It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Los Angeles City Council gives final approval to law requiring porn actors to use condoms

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 07:54 AM
link   

In a significant defeat for the adult film industry, the Los Angeles City Council has given final approval to a city ordinance requiring porn actors to wear condoms while performing.

The 9-1 vote Tuesday marks a significant victory for the L.A.-based AIDS Healthcare Foundation, which has been rallying for years to protect the health of porn actors by asking agencies in California to mandate condom use during film shoots. In the past decade, porn shoots have been suspended several times after high-profile cases of porn performers infected by HIV.

LINK

A few hours ago i was listening to George Noory like i normally do every night and this law that just passed by the L.A city council really caught my attention.
What i don't understand is why is the gov't always trying to stick their noses into everything, now what people are doing in their bed rooms?
this should be a mutual decision from both partners participating in the film, just like in any other case where 2 (sometimes more) persons are going to have sexual intercoarse other than in a porn video.
what do you think ATS?
should the gov't have any say of what protection these actors should have is they muatually agree to not use condoms?


edit:
from what i just found out this industry requires monthly STD testing, is this enough?
Adult film industry supports mandatory monthly STD testing


In the fourth in a series of public meetings in California, representatives of the adult film lobby have proposed that the porn industry continue its monthly mandatory STD testing for adult film stars, according to the publication In These Times.

edit on 18-1-2012 by OUTofSTEPwithTHEworld because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   
Technically, this isn't the affairs of the bedroom. It's workplace health and safety. However, many jobs carry inherent risks, and if someone is willing to take the risk, while the employer is doing everything to minimize it (testing), I think it should be up to the person to make the decision.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:37 AM
link   
I saw a doco on the porn industry a while ago and one of the things brought up was the lack of condom use. The girl being interviewed said of course she would prefer to use condoms ( she had caught 2 STDs previously) but it was hard to find work if she insisted men wore protection.

I doubt there would be many women in the industry who would not prefer to use condoms



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff
I saw a doco on the porn industry a while ago and one of the things brought up was the lack of condom use. The girl being interviewed said of course she would prefer to use condoms ( she had caught 2 STDs previously) but it was hard to find work if she insisted men wore protection.

I doubt there would be many women in the industry who would not prefer to use condoms


do you remember what the documentary was called, id like to take a look at it.
meibe she should have insisted that'll her partner have an STD test prior the film?
why do the job if you don't want to take that big risk...
edit on 18-1-2012 by OUTofSTEPwithTHEworld because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
The porn industry is a regulated industry to a degree (no child porn, they pay taxes); therefore, the government can impose restrictions on them like any other business...and that is what they are doing now.

Time to regulate porn?

Regulation of the industry has been limited to prevention of child pornography. Title 18, Section 2257 of the United States Code of Regulations explicitly prohibits performers under age 18 and provides for civil and criminal prosecutions for any violation [3]. Adult film production companies are required to have a Custodian of Records to document and retain records of the age of all performers, to enforce the age entry restriction.

Performers are required in most cases to pay for all screening tests, and to sign a consent form that permits disclosure of their test results to other performers and producers before filming. Both of these practices are explicitly prohibited under California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) regulations. HIV-positive female performers are permanently excluded from participating in adult films.


But hey, if porn stars want to spread diseases amongst each other...more power to them. Most dont seem to care


The problem comes when they are in a very high risk job that puts OTHERS at risk....and dont test, dont tell others if they are invected and so on.

Sure there are a lot of risky jobs.....but risky to the person who hold the position....not risky to anyone they come in contact with....or sleep with.
edit on January 18th 2012 by greeneyedleo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:19 AM
link   
reply to post by OUTofSTEPwithTHEworld
 


Also mentioned in that doco was the fact that all actors were tested twice a month if I remember correctly, prior to each shoot they also had to bring in the results of their most recent test.
I guess it wouldnt be an issue if it was a closed system where porn stars only slept with porn stars but that isnt the case and Im guessing people who knowingly slept with pornstars would be quite promiscuous therefore even being safe have a higher likely hood of contracting an STD and passing it on.

Im no prude and have nothing against porn but I really see this as being similar to making people wear hard hats on a construction site, they may sometimes be a hassle or uncomfortable but better safe than sorry.
You can take precautions but sometimes accidents happen and its better to be as safe as possible.

P.s sorry dont recall the name of the doco but I think the actress name was Donna something, Ill try a google search and repost if I can find it
edit on 18-1-2012 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:32 AM
link   
Having lived in Los Angeles for 50 some years, it's my humble opinion that all members of the Los Angeles City Council should wear male/female condoms before they take their seats each day!!

With what's gone on between the city council and the city of Los Angeles, I'm surprised the entire population isn't suffering from some sort of STD.

And they're worried about the porn industry?

It's the citizens of LA that need to be worried!!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:43 AM
link   
What will happen, and it is about money in the long run, is that those adult studios that do not want to follow this law will end up moving to a more favorible part of the state if not to another state, and those that want to remain will follow the law. It will ultimately be a business decision on the part of the studio and actors in that industry.
The LA city council is making one classic mistake in this case, it is trying to regulate the one thing that government can not regulate human behavior. It can not regulate what we do behind close doors, in fact, they are most ineffective and have been shot down by the courts every time they try. Nor can they dictate to the general public as to what they will and will not like, as the public votes with their wallets and dollars, when it comes to business. Any adult movie studio will have to make a choice and ultimately it will be to either stay or go. But given the state that California is in, it would not be surprising if there are other cities that would be more favorable to the adult studios, so LA could lose big time.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by sdcigarpig
 


You took the words right of my mouth. If there's money to be made by making non-condom porn, the studios will relocate to a locale where there is no such requirement.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptHowdy
 


agreed. will end up being good for las vegas.



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:00 AM
link   
I am just curious how they intend to enforce this new law?


Appointment of a new official to regulate porn studios and be there during the filming...what a job!


This law sounds ludicrous to me!



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by jerryznv
I am just curious how they intend to enforce this new law?


Appointment of a new official to regulate porn studios and be there during the filming...what a job!


This law sounds ludicrous to me!


what a great job that would be.

i guess as long as the condom is visible during the sex or somthing, film review?



posted on Jan, 18 2012 @ 10:23 AM
link   
Seems to me they could get around that requirement by filming outside LA county.

2nd.



posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 09:27 AM
link   
From a business perspective I'm guessing no one would buy the porn if they wear condoms, effectively driving the industry out to another state. Probably the point.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join