User-agent: * Allow: / Legal news, political opinion, Satire, and lawyer thinking by Tim Paynter, Attorney at Law: Law may require adult actors to cloak their members === Michael Weinstein of the Aids Healthcare Foundation petitions for wearing condoms in the adult film industry

Why Not Twitter This?

Thursday, March 18, 2010

Law may require adult actors to cloak their members === Michael Weinstein of the Aids Healthcare Foundation petitions for wearing condoms in the adult film industry

Condoms may be required for actors in adult films

Erotic Arts Actors may not be allowed to perform naked anymore.  While they may appear without a stitch on, when it comes time to do the deed, they may be required to cover up a bit, they may be required to wear a condom.  That will be the case if the Las Angeles Aids Healthcare Foundation wins passage of a petition they filed with the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board according to the

Most adult porn actors do what they do best in the au natural. That is the stock in trade for an adult film star. Likely, he is blessed with certain physical attributes. He is probably young, attractive, height-weight proportionate, and he sports a healthy package below the belt.  If he is lucky, he has some acting talent to go along with his physical size and stamina. He gets paid the big bucks to show off what he has.

One of genre that attracts a lot of attention in the adult industry is performing ‘bareback’. The term refers to those who have sex without condoms. Frequently, the practice is used in gay films in which actors engage in anal sex without the protection of the thin sheet of latex that most sane people consider a requisite in safe sex.

"'Bareback sex' is not limited to homosexual films"

“Bareback sex” is not limited to homosexual films, however. So called straight movie goers pay good money to see a flick in which the ‘babe’ takes it from the front and then the back ‘bareback’. The practice is specifically risky to women because of the potential for transfer of bacteria from the anus to the vagina.

Consumers like these films for a variety of reasons. First, of course, there is the view. Nothing impedes it, since one’s 'member' remains un-cloaked throughout the production. There is a certain ‘thrill’ in bareback sex, as well.  The fantasy is, throw caution to the wind, take your chances, you are invincible, maybe someone else will get the dreaded AIDS virus, but not you. Those who are not willing to take the risk in real life enjoy living it vicariously on the silver screen.

Others enjoy watching their actors do it without condoms because they themselves have sex without condoms. They already have the AIDS virus and seek others who are similarly infected.

Believing one is invincible because he or she is HIV positive is foolish thinking.  Most who have the death virus are encouraged to use a condom in their love making practices so they do not come into contact with more virulent strains of the virus and other infectious diseases like Hepatitus.

"Pornography represents a fantasy"

Finally, doing it ‘bareback’ represents the ultimate in the sexual experience. Pornography, as in all cinematic art, represents a fantasy of life. The viewer, at least through film, wants to enjoy the sexual experience to the fullest. Despite modern condom making techniques, many men believe condoms are nothing more than a wet noodle which impede sexual pleasure.

Unfortunately, the “Don’t try this at home, folks” warning falls flat on it’s face when it comes to most theatrical productions, and especially to adult films. If it works for the cat on stage, or for the stud in the bed in this case, then it ought to work for the fellow who is watching the flick, as well.

"An HIV Poz diagnosis means no children"

Not true.  Don't buy it.  The guy who pays his money for the adult DVD does not see what happens to the actors after the director yells 'cut'.  Those who contract AIDS on-screen have the same problems as those who contract it off-screen.  First, there is the panic with the bad news.  Then comes massive doses of prohibitively expensive medications.  The future become uncertain. 

Relationships are changed forever.  Adult film actors and actresses who want the benefit in real life of what they portray on screen are precluded from doing so.  Most HIV poz men and women do not want to pass the ugly disease on to their newborns.  So an HIV positive diagnosis usually means no children.

It is sad to say, the 'bareback' fantasy is being played out in adult dating circles with increasing frequency.  It was once considered taboo as a nation of public health workers and the gay community fought against the the spread of the AIDS virus.  Now, young gay men often advertise for multiple partners 'bareback' in the adult sections of Craigslist.  Others have 'bareback' parties.  Straight couples frequently advertise they are open for 'bareback only'.  They fail to make the leap from fantasy to reality as they watch adult actors engage in risky sexual practices on film.

From our point of view, advocating bare back sex is bad policy on the part of the adult film industry. It promotes risky sexual practices. It places actors and actresses at extreme risk for contracting sexually transmitted diseases, (STD's) some of which are fatal and others which have long lasting consequences.  It promotes the false belief if one has serial converted and is HIV poz, he has nothing to lose.  The reality is, everyone in society loses when STD's are traded.  The disease inevitably will be passed to unsuspecting third parties.

"Most people don't associate sex with pushing up daisies"

If you have AIDS and you engage in sex without telling your partner, you could be in serious trouble.  Passing a deadly disease to an unsuspecting person may result in civil suits and even criminal charges.  One rarely thinks about these things when watching adult films.  But then, most people don't associate sex with pushing up daisies, either.

That is why we encourage the California State Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board to adopt condoms-required standards for actors in the adult film industry. The issue comes in front of the Board today after a petition by The Las Angeles based Aids Healthcare Foundation was filed by the foundation's president, Micheael Weinstein with the California Board in November of 2009.

The petition requests the Board to require:
a.  Actors to wear condoms;
b.  Condom safe water-based lubricants
c.  Make available the Hepatitus B Vaccine
d.  Testing for those exposed to STD's and certain diseases
e.  Training for actors and actresses and others employed in the adult industry.

Laws regulating adult actors and actresses are not new. Currently, adult actors are required to provide test results showing they are HIV negative and free of certain other STD’s before they can do their thing for the camera. The problem is, while the test must be current within 30 days, there are no guarantees. The actors and actresses can easily contract STD’s including AIDS during the 30 days prior to the film shoot.

While it is considered un-professional in the industry to place un-witting co-workers at risk, it is an occupational hazzard. Chris Parry with efilmcritic writes about one AIDS outbreak.  Those who lose the bet will surely regret trading the few dollars they made for stripping down and strutting their stuff when all they needed to do was suit up when they showed up.  Let's hope Weinstein's Aids Healtcare Foundation Petition to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, also known as DOSH, is a success!

No comments:

Post a Comment