Image by Richard Kadrey / Kaos Beauty Klinik.
Down the page you’ll see the post “porn workplace safety” — my post with an article about HIV, STD testing and the porn industry that I think is one of the most honest, unflinching and comprehensive articles I’ve ever seen written on the topic. It was originally published in The Advocate, an award-winning LGBT news site and print magazine. Mysteriously, and quietly, The Advocate pulled the piece — after gutting the piece of some powerful information about porn, HIV and testing. I found out when the site The Unabashed Queer boldly republished the piece in its entirety last night.
Yesterday the LA Times broke the story that an AIDS advocacy group filed complaints against 16 porn companies in California on thursday, accusing them of violating state workplace safety rules by failing to require porn actors to wear condoms. (also: Reuters) In Siegel’s piece, he’d revealed that a woman from AHF had told him they might even sue CAL/OSHA. But apparently The Advocate didn’t want to publish that; it’s in the uncut piece over at The Unabashed Queer.
Does anyone remember the slogan “silence = death”? It rings with sad irony in light of what The Advocate has done. Any, and every, legitimate publishing medium needs to have a clear and open reason for removing content they once endorsed. Think about blunders in mainstream media; has the NYT ever pulled a piece even when contested or plagiarized? No, they let it stand on record. What The Advocate did completely undermined any credibility they had as a news source or medium of record, and they have to answer to that. Not to mention their position in the LGBT communities.
Read: “The Unabashed Queer’s Cut: Workplace Safety for Porn Actors” by Matt Siegel.
The news is breaking. The State of California has subpoena’d medical records; the ACLU is involved and fighting back on privacy grounds. It’s a mess. Snip from “Groups to file complaints against 16 porn companies“:
Vowing “never to stop pushing” for condom use in porn, AIDS Healthcare Foundation officials said Wednesday that they plan to file complaints today with state officials against 16 California-based production companies they say have violated workplace safety laws.
The complaints will mark the latest move by the Los Angeles-based advocacy group to pressure the porn industry and government regulators to do more to safeguard the health of adult-film performers.
The foundation sued Los Angeles County last month alleging that public health officials had failed to prevent the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and to enforce laws requiring employers to protect workers against exposure to bodily fluids. The suit was filed after the disclosure that an adult-film performer had tested positive for HIV.
“You can go to any porn shop or any hotel and pull up incontrovertible evidence against every one of these companies,” said Michael Weinstein, president and chief executive of the foundation. “Is there anything today that prevents them from going in and finding any of these porn sites to be dangerous workplaces?”
Foundation officials, joined by the nonprofit Pink Cross Foundation, which helps workers leave the adult industry, plan to file complaints with the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health based on a review of dozens of DVDs.
Foundation spokesman Ged Kenslea said that although the survey was not scientific, they did select films made by California-based companies. Of 58 films reviewed — including Vivid Entertainment’s “Nasty as I Want to Be” and Hustler’s “This Ain’t the Partridge Family XXX” — only two included scenes with condom use. (…read more, latimes.com)
Update 08.24: Mediaite questions The Advocate’s actions in Did Advocate.com Kill an Article to Please Its Porn Industry Bigwigs?
You know, I would expect a little more of a critical perspective on this story from some of the sex-positive blogs who have been covering this. The fact that this lawsuit is coming from 1) Michael Weinstein, somebody with a history of irresponsible grandstanding around AIDS issues, notably his attempt to get Viagra banned as somehow promoting unsafe sex; and 2) the Pink Cross Foundation, which is essentially an evangelical ministry to the porn world led by former porn star-turned-fundie Shelly Lubin. Shelly Lubin is very much part of the religious right and her agenda for the porn industry ultimately is about eliminating it rather than making it safer.
The article talks about a “conversation” that needs to happen about porn and HIV, and I agree with that much. However, if you think that porn is really going to be made safer by bad-faith legislation and lawsuits by the likes of Michael Weinstein and Shelly Lubin, you are sorely mistaken.
Jizzillions!
“Condom, bareback, gay, straight —when the defense rests, the same threats emerge. If the government tries to make any regulations, the production companies will immediately up and move causing the state to lose billions of dollars in tax revenue. “
Billions in tax revenue from bareback porn? Really?
Nobilis, i agree totally. if porn is about fantasy, why not use realistic looking but fake/computer-generated members and holes, cumshots even? i will be honest, i have seen some ecus of penetration in gay films where i was almost certain: those organs are not real. i was pretty sure they must have been fucking a cast, that asshole was just too perfect looking, or it could have been digitally retouched. how about some whizzz kids developing CGI for porn movies, so that actors dont have to use their real genitals? how about a green-screen condom? lol
This isn’t about educating kids, Andrew, it’s about protecting the actors.
You completely missed the point.
Action movies are controlled environments with a great deal of care taken to ensure that what LOOKS dangerous on screen is not ACTUAL dangerous behavior on the set.
When was the last time an actor had live ammunition on the set?
The only place actors aren’t “shooting blanks” is in the world of porn.
If they can figure out a way for the talent on a porn shoot to LOOK like they’re exchanging bodily fluids without ACTUALLY exchanging bodily fluids, then that would be perfectly fine. Until then…
One of the myriad of reasons non-condom porn is so attractive is that it’s aggressive, raw, and animalistic; it’s the mating ritual in it’s purest form, without barriers. It allows people to live their fantasies without the drudgery of real life and all the limitations it offers. It’s spur-of-the-moment uncontrolled lust. Personally, I don’t know of a single nurse who’s had or every would have sex with patients, nor have I ever heard of a real sexy french maid who’s only purpose is to clean my knob or a seductive teacher who wants to grade me on something other than my final paper. It’s fantasy. Condoms don’t belong in fantasy, unless that’s your thing.
If they’re going to pass this law, they should also require all violent and action films to have brightly colored water guns because they sure as shit don’t offer lessons on how to properly handle a real one. I’ll also put up $100 that kids learn gun safety from the cinema MORE than they learn sex education from porn. I’ll also venture to guess that there are far more gun deaths each year than from HIV or AIDS.
Say no to violence, not sex.