Porn industry may leave LA if city OKs condom use
istockphoto
(CBS/AP) Porn vendors in Los Angeles are threatening to pack up their sex toys and leave the nation's porn capital if authorities carry through with their effort to require condoms on adult film sets.
PICTURES - Derrick Burts: HIV-positive porn actor calls for condom use
On Tuesday, the Los Angeles city council voted 9-1, granting final approval to an ordinance that would deny film permits to producers who do not comply with the condom requirement.
Before the measure can take effect, however, the council has called for the creation of a committee of police officials, the city attorney, state health officials and others to determine how it might be enforced.
"It's going to be interesting to see how in fact they do try to enforce it and who's going to fund it, and all of the time and effort they're going to spend," said Steven Hirsch, co-founder and co-chairman of Los Angeles-based Vivid, one of the largest makers of erotic movies.
"Ultimately I think what they will find is people will just stop shooting in the city of Los Angeles," added Hirsch. "That's a given."
Other industry officials agree with Hirsch, condemning the measure as too politically correct, and one that cannot be enforced in the city known as the porn capital of the country. Approximately 90 percent of U.S. porn films are made in Los Angeles, almost all of them in the city's San Fernando Valley, said Mark Kernes, senior editor of Adult Video News.
The porn industry, including films, internet downloads, sex toys and admission to dance clubs, produces about $8 billion a year - but it has been battered in recent years by the recession and the popularity of free online porn. Kernes says requiring condoms would further erode business.
What do consumers think? Many, particularly those overseas, have made it clear they won't watch films when the actors use condoms, complaining that it is distracting and ruins the fantasy.
"You can't actually compel an industry to create a product that the market doesn't want," said Christian Mann, general manager of Evil Angel, another of the industry's largest production companies.
Ged Kenslea, spokesman for the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, said the measure is needed because the industry has failed to properly police itself. For years, he said, filmmakers have ignored state health laws mandating the use of condoms when workers are exposed to blood-borne pathogens.
The industry already does its own policing, filmmakers say, requiring actors be tested for sexually transmitted diseases a minimum of every 30 days when they are working. They say no cases of HIV have been directly linked to porn films since 2004, adding they fear if the industry scatters to areas outside of Los Angeles, testing could fall by the wayside, exposing performers to more risk.
"If someone is going to catch an STD, it's usually out of the business because we are tested so often," said veteran porn actress and producer Tabitha Stevens.
In her 17 years in the business, Stevens said, she has worked both with and without condoms. Although she prefers to use condoms, acknowledging they do increase safety, she said the choice should be left up to the performers and not mandated by a government agency.
"If you want to wear them, wear them. If you don't, don't. That's up to the talent to decide. It shouldn't be up to the government to decide," she said.
According to the CDC, latex condoms are "highly effective" at preventing HIV transmission, and have been shown to reduce the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases including, gonorrhea, chlamydia, and trichomoniasis. A lesser degree of protection is provided for genital ulcer diseases -including herpes and syphilis - or HPV, because these infections may be transmitted by exposure to areas that are not covered or protected by the condom.
Popular in Health
- Surgeons remove 4-pound hairball from tiger 10 Photos
- Once obese dachshund gets surgery to remove excess skin
- Cause of Alabama mystery illness cluster determined
- Heartburn raises throat cancer risk but antacids may help
- Feet come first when it comes to body parts with most fungi
- Surgeons remove 4-pound hairball from 400-pound tiger
- Skin cancer self-exam: What to look for (PHOTOS)
- Airway made by 3D printer saves infant's life
The reality is that because of the industries rigorous testing procedures, it really is safe sex. It's safer even than a monogamous relationship actually, because every performer is tested before preforming whereas a spouse might be cheating on you without your knowledge and never get tested.
Furthermore I would go on to point out that the likelihood of infection (with a proper testing regime) is relatively low, you wouldn't ban stunts from movies because one or two stuntmen were injured over the course of a few years would you? Did anyone propose banning guns from movies when Brandon Lee got accidentally shot?
Yet despite the fact that HIV is even now treatable and not fatal (indeed, those infected have to take medication and are limited in their reproduction, it is little more than a minor disability), you propose that the rare possibility of an accident is cause to impose visual censorship on the entire industry?
This entire issue has been trumped up by AIDS Healthcare Foundation, a lobby group who's seeing the waning of the significance of their cause and is therefore drumming up publicity in the hopes of spurring corporate and private donation so that they can prolong their proverbial gravy train. Why else would they choose to trumpet the issue now, after HIV has been treatable and manageable for years? Clearly this is an issue of this group seeking donations and exploiting the corruption of the L.A. city council to drum up publicity.
This is nothing more or less than an attempt to censor visual media in the movie capital of the world. If they censor adult entertainment in the name of "public health" today, why not censor violence in movies tomorrow, or how about ideas that aren't conducive to the public wellbeing such as certain lyrics in rap music? If one special interest group can censor one form of creative expression, why not others?
This is a direct assault on free speech and free expression, nothing more and nothing less and it is not the end. You don't take away people's rights with one stroke or there'll be public outcry, you do it incrementally in little baby steps and that's what this is, a step toward censorship.
If they want their industry to survive the porn producers should found a superPAC right now and start fighting for the recall of every city council member who voted for this ban, and anyone who supports freedom of artistic expression should support them.