result of the draconian language of bill AB 332 “that references dental dams and hazmat suits,” industry talent is leaving Los Angeles County to pursue opportunities elsewhere, explaining that APC4C will work to reverse this trend by giving a voice to performers who have been “systematically ignored.”

APC4C released its first official post yesterday that included the backing of major industry players, including Alana Evans, Amber Lynn, Jessica Drake, Kylie Ireland, Nina Hartley, Steven St. Croix, Tanya Tate and Tasha Reign.

“The simple fact is that no one speaks for the intelligent, responsible community of performers that I’ve known since I entered the industry 15 years ago,” Lee said. “APC4C represents the voices of performers who are tired of being disrespected and spoken for by people who don’t even view them as a species above caged animals that get thrown a treat for performing a trick on camera. I’m proud to stand up against harassment and insults with the people I care about.”

The coalition’s immediate goal is twofold: to attract members to sign up online and to fax Assembly members to urge them to oppose AB 332, Lee said.

In the future, APC4C plans to organize lobbying efforts and fundraisers.

According to Lee, antiporn activism and its propaganda are nothing new, and she has been watching its battle against the industry for years.

“I remember Diane Duke having to bully her way into a UCLA panel discussion in November 2010 when industry people weren’t invited to add their invaluable input to the conversation,” Lee said. “Just two weeks ago I was at the AB 332 hearing while someone from UCLA was counseling a group of students in a corner of the waiting area, comparing porn performers to animals in mainstream films.”

Lee said APC4C will work to abolish such stereotypes and insert performers’ input into legal discussions concerning the industry.

And no better timing, either, since AB 332 is scheduled for it's next legislative hearing with the California Assembly's Appropriation Committee today. This would be the last stop before the bill goes before the full Assembly.

Oh, for those who think that the former Julie Meadows isn't fully committed to this battle? Read this interview at her blog she did with AVN's Mark Kernes. Then, watch this YouTube video interview with performer Melissa Monet. Then, surf the rest of her blog.

Porn Panic 2012 (The Original Series): Finally, Some Unity?? TTS and APHSS Compromise On Testing Protocols; And APHSS Holds NO-Holds-Barred Meeting Hashing Out Testing Procedure And Condom Mandate Resistance

Wel..it seems that we may finally be turning the corner regarding the LA porn industry finally getting off their collective arses and coming together (ignore the pun) to save themselves.

The first big thaw was when Talent Testing Services and the Free Speech Coalition-backed group Adult Performer Health and Safety Services (APHSS), decided to bury their hatchets and compromise on the issue of performer testing protocols. TTS, for various reasons, had enough issues with the APHSS database system and retaining their autonomy as a seperate testing org that they had refused to join APHSS when it was originally formed last year; and APHSS had their own issues regarding some standards of TTS that didn't meet the guidelines set forth by the former.

With the help of the large conglomerate Manwin, though, a deal was reached in which TTS would retain its independence from APHSS, but their test results would be integrated into the APHSS database, allowing for industry access across the board for performers using TTS via the larger database.

Diane Duke, Executive Director of the FSC, made the official announcement Monday via XBiz.com. Some snippage:

Adult Production Health & Safety Services (APHSS.org) today announced that it will start to receive Talent Testing Service, Inc. (TTS) data into the APHSS database via an electronic transfer protocol. While TTS is a non-APHSS provider, FSC and TTS have agreed that a comprehensive information source for performer availability is critical to support industry protocols.

Earlier it was reported that TTS did not meet all of the APHSS qualifications for performer care and therefore did not qualify as an APHSS provider. Moreover, TTS stated that they were not interested in being an APHSS provider.

This conflict posed a problem for performers and producers who wanted to utilize both APHSS and TTS.  After a number of discussions, TTS and APHSS have come to an agreement. “The electronic transfer of TTS data into the APHSS database as a non-APHSS provider seemed like the best compromise for the good of the industry,” explained Diane Duke FSC Executive Director.


“Although we (TTS) will continue to provide results via our own web portal, providing accessibility in the APHSS database benefits the industry as a whole.” said Sixto Pacheco, CCRC, President & CEO of TTS.

Currently, APHSS and TTS are working together to coordinate the technical steps for data compatibility.  As soon as those steps are worked out, TTS information will be available on the APHSS database.

Of much more significant importance, however, is that FSC and APHSS held a meeting on Monday, in which industry pros (including producers, agents, and performers) were introduced to and allowed to inquire about the APHSS database, the testing protocols, and also to update on how to best fight the proposed Los Angeles County condom mandate initiative scheduled for later this year. All of the major players were there, and there was some serious and much needed discussion happening.

Once I get approval from the FSC and APHSS to embed the video of the full meeting, I will append it to this post; in the meantime you can go here to view the meeting in its entirity.

Update: Permission was just granted...so, here you go (props to the FSC and XBiz.com):



APHSS.org Meeting Discussing Performer Testing and L.A. Porn-Condom Ordinance – July 10, 2012 from XBIZ on Vimeo.

Also...Lydia Lee (formerly Julie Meadows) was an attendee, and has posted her reflections of the meeting both at her blog and at her latest "Hanging With Lydia Lee" audio podcast.

And, XBiz has posted their recap of the meeting's highlights here. Also, AVN (via Mark Kernes). Also, Dr. Chauntelle Tibalis at PVV, here.

Porn Panic 2012: Oh, Great: Just What The Doctor Ordered..Disunity!! The Great Testing War

Never let it be said that an industry as dysfunctional as the adult film industry can't find new and different ways to bite their own hands.

It's bad enough dealing with Michael Weinstein and CalOSHA and the condom mandate, but now there is an emerging dustup over modern testing standards that threatens to blow the entire industry standard to smittereens.

Basically, the issue is a war of words between two testing agencies: Talent Testing Services TTS), and Cutting Edge Testing (CET). The former has been one of the primary testing services for porn performers since the demise of the Adult Industry Medical (AIM) Foundation; the latter was formed directly out of the ruins of AIM itself. The latter also happens to have one big advantage: it's backed by the Free Speech Coalition, the main lobbying group for the adult industry, via its main protocol agency, the Adult Production Health and Safety Services (APHSS), which essentially rebooted AIM's old protocols and database and upgraded it for the present.

You will recall last year in the latest HIV porn scare where a performer was found to have been tested positive for HIV, only to find that the series of tests turned out to be a false positive due to contamination of the original sample. You will also recall that the performer had used TTS as his backup test after he was first found to be "reactive", then he switched over to another clinic that was backed by APHSS, which verified the false positive. That raised some barbs from some, since TTS had opted not to be a part of APHSS, citing both costs and "performer choice". Also, FSC had noted that their protocols required any testing agency to have an in-house doctor on staff to verify the accuracy of their testing, which TTS didn't have. It was soon after that episode that Cutting Edge Testing was born, offering updated tests with results as quickly as 24 hours after the needle draws blood, and the latest and greatest testing procedures.

And about those tests?? Well, here is a description of them from the FSC website:

Second, APHSS accepts the Aptima HIV-1RNA Qualitative Assay and the Abbot RealTime HIV 1 Assay HIV PCR tests. After considerable research and contact with infectious disease specialists,pathologists and physicians, APHSS determined that these two tests best meet the needs of our performer population. Both tests have the 9 to 11day window. The Aptima test is sanctioned by the FDA for detection and diagnosis of HIV. The Abbot test is sanctioned by the FDA to determine the viral load of HIV–the amount of the HIV virus present. While the Aptima has been FDA approved for diagnostic, the Abbot test has been identified by experts as an excellent option for the industry because of the doctor’s ability to know the value of the viral load.  The purpose of the initial HIV test is to screen for the presence of HIV, not to diagnose. If a performer tests positive, an additional diagnostic test will then be administered–regardless of the initial test’s brand.

The controversy here is that the Abbot test is sanctioned only for viral loads, but not for diagnosis of HIV (in that, it's similar to the old Western Blot test that was part of the old AIM regime of testing), while Aptima is more related to the old PCR-DNA tests. CET, being an APHSS-sanctioned facility, uses both tests; TTS only uses the Aptima test for their standard.

Nevertheless, for those who prefer TTS either because they personally prefer their facilities or they don't trust CET for its "monopoly" and its backing by the FSC/APHSS, it has become a burning issue with them..especially concerning what they perceive as a power play by FSC to make CET into the one and true gold standard of testing, and freeze out all others.

One particularly not-so-happy performer is Shy Love, who just so happens to be the owner and manager of the Adult Talent Managers - Los Angeles (ATMLA) talent agency, which manages the careers of well over a hundred active performers. She has been one of the more active antagonists against what she sees as CET's "monopoly", as well as what she percieves as the FSC/APHSS' drive to control and standardize performer testing, what she sees as nothing more than a shakedown by the FSC to raise money for their organization.

She is reinforced by other critics of the FSC, including director Nica Noelle and performer January Seraph, who originally questioned the security of the APHSS database when it was formulated last year, as well as former producer, now porn critic, Mike South, whom has been a long-time opponent of the FSC and their stewardship of the testing process.

Mark Kernes has a nice breakdown of the entire donnybrook over at AVN.com; here's how he summarized the debate between Love (backing TTS) and FSC/APHSS:

"Talent Testing Service's requirements were requested by [Free Speech executive director] Diane [Duke]," Love stated. "All requirements including doctors—they have a doctor on file. They said it's done. Diane had also requested that if someone came out positive, that there would be counseling done. TTS had agreed that if someone came out positive, with their new HIPAA paperwork that they had, they had the right to have that person converted over to the APHSS system, where they would provide the counseling. They said they had no problem; that was done. The last resource [sic] was, their APHSS system, to enter the data of positives/negatives into the system so APHSS could have it, TTS told them that they were breaking HIPAA laws and against the law because that actually puts the man in charge, so if there's an error, they're liable, but that there is a program that a programmer can put into the back of the system, which at the time Manwin has said that they are willing to pay for the programming and everything else so that that information can be put into the back of the database, and that requirement was met. So all three requirements that Diane had requested..."

However, when AVN's Roy Salter brought up the objection that there was no doctor at the TTS facility when the performer's blood was drawn, Love responded, "No, the doctor is available. The doctor's the one that writes the prescriptions. Diane's issue was, she wanted the doctors to be the ones to contact the patient if they came out HIV-positive, and by law, the doctor does not have to do that. They can actually have a licensed HIV specialist who is a counselor contact the patient directly to notify them of the circumstances, and if APHSS was going to be doing the counseling, at that point tell them to come in to retest, go to APHSS for counseling, which we fixed all that in two seconds."

Duke made the point, though, that in order to fulfill APHSS's protocols, testing would have to be ordered by a California-licensed physician, which TTS does not currently have. 

Moreover, TTS has previously stated that it would immediately report any positive HIV performer to the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health even before any confirmatory test had been done, which would likely result in the shutdown of the industry for as long as a month before even a false positive could be sorted out.

 Or, more likely, in the wake of the condom mandate law, a total seizure and takeover of the industry testing protocols by AHF and an imposition of the condom mandate..which would be far, far worse.

At any rate, the debate seemed to be reaching a stalemate.....that is, until The Gorrilla arrived and put his feet down.

That would be "The Gorilla" as in Manwin, the holding company that has essentially taken over porn production overnight via its holdings of sites like Brazzers, MoFos, Reality Kings, the Playboy collective, Digital Playground, and other sites/production companies. It was Manwin companies who got nearly singed in the last porn panic, since it was accused that Brazzers had allowed the "positive" tested performer to continue to shoot videos while his tests remained in limbo...a charge that was publically leveled by none other than Michael Weinstein of AHF during his attempt to milk it for the condom mandate campaign. And, it was APHSS who rescued Manwin out of the firepit by offering alternative testing that ultimately cleared both the performer and Manwin/Brazzers of any wrongdoing.

Naturally, such good deeds do not go unrewarded. And, when you are the King, you can really, really, really reward. Once again, AVN.com recites the tale:

Manwin Sets New Production Standards

LUXEMBOURG—Manwin has decided to set new best practices regulations for all performers and third party producers hired to create content for its websites.

In its proposal, Manwin supports the system put in place by the APHSS, while also moving beyond the standard industry practice of 30-day interval testing.

The APHSS has set forward a best practices guideline and system that allows performers, producers, and agents to create a controlled work environment.

It includes consistent standards and guidelines for testing and treatment of adult performers, a secure database that ensures performer privacy and protects producer liability, protocol for performer support in the event of a positive HIV test result - including testing of 1st and 2nd generation partners—as well as health and safety resources provided for producers and performers.

In other words..APHSS/FSC is Manwin's choice. Sorry, TTS, but...Scoreboard.

But that wasn't the real game changer in that announcement.  THIS was:

Following months of research, and meetings with various doctors and medical experts from the most respected universities and health institutions in North America, Manwin has decided to implement additional rules for anyone involved in producing content for its sites.

The company will require FDA-approved tests from the clinics listed on the APHSS.org website, specifically the HIV-1 Aptima RNA Qualitive Assay. In addition, the company will require 15-day interval testing for performers.

As of July 1, 2012, adult entertainers performing in scenes commissioned for websites belonging to Manwin will have to provide health tests that are no older than 15 days. Manwin will pay for all additional tests needed under these new rules, in case a performer works for any of the company's brands multiple times in a 30-day period.

Manwin expects producers, performers and agents to be in full compliance with these new regulations, and looks forward to working with the FSC in setting the highest possible standards for the industry.

To summarize, Manwin essentially revolutionized the art of performer testing, by narrowing the window of testing from 30 days to 15, and even backed it up with the option of footing the dime for any performer having to work for any of their sites in multiple scenes.

Oh, but that's not all, either, Clones. Some talk the walk, but it takes real money to back it up. Is this real enough for you??

Manwin Donates Gen Probe Aptima Machine to Cutting Edge

 LUXEMBOURG—Following its decision to enforce stricter health rules and guidelines for its producers and performers, Manwin has purchased the Gen Probe Aptima machine for Cutting Edge Testing.

This piece of equipment performs the Aptima RNA Qualitive Assay, the FDA approved test that Manwin requires as part of the new health standards and procedures from producers, performers and agents.

While researching its new guidelines, Manwin collaborated with various North American health experts and organizations. During this time period, Dr. Peter Miao became a great source of information and support. The renowned infectious disease expert, who was part of the original team of physicians that encountered HIV infections in 1981, oversees the Cutting Edge Testing center.

“Aptima testing by Gen Probe has been available for many years, and is approved by the FDA for the diagnosis of acute HIV infection," Dr. Miao said. "At Cutting Edge Testing, we are now transitioning to the Aptima test for screening of HIV [infections] very shortly."

Manwin is pleased to support Dr. Miao and Cutting Edge Testing.

“This demonstrates Manwin’s concern for the health and safety of all the performers and the industry as a whole,” says Dr. Miao. “By their generous gift, we now can move ahead and perform the Aptima test in the very near future.”

Manwin hopes that the donation will help Dr. Miao and his team continue their work in providing optimal health services to adult entertainment professionals, as well as the public at large.

Yeah. That pretty much settles the case of who Manwin trusts, doesn't it?

The basic reactions from the porn community to this can basically be reduced to two polar opposites: "Whoa!!! Manwin's bringing the porn industry together and finally fighting for performers!!!  KEWL!!!" and "Yeah, right...all Manwin's doing is taking everything over so that there will be nothing left for the rest of us!!!  BOOOOOOO!!!!" I guess that only time will tell who turns out to be right.

And as for Talent Testing Services...well, there is now a movement afoot to get them integrated into the APHSS orbit, so that they can get with the Manwin program, and possibly get themselves some of that green sunshine. (Remember, they already perform the Aptima test long before CET did.) Maybe that can defuse some of the flame throwing now going on.

And then again, there will be folk like Mike South who will dismiss the entire thing as a sideshow circus that detracts from what he considers to be the fundamental flaw with the entire system: the dependency on the databases and the possibility of another breach like what happened with AIM via the original Porn Wikileaks and Desi Foxx, the refusal to add testing for other STI's like HPV, herpes, and syphillis, and ultimately, the refusal to adjust to the new enforcement regime from AHF/LA County/CalOSHA that still may override their best efforts to avoid the condom mandate. Once again, time will either vindicate or crucify his analysis.

And of course, we'll follow everything as we always do here at BPPA. Because we can.

More analysis from Dr. Chauntelle at PVV here; and some from Lydia Lee (channelling Julie Meadows once again, happy to announce) here (also check her podcast here, too).


Update: Uh-oh....seems like Manwin might have spoken just a bit too soon. From the latest post by Sean Tompkins over at The Real Porn Wikileaks:

Manwin is forcing people to test at a certain place as a condition of them getting hired. Manwin insists that all talent pay for the test themselves unless booked more then twice in same 30 day period.. This is a clear violation of LC Section 222.5

No person shall withhold or deduct from the compensation ofany employee, or require any prospective employee or applicant foremployment to pay, any fee for, or cost of, any pre-employmentmedical or physical examination taken as a condition of employment,nor shall any person withhold or deduct from the compensation of anyemployee, or require any employee to pay any fee for, or costs of,medical or physical examinations required by any law or regulation offederal, state or local governments or agencies thereof.

Now I’m not a lawyer and I’ve never played one on tv so I could be wrong.

Now, this would get into the debate over whether a porn performer really is an employee or an "independent contractor"; not to mention the fact that California law expressively forbids using HIV status as a condition for denying employment.

There's also been a genuine Twitter debate going on now between Charity Bangs, a performer who is signed with Talent Testing and has raised serious issues about the "monopoly" practices of Cutting Edge Testing and its alliance with FSC/APHSS and now Manwin; Michael Fattorosi (aka "Pornlaw", who has offered some prime legal opinion on the entire episode), and Keiran Lee, Brazzers' main "stud" performer, whom has also raised some astute questions.