ONTD Political

L.A. voters say yes to condoms in porn, but the industry still wants to say no

11:45 pm - 11/07/2012
Voters told public health officials to begin monitoring the filming of sex scenes in pornographic movies.

On Wednesday, the county was trying to figure out how.

The new law requires porn actors to wear condoms and establishes a permitting system similar in some ways to how Los Angeles County inspects restaurants. Porn producers are required to purchase health permits from the county, which will do spot inspections on porn sets to make sure condoms are being used. The inspectors can close production if the filmmakers don't comply with the rules.

The county has said the law, pushed by AIDS activists concerned about disease outbreaks, forces the establishment of a new bureaucracy, complete with inspection schedules, a permitting process, a training program for dealing with bodily fluids and a special vault for evidence seized from movie sets. County employees could even be called upon to screen X-rated titles for condom compliance.

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who has been critical of the measure, said it would be difficult for the county to enforce the law because many porn shoots occur in private homes and are never registered with authorities. But he added that the county was obligated to enforce the law, which passed with 55.9% of the vote.

"People voted for it, and they're entitled to have it on the books," Yaroslavsky said. "It's a challenge we're going to have to confront."

The passage of the law created an outcry Wednesday in the adult entertainment industry. Porn producers have long said consumers will not purchase movies in which actors wear condoms and on Wednesday, executives and directors once again threatened to move from long-time production sites in the San Fernando Valley to other California counties, Las Vegas or Hungary, Europe's center of adult moviemaking.

"I love this business, but I feel this is an attempt to drive us out of California,'' said veteran director Kevin Moore.

In a letter to county supervisors, the head of an industry lobbying group called the law "untenable for adult production" and said the group was preparing a lawsuit to stop it from going into effect on 1st Amendment and other grounds.

The measure leaves the details of inspections to the county. The county has estimated that enforcing the law would cost nearly $300,000 in the first year, with fees from the production companies covering its costs.

The Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act, also known as Measure B, was the brainchild of the L.A.-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which bills itself as the largest AIDS healthcare organization in the world.

The group's president, Michael Weinstein, waged a mostly lonely battle for condoms in sex scenes for a decade, ramping up public pressure on officials in 2005 after the HIV infection of three actresses by a porn star.

His efforts were opposed by the industry, which maintained that mandatory actor testing for HIV was effective
, and he got little traction with elected officials who seemed reluctant to wade into the unsavory details of pornographic production.

Pressure increased in 2010 when a porn actor was infected with HIV. County officials said they were in favor of condom use, but didn't support new local action because the state had jurisdiction for workplace safety and, in any case, enforcement would be too difficult. Dr. Jonathan Fielding, the county health officer, wrote in a report this summer that it would be challenging to identify "underground, inconspicuous, intentionally non-compliant filmmakers." County lawyers also said they worried that the measure violated the 1st Amendment.

Weinstein charged that the real issue for county supervisors was disgust with the world of pornography. Their rejection led him to take the issue to the ballot box, where, he said Wednesday, the public did not reflect any of the government's qualms.

"There was no ick factor among the voters. They were so much farther ahead of the politicians. And they made a considered decision," Weinstein said.

He said the county's worries about enforcement were silly and reflected their distaste for anything related to adult entertainment.

"If you have a hot dog stand, you apply for a permit and periodically a health inspector comes out and determines whether you're operating safely, so you don't give food poisoning to people," Weinstein said. "We have 134 businesses that require county permits. Why is this so exotic?"

He noted that the county has required sex clubs and bathhouses to obtain government permits since 2006.

Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich, who had remained silent on the law, declared his support for it Wednesday.

"It's a matter of public health when you have the spreading of disease," Antonovich said.

The porn industry vowed to continue battling the law and made the economic impact on the region a central argument. About 5,000 adult films are shot each year in the county, employing more than 10,000 people according to industry estimates.

Steven Hirsch, founder of the adult film company Vivid Entertainment Group, said the industry would fight the measure "to the very end" and predicted that efforts to enforce the law would be an expensive failure.

"The truth of the matter is I'm not sure there will be a lot to enforce if no one is producing in the county of Los Angeles," he said, adding that supervisors would "spend a lot of time and a lot of money on how to figure out how to put something in place that ultimately won't work."

Evidence of how closely the porn community was following the vote could be found on an industry website where images of scantily clad women appeared next to vote tallies from the county registrar-recorder's office.

"The margins have closed slightly, though, as more returns have been posted to the official government website," AVN reported, adding, "Oh, and President Obama was re-elected."


Some porn performers have come out against this, saying that they know what they're getting into, they always use condoms in their personal lives, and condoms make fast, rough sex uncomfortable.

James Deen responded to the passing to the Huffinton post: "We are much like the homosexual, minority or female populations. We are a community of tax-paying and law-abiding voters who are currently being persecuted. But our opinions do matter, and I hope one day we get respect as these previously stated groups and others have begun to receive."

Before the vote happened Deen and female performer Jessica Drake released a satirical video of what will happen if the measure passes. The California porn industry has virtually collapsed, porn crews have to wear hazmat suits, and the porn shoot is abruptly ended after Deen chokes on a dental dam.

youtube source
ragnor144 8th-Nov-2012 12:36 pm (UTC)
I am trying to figure out how condoms inhibit free speech. They would have an adverse effect on some fluid-based fetishes, but is that legally speech? *curious
dw_10rosefan 8th-Nov-2012 05:42 pm (UTC)
I don't think it is even CLOSE to be anything against the First Amendment. They are just making up lame excuses.

Edited at 2012-11-08 05:43 pm (UTC)
atomic_joe2 8th-Nov-2012 01:53 pm (UTC)
When does it come into erect, I mean effect?
toraguru 8th-Nov-2012 01:58 pm (UTC)
LOL, why do they care if they have to wear condoms? Deal with it, it's for a good reason. Since so many young people are learning about sex through porn, at least get one good message out to them: wear a condom!
clevermanka 8th-Nov-2012 02:31 pm (UTC)
The free speech argument is ridiculous, but the article should have gone into a little more depth about why the actors don't want to use condoms. It's not just a matter of comfort. It's the fact that long-lasting intercourse with a condom can cause abrasions, especially in the person being penetrated, which leads to increased susceptibility to all sorts of infections. There is also the matter of basic comfort, which I think shouldn't be overlooked.

I understand the concerns of the people who want condom use shown in porn to promote condom use in real life, but that idea only extends so far. Personally, I'm not comfortable legislating what someone else has to do for their job.

edited for emphasis.

Edited at 2012-11-08 02:33 pm (UTC)
carmy_w 8th-Nov-2012 05:36 pm (UTC)

My only thought is if the Health Dept. is going to go whole hog-any intimate contact? Including fellatio/cunnilingus? What do they do about facials?

(I do think it's funny that nearly every time I see a vibrator in a porn movie, it's got a condom on, but not all the people do!)

kagehikario 8th-Nov-2012 02:35 pm (UTC)
Would be more interested in listening to industry voices if more female performers were speaking out. So far I've seen commentary from only male producers and performers. I'm also put off by this petty childish attitude of "You can't make us so don't even try!" :/

We are much like the homosexual, minority or female populations.

Ahahahaha and you lost me there, mate
clevermanka 8th-Nov-2012 05:20 pm (UTC)
Would be more interested in listening to industry voices if more female performers were speaking out

I believe Sasha Grey has brought it up, but I can't do a search since I'm at work. =/ Honestly, I don't even remember off the top of my head if she spells her last name Grey or Gray and I think it's best if I don't look it up at the mo'. But I know the women performers have spoken about this.
surrealism 8th-Nov-2012 03:23 pm (UTC)
What the hell about this is a free speech issue!
3608 8th-Nov-2012 04:47 pm (UTC)
The porn industry in Los Angeles regulates itself in concern to health and safety and has been doing a damned good job. Stoya wrote some great in depth things about it prior to voting on her tumblr. http://stoya.tumblr.com [they're all on the first page or so, obviously NSFW]
I'm actually pretty upset about this passing, because I don't want condoms in my porn, it's off putting and completely ruins the fantasy for me.
I don't feel like this something done to keep people safe, but just make it more difficult to produce porn, and is in turn, puritanical 'muricah rearing it's ugly head once again, and I can't believe LA fell for this shit.

[edited for spelling]

Edited at 2012-11-08 04:48 pm (UTC)
vidriodeperlas 11th-Nov-2012 08:25 am (UTC)
casketscratcher 8th-Nov-2012 04:50 pm (UTC)
"We are much like the homosexual, minority or female populations."

Said the straight, white guy.

underfiend 8th-Nov-2012 05:07 pm (UTC)
This comes off as sex-shaming to me. Along 3608's comment, I really wonder how many people who purchase/watch porn voted for this.

3608 9th-Nov-2012 12:47 am (UTC)
I wonder the same thing! I feel like it was a complete "think of the childrennnnnnn" move.
killerforhire 8th-Nov-2012 06:25 pm (UTC)
I live in Chatsworth, THE porn capital of Los Angeles, if not the world. As much as people want to argue for safe sex or setting good examples, this is MY local economy that is about to take a huge hit. These are buildings in MY neighborhood I walk past, drive past, every day. I will see many buildings go vacant with "For Lease" signs. As far as I know, the adult film industry self-regulates itself very well, and all STD tests must be current within the past 14 days and be verified. And, to be honest, if there was a demand for condoms in porn, there would already be condoms in porn. I don't understand why people in Los Angeles voted to drive jobs out of the county. This is so much more than adult film actors, directors, editors. These are the people who make the packaging for the DVDs, the deliverymen, the security guards for the buildings, the barista at Starbucks who makes a latte for the guy in charge of the lighting.
mingemonster 8th-Nov-2012 07:39 pm (UTC)
Safety in the workplace isn't a choice. It can't be, or employers will find a way to encourage rejecting it
eyetosky 8th-Nov-2012 08:17 pm (UTC)
I'm of two minds on this. It hadn't occurred to me that comfort/abrasions would be an issue, but... can't they just edit out the 10 seconds it would take to apply more lube?

James Deen saying "We are much like the homosexual, minority or female populations," or Stoya saying "It could become our Stonewall or our Roe v. Wade."... goddamn, what? Seriously? You're equating putting on a condom with a violation of rights on par with dying from an illegal operation or getting assaulted by police? Really guys?

I mean, more stringent standards for screening in the industry that's already nigh-militant about it would be a hell of a lot more efficient, but the way folks like Deen and Stoya are reacting is making it a smidge harder to side with them. >_
caterfree10 9th-Nov-2012 07:12 am (UTC)
This completely.
princesethking 8th-Nov-2012 08:55 pm (UTC)
I wish they would use condoms in porn, not because of the actual porn itself, but for the safety of the actors themselves. Some people slip through the cracks and infect others with STDs and that's horrible.
perthro 8th-Nov-2012 09:32 pm (UTC)
Exactly. A lot of people who have sex use condoms. I don't buy porn, since I have the internet and stuff, but frankly, I don't care if the person in it is wearing a condom. There's plenty of amateur porn produced by people in their own, real homes, where they're using them. And omg it's still watchable! Incredible! It's... it's almost like... someone wearing protection is... still sexy. O.o what is this madness.
mollywobbles867 8th-Nov-2012 10:14 pm (UTC)
Condoms in porn is only a good thing, imo.
jadehunter 8th-Nov-2012 10:43 pm (UTC)
"We are much like the homosexual, minority or female populations. We are a community of tax-paying and law-abiding voters who are currently being persecuted."

This page was loaded Apr 26th 2018, 6:51 pm GMT.