Prev
Next

Condoms for porn stars is Russian roulette

Claire Porter

by Claire Porter

26 Jul 05:40am

Must Reads

The Punch is moving house - this is a caption

The Punch is moving house

385

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this? - this is a caption

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

122

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming” - this is a caption

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

251

Filed under: Aids, Health Reform, Porn, Safe Sex, United States

99 comments

Asking the consumers of porn to vote on whether porn stars should be required to wear condoms during sex scenes is like asking children to vote on whether they should be required to eat dessert after every meal.

If it's not on, then it's not even on the screen. Photo: News.com.au

It’s like asking consumers whether McDonalds should ban the Big Mac.

It’s placing people’s sexual health in the hands of people who will vote not on their conscience but on their… *ahem* appetites.

Not only is it just morally wrong, it’s dangerous to the health of the people that provide consumers with healthy, adult entertainment.

The worst part about is that the adult industry is calling this a historic win.

The Los Angeles County supervisors had to be pressured into the decision after facing years of pressure from lobby groups to regulate health care in the adult industry.

This is the decision they came up with. To let the consumers of porn vote on the sexual health of the actors and actresses they watch for their own viewing pleasure.

The AIDS Health Care Foundation actually called the decision to allow a vote “a historic day”. 

Sorry, WHAT?! 

“We look forward to educating the public about the issues at stake,” said AHF President, Michael Weinstein. “Simply put: No one should contract an incurable disease as a routine part of going to work.”

Mr Weinstein is absolutely correct but health lobbies shouldn’t have to campaign for regulation.

That’s not education, it’s Russian roulette.

The benefits of regulating the porn industry would mean that, at least hypothetically, regular health checks could be tax deductible and/or subsidised. 

But in a country like the US where even the right to health insurance is seen as an obstacle to economic freedom, no right-minded President or even state legislature is going to go near a topic as controversial as porn.

God forbid we act like grown-ups about this.

The US should man-up and have adult issues regulated by adults who have studied the health risks posed to porn actresses and actors.

Then Obama should mandate that the porn industry implement regular health provisions for its actors and actresses.

Then the US should take a page out of Australia’s book and tax people who don’t have health insurance.

Because seriously, when has anyone ever voted against their own interests?

Most commented

99 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Super D says:

      07:07am | 26/07/12

      So porn enthusiasts with an aversion to condoms will now source their entertainment from eastern Europe. The end result will be a smaller less lucrative industry in the US.

      Reply

    • scott says:

      09:29am | 26/07/12

      The real enthusiasts already source their entertainment from Europe.  The women are hotter and they have much higher production values.

    • thatmosis says:

      07:27am | 26/07/12

      The people making these movies or whatever know the risks and its up to them to decide whether to wear a condom or not. Personally I don’t care one way or the other but I’ll bet my bottom dollar that the :viewing” public will vote no and that’s the way it will stay until the actors?? themselves take a stand. The way things stand those that don’t use a condom will get more work than those that do as that is what the average punter wants to see.
        The porn industry in America already has the most stringent rules about health and most actors?? cant work if they haven’t got a Doctors certificate that’s less than a month old to say they are clear of STDs of all types but of course there are those that flaunt these rules.

      Reply

    • Jay says:

      08:26am | 26/07/12

      So when was the last time you starred in a Porn movie? ‘Stringent rules?’
      There are many harrowing accounts from current and former porn actresses. Listen to their stories. How many of these ‘actresses’ from Asia or Eastern Europe are forced to participate in these movies or a just more victims of the ever growing people trafficking gangs.The misery that these movies cause so mostly men can get some gratification is an indictment on the human race.Once upon a time there were limits even in the porn industry; nowadays it seems anything goes. What does this say about us?

    • Alfie says:

      07:30am | 26/07/12

      “...actors and actresses” lol

      First time I have heard that one.

      Reply

    • OxyTorch says:

      08:33am | 26/07/12

      They’re called “actresses” because they are faking it.

    • Beardo says:

      07:44am | 26/07/12

      I find it funny the author thinks this industry can even be regulated. No guys under 40 actually pay for porn anymore - how do you think you would police an industry raising indirect revenue from online advertising? If stream providers see demand for say, bareback, they will source it.

      You would have to hit mainstream porn with super illegal Internet status like terrorism, kids etc for it to be policed. Good luck with policing a google of “big boobs”.

      No this is more then just a workers rights issue - this is women starting to realise their average guy has an alternative to the stuffy wife who won’t put out. Sure the bad boy will always get it elsewhere, but now that the average guy has a safe private way… heaven forbid!

      Reply

    • TracyH says:

      08:52am | 26/07/12

      Beardo…yeah I’ve wondered recently how there is any money at all in the porn industry lately, with it readily available for free online. There are millions of free porn sites on the net. I’m not ashamed to say I peruse it when the mood strikes, and I’m a female. I seriously do wonder why there is a push for these regulations. Sex is the one thing that can never be regulated, whether through moral outrage or legislation. The ‘rightness or wrongness’ of the argument is therefore pointless.

    • Susan says:

      09:24am | 26/07/12

      Your logic defies me.  So a wife worried about her man cheating should be even more concerned when she realises he can use condoms and he will think he is ‘safe’?

      Surely just about everyone knows about condoms. It’s not like they were invented yesterday.

      I feel so sorry for wives whose men talk about them as “putting out”.  And you guys come online, speak about women and wives like they are trash and you presume we’ll find you attractive??  Some women will…the sort that like to “put out”. 

      I think you should be shopping in a different aisle for your meat.

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:09am | 26/07/12

      I think its just plain speaking Susan. He has a point, generally if their is cheating ( say surfing porn ) than its generally for a reason.

      Same goes for chicks, if their husband got fat the attraction may not be there anymore and suddenly that gym instructor looks pretty good now wink.

      Why cheat if you can get everything at home? Personally if my gf looked at porn I couldn’t care less, pretty harmless fun if you ask me.

    • Susan says:

      11:08am | 26/07/12

      simonfromlakemba…. I guess the language and terms people use when they are “plain speaking” kind of defines how they see those closest to them and the value given to them….and for me, it’s a “no buy” today thanks. 

      Sex is also of course different to a relationship and, for me, no, I would not kick off my partner because they changed their looks.  But that’s because I value other things higher than appearance.

    • che says:

      02:12pm | 26/07/12

      Beardo & simonfromlakemba, wouldn’t a more appropriate response to not being attracted to your partner anymore be to break up with them? Why is cheating the only option available? That always confuses me…

    • M says:

      07:54am | 26/07/12

      The porn industry is almost dead anyway, too much free stuff and not enough people willing to pay for content.

      I’d say leave it up to the actors and actresses to decide what’s in their best interests.

      Reply

    • scott says:

      09:34am | 26/07/12

      It is far from dead, the financial model has changed.

      Instead of purchasing the content from adult stores, people are viewing the ‘free’ websites where the producers of content are earning revenue from the advertising.

    • Scotchfinger says:

      10:29am | 26/07/12

      Scott writes: ‘the financial model has changed.’
      Is that a euphemism for ‘now criminal gangs round up underage girls from Eastern Europe, drug them and have them raped on camera by horny parolees?’  Or ‘bored school boys with no self-esteem coerce their girlfriends to blow them on a smarphone camera, before downloading the result’? Yes, the financial model has indeed changed; it’s become less regulated, more ‘free market’ and hence safer!

    • scott says:

      01:26pm | 26/07/12

      @Scotchfinger

      No, it is not a euphenism.  Do some research.  Sites like Redtube, Youporn etc. are essentially paying royalties earned from the advertising revenue to the porn studios whose content they are streaming.  Why else do you think the studios are not having the content removed for infringing their copyright?

    • Tubesteak says:

      08:01am | 26/07/12

      I can’t imagine people really care whether the pornstar is wearing a condom or not.

      I doubt it’s going to have that much of an impact if they start wearing them.

      The porn industry has already had a 50% decline in sales and income over recent years due to the internet.

      Reply

    • Tony Smith says:

      09:13am | 26/07/12

      Disagree tubesteak - as an sporadic viewer of adult film, I tune out to those wearing condoms. These films are about fantasy and showing a visible condom gets in the way of that.

      Instead of exporting the jobs to other countries how about they focus more on medical testing before they perform.

    • Susan says:

      10:33am | 26/07/12

      Tony..the trouble is…AIDS testing requires three months.  That’s why police officers etc who have had needle spikes etc sweat it out for so long until they are sure..  So, you effectively need to be sex, needle etc free during that whole testing time and then if you have unprotected sex just once, you would need to wait another three months for a confirmed clear test.  Not realistic for sex industry workers including porn film workers.

      The condom might spoil your fantasy but you don’t want your fantasy potentially killing someone I assume…not unless you’re into snuff or your fantasy dissociates you completely from the reality you are viewing. And I presume post orgasm the reality floods (pardon the pun) back in and when you are back on earth you, once again, would hope no-one’s life was risked in order to help you get off.

    • Scotchfinger says:

      11:16am | 26/07/12

      Susan, when watching porn do you really think the viewer’s main concern is the health and welfare of those on the screen? The entire point is, the ‘actors’ are sexual objects, not personalities or people he wants to empathise with. Women viewing porn may be different, but men still watch the most. Ergo, most viewers would be indifferent to making the acts safer, but feel cheated if any measures were made to make the acts less ‘authentic’ and hence less compulsive viewing.

    • Slothy says:

      11:20am | 26/07/12

      Seriously Tony? You’d rather put someone at risk of contracting HIV than use a bit of imagination to ignore the condom in your wank material? What the hell? I’m pro-porn in theory, but it’s that kind of ‘fuck their health and safety, I’m horny’ attitude that makes me uncomfortable with the levels of exploitation in the visual porn industry.  If you can’t deal with physical realities in your porn, maybe you should stick to animation or written erotica.

      Oh, and for those crying ‘but condoms will shrink the industry!’, just consider what happens to the actors every time someone tests positive and the whole shebang has to shut down while all their partners and partner’s partners get tested.

    • Tubesteak says:

      11:47am | 26/07/12

      Tony Smith
      I don’t get how someone else wearing a condom in a video you’re watching ruins your fantasy but each to their own…..

    • Susan says:

      11:48am | 26/07/12

      Scotchfinger…I’ve never been an overly interested viewer of pornography however I am with Slothy here.  If you don’t think those are real people there, just like you, that is the mindset you enter into when you want to get off.

      Slothy says it far better than I can I think.

    • Tad says:

      02:13pm | 26/07/12

      I agree with Tony. It makes a difference, and not a positive one.

    • Tony Smith says:

      02:53pm | 26/07/12

      Susan and Tubesteak - you guys do realise that even with condoms some diseases can be transmitted right? Furthermore condoms can also break. Why therefore stop at the actors wearing condoms and simply ban recorded sexual intercourse altogether? I don’t think you can honestly say that “No one should contract an incurable disease as a routine part of going to work” by simply enforcing use of condoms. To acheive this you really need to stop the act altogether which is what I suspect those supporting these changes are really after but one step at a time.

      I of course care about the welfare of those consenting adults who are participating in the movies hence why I said that more focus should be done on regulating health checks etc. It is however a step way too far to say that like the many millions of people around the world who have casual sex without wearing a condom these performers can’t do the same even when they are consenting. Some people would prefer not to make adult movies at all and they shouldn’t, some people are willing to make adult movies that use protection and they should do that, some people are willing to make adult movies without protection and rely on the extensive medical testing which is always publicised ... those people only should do that.

    • Susan says:

      03:14pm | 26/07/12

      Tony…I agree…a condom is not the seal of “no disease can enter or pass here” but it is far better than not using one.  I also saw that you, like Scotch, don’t like to see condoms in the porn you watch so I’m sure you realise that affects your take on this.

      Re the health checks, the shortfalls of those have also been discussed.  You need to wait three months and have no activity within that time frame.

      Unfortunately, most actors can’t afford to do that and most companies would dump them unless they are willing to perform regularly.

      So, at this time, given what we know and the risks, a combination of health-checks, condoms and downtime are really required.

      There’s no argument not to use a condom aside from some of you feeling it ruins your fantasy.

    • Scotchfinger says:

      08:38am | 26/07/12

      I considered what the impact that my favourite actors wearing a condom during sex would have on my viewing pleasure. I broke out in a cold sweat; felt anxious and trembly; became angry to an irrational degree; and finally sought the safety of my computer. Thankfully, the sight of all those beautiful people having glorious consensual sex, free from joyless rubber, was like a balm on my troubled soul. I closed the curtains, took the phone off the hook, called in sick and joined the happy couples (or groups). My world balanced again, one box of tissues later. How dare you try to take this away from me!

      Reply

    • bambisland says:

      08:51am | 26/07/12

      The issue and the subsequent vote is actually a state issue in the US, not a federal issue. Why is the reporter calling for Obama to do something when he doesn’t have constitutional control over it?

      I also agree with the other comments. You can regulate the porn industry all you want, it will just kill it off faster. A large majority of porn these days isn’t coming from the porn industry anyway.

      Reply

    • Pork Sword says:

      09:06am | 26/07/12

      ... Claire, but you are a not taking a tally from porn consumers. You are asking the entire adult population to vote on the issue. If the ENTIRE adult population states that the decision should be left up to the entertainers, then the choice remains with the individual entertainers.

      You do realise that no one is holding a gun to the head of these entertainers and I am surprised at your comments as there are saftey regulations with respect to medical testing etc. Instead of polling kids about desert I think a more appropriate analogy is there being a law implemented that children can not eat desert ever because some kids are getting fat. What happened to personal choice?

      Reply

    • Ben says:

      09:22am | 26/07/12

      Penis fractures are another hazzard of porn industry.

      Reply

    • Geoff says:

      12:34pm | 26/07/12

      You can’t fracture a penis lol

    • Big Jay says:

      12:56pm | 26/07/12

      Wait!...Seriously?

      I didn’t hear this Gail Dines analysis…

    • Susan says:

      03:28pm | 26/07/12

      Yashua was mentioned by someone else.  His accident was referred to as a fractured penis but he had a torn urethra and ripped something in his pelvic wall.  The female was on top I think and he slipped out and thrust back and the tip of his penis hit her pelvic bone.  The crew reckoned they heard an audible ‘snap’.  Anyway, he was in surgery for a few hours so it wasn’t minor.

    • che says:

      09:26am | 26/07/12

      Maybe they are asking the consumer because without the consumer there would be no industry?

      Are you talking about the porn industry which sells dvds, or the free stuff on the internet? And does anyone actually buy porn anymore anyway?

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      09:27am | 26/07/12

      Sex workers and porn actors are just that…workers.  They should have the same consideration given to their safety and health like any other worker.  John Holmes died from AIDS and should have been one of the last to do so in the sex industry.

      Reply

    • simonfromlakemba says:

      10:11am | 26/07/12

      He was going to die from drugs or being killed anyway. Most prob thankful aids got to him first.

    • MarkS says:

      10:36am | 26/07/12

      Agree, it is a workplace safety issue. Therefore an issue for the state government where the movie is made. In both Australia & the USA, workplace safety is not a federal issue, nor is it an issue for the consumer. Unsafe sex is just that & therefore should not be allowed in a professional workplace.

      If people wish to see unsafe sex, there is more then enough amateurs willing to put it out all out there for free.

    • Susan says:

      11:10am | 26/07/12

      MarkS…agree completely.

    • AnT says:

      02:59pm | 26/07/12

      I agree with bringing in the law for sex workers as their clients are not vigilently tested like in the adult industry. These are two completely seperate issues.

    • Cry in my Gin says:

      09:36am | 26/07/12

      I’ve come to clean the pool.

      Reply

    • Anthony Sharwood says:

      09:56am | 26/07/12

      That’s funny. Cos it is.

    • Pretty Girl says:

      10:06am | 26/07/12

      But we don’t have a pool…

    • Budz says:

      10:44am | 26/07/12

      You called me to clean out your plumbing?

    • sunny says:

      09:48am | 26/07/12

      It’d be funny seeing a porn star get audited by the tax office ...

      “Mr Ramrod, you have claimed a $7,500 deduction for the purchase of condoms in this financial year?”

      “Yeah well it should be more but I lost some receipts.”

      Reply

    • Skeetlejuice says:

      09:53am | 26/07/12

      There is enough content from the past 30 years minus rubber johnnies that i couldn’t physically care less if they make more porn or not.

      The internet back catalogue is nowhere near tapped.

      Besides - surely they will just do it in another state. Problem solved.

      Reply

    • ibast says:

      11:34am | 26/07/12

      “The internet back catalogue is nowhere near tapped.”

      You are not trying hard enough.  Clearly you are not pulling your weight.

    • James says:

      09:57am | 26/07/12

      Yeah spot on! People shouldn’t have a vote on what directly affects them!! Let’s get rid of this whole damn voting system altogether! They know what’s best for us! /sarcasm. Comparing a democratic process made by educated adults to a child crying over a happy meal….Possibly the worst comparison I’ve heard in some time.

      Reply

    • Slothy says:

      11:31am | 26/07/12

      I wasn’t aware that it was you, the consumer fapping at your computer, that was directly affected when one of your spank fantasies contracted HIV. The more you know.

    • James says:

      10:23pm | 26/07/12

      Point taken. However I still think that the average voter has enough sense to vote for what they believe to be right, not what they believe to be more sexually appealing.

      Surely you don’t think that the majority of people would vote for something they believe to be wrong, just so they could watch porn stars not use condoms.  As stated throughout the comments, there are many reasons for not enforcing condoms. To assume that the only reason is for the voter to enjoy porn more is wrong.

    • Luigi says:

      10:12am | 26/07/12

      Love the red lips Claire.

      Reply

    • Bony Attott says:

      10:18am | 26/07/12

      No need for condoms in girl-on-girl porn. Just sayin’.

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      11:12am | 26/07/12

      Two words for you Bony… ‘dental dam’.

      A nurse had to explain this one to me!

    • Les B. Ianfantayzee says:

      11:18am | 26/07/12

      Agreed Bony.

      Who wants to look at some other guy’s tackle doing what you wished yours was?

    • Brett says:

      10:29am | 26/07/12

      Someone in government needs to do something about this….all of the standing members need to be pulled together for a penetrating debate to establish a firm commitment to not go soft on the issue while keeping abreast of global policy positions

      Reply

    • Luigi says:

      11:20am | 26/07/12

      right on Brett

    • liz says:

      10:35am | 26/07/12

      But porn stars get very frequent testing for sexual diseases, condoms or no condoms. And “russian roulette” is a terrible analogy, don’t be so dramatic Claire.

      Reply

    • Matthew says:

      02:46pm | 26/07/12

      Clearly you know nothing about the process.  Sex workers have sex multiple times a week.  AIDs testing takes months.

      Besides, it only takes 1 time to get something.

    • Matt says:

      10:45am | 26/07/12

      Theres no evidence that theres a problem in the porn industry.

      You get a choice. There are HIVpos film shoots, and shoots with only negs.

      If they do force condom use, the industry will die in america.

      It is a win, as its a move against a nanny state forcing people to do things they dont want because other people want to change their behaviour.

      The vote is actually a deliberate move to kill the industry coming from church groupd who morally oppose it.

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      11:19am | 26/07/12

      Seems odd to me that a raft of people consider it fine to get off on the basis of people potentially risking their lives.

      “If they do force condom use, the industry will die in America.”.  That is so bizarre to me…not saying you aren’t correct however.

      There is just something wrong to me about this in the same way watching child porn is wrong.  JUST because that’s the way someone prefers or likes or thinks they ‘need’ to get off, doesn’t make it right or doesn’t mean it should be catered to.

      As MarkS just said in a post, there’s loads of amateur vids etc online if you simply have to see unsafe sex action. But an ‘industry’ that is profit driven and employs workers should consider their workers same as any other industry.

      If all you had available were films with condoms, you would get used to it. In a generation people would simply accept and expect them to be present.

      Seems such a selfish mindset to say…nope, doesn’t give my orgasm the maximum pleasure so to heck with your health, take the condom off!  Cos my orgasm needs are, of course, the priority here.  My orgasm is far more important than you potentially getting AIDS or another disease.

      How can that be ok?

    • Slothy says:

      11:59am | 26/07/12

      Agreed Susan. I’m pro-porn in theory, but this whole ‘health and safety? But what about MAH ORGASM!?!?!’ attitude is skeeving me the hell out.

      And Matt, when you say condoms will kill the industry, you’re ignoring the fact that as recently as August 2011, a positive HIV test brought the entire LA industry to a standstill. Production had to shut down while all their partners and partners’ partners were tested. How’s that for damaging to the industry?

    • Sancho says:

      12:33pm | 26/07/12

      Isn’t the point there that in a worldwide industry employing tens of thousands of sex workers, a single case of HIV was so rare as to shock the LA scene into ceasing production?

    • Susan says:

      01:04pm | 26/07/12

      Slothy….totally with you on this and forgot about that 2011 issue which totally deflates many arguments being presented today.

    • Slothy says:

      02:04pm | 26/07/12

      Sancho - first, your point about HIV infections being rare because LA shut down in response to one case out of tens thousands of sex workers across the world doesn’t seem to make sense here. LA didn’t shut down in horror because someone in Ukraine was infected; they shut down for a case in the LA porn community. I don’t even want to think about what the infection rates would be in Eastern Europe.

      Secondly, new infections are not rare in LA either. In fact, at the time it was a common enough occurrence that there were calls to ban a specific sex act (the creampie I think? I can’t check the details for obvious reasons) because the risk of transmission was so high and that act was tracked to be the cause of almost all new infections. This one shut down the industry because it was public. A lot of positive tests are hidden and covered up for the very reason that production has to be halted while everyone gets retested, and even then the tests only catch new infections once it’s too late.

      What’s that phrase about prevention vs cure? Something about using condoms to prevent the spread of HIV because a cure does not exist?

    • Slothy says:

      03:21pm | 26/07/12

      Also Matt - It appears to me that this is being driven by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the largest provider of AIDS care in the US. They also appear to provide services worldwide. I haven’t gone in-depth, but I can’t find any mention of religious links on their site or the other google hits their name brings up. Where is this church conspiracy thing coming from?

    • Kate says:

      11:49am | 26/07/12

      Perhaps they could have an announcement at the start of every film/webcast/magazine stating that the actors/actresses in the film undergo regular and stringent health checks in a controlled environment, but that you (the viewer) should always practice safe sex and use a condom.

      Make this a requirement and apply fines for those who don’t. It might not be as effective, but it’s a start, and you can work your way up to bigger things from there incrementally.

      Just a suggestion smile

      Reply

    • Dene says:

      12:57pm | 26/07/12

      Kate - That already happens in a lot of gay male porn.. “Professional” Gay porn is 90% condom and the other 10% is heavily cautioned before showing itetc

      Amatuer stuff? Another story all together

    • Slothy says:

      02:08pm | 26/07/12

      And yet the gay porn industry still exists? My gosh.

    • Jay says:

      11:57am | 26/07/12

      Here is an extract from a former actress. Hope it dismisses a lot of the myths.
      *************************************************************************************

      That first experience was odd. I was bothered by the fact that my agent used forged documents that showed I had been tested for HIV and other STDs. I had never been tested. I also remember the porn star I was supposed to work with that day was there but she couldn’t do anything because of her health. Her insides were so damaged from porn. I thought it was going to be me and a woman - less threatening right? But these 2 guys joined in and I didn’t think they were going to do that I was supposed to act like it was NOT my first film ever but I think they could tell I was new. There were lots of red flags in the beginning there.I know now that after years of living that life, I was traumatized by it. It was like enduring many years of oppression and abuse of all kinds. When I left and got rid of the drugs, etc., my emotions were raw for the first time in years. Over the years, I suffered depression and anxiety among many other problems and had to have counseling and take medication. Anyone who enters into that and already has mental illness, it will only make it worse.

      What about physical problems?

      Over the years, I mostly had to deal with STDs. I had so many different infections all of the time. I left Hollywood because I became so ill from Chlamydia. My abdomen hurt so much I had to come back home. My insides had been so abused, that at one point, a doctor at Planned Parenthood brought a group of interns in to look at my damaged cervix! I knew that “business” was taking a toll on my body and it also ages you quickly.
      grew to hate men in general and had no respect for men who watched porn. I thought men were perverts and just wanted one thing from women period and they treated women horribly. I think of men differently now. I see them as victims of the porn industry as well. I know that men want what women want too, not sex but love. We all want love. We all have a void to fill but some people try to do that with porn. Some men pay a price for porn addiction by losing their families and jobs. It is so sad and tragic to me that porn destroys the people who make it and also the people to view it. That is clear to me now.

      Reply

    • Nikki says:

      01:14pm | 26/07/12

      Wow, who would have guessed that a career in porn would be demeaning, dehumanising and leave you with an arse like a tattered windsock!

    • Susan says:

      01:29pm | 26/07/12

      Very evocative Jay.

    • Soldier says:

      02:47pm | 26/07/12

      Source?

    • Jay says:

      02:54pm | 26/07/12

      Nikki,
      ‘There but for the grace of God go I’.Sometimes when you have no options you have to do things to survive, but obviously you are so superior and smart you don’t have to concern yourself about going down this path.
      Good for you; unfortunately not all women are lucky as you.

    • Susan says:

      03:34pm | 26/07/12

      @Soldier…because links on this topic are often not accepted by news.com.au all you need to do is copy a line from the post and run it via google.  The woman’s name is Jennifer Case.

    • Admiral Ackbar says:

      06:01pm | 26/07/12

      There is always a choice Jay. Hehe, tattered windsock.

    • Steve Howton says:

      12:46pm | 26/07/12

      Here’s a way to ruin a very funny debate - Occupational Health & Safety.

      Some here say it’s up to the actors/actresses. (It’s lovely of you to call them that - must make them feel SO talented). Do we also say it’s up to Traffic Controllers to decide whether or not to wear high-visibility clothing? Can we leave it up to Bricklayers’ Labourers to determine whether to wear work-boots or thongs?

      I agree with Susan who says that “Sex workers and porn actors are just that… workers”. I may not agree with the work they do, but they must surely have the same workers’ protections that any body else has. It certainly shouldn’t be put to a vote when you are dealing with life and death.

      And,  “simonfromlakemba says:
      He was going to die from drugs or being killed anyway. Most prob thankful aids got to him first.”

      I submit that is a disgraceful comment. Have you, sir, ever witnessed a person suffer from and, subsequently, die from HIV/AIDS related conditions?

      Reply

    • AJ of Here says:

      01:58pm | 26/07/12

      Steve, he is from Lakemba. Says it all.

    • che says:

      02:08pm | 26/07/12

      Using the example of Traffic Controllers and Brickies is a good one. However, the major difference is that those professions wearing their safety gear doesn’t affect the bottom line of the sales of their company (apart from the cost of purchasing the safety gear).

    • Susan says:

      02:40pm | 26/07/12

      che…actually it does affect the bottom line.  There were workers on a roof at a site in an Aussie city in 2012.  They were reported for not wearing safety gear and they had also risked public safety in another direction.

      Anyway, the biz who had awarded the tender to the roofing company cancelled it and dumped them for the breach.  A BIG contract lost.  So, on this occasion the company rightly got a big message and a whack to the pocket.

    • che says:

      03:23pm | 26/07/12

      Susan - yes that is my point, that company was fined for their workers NOT wearing the safety gear. Imagine how many companies would enforce safety gear if the WEARING of it made the company lose money?

    • Jamie says:

      01:03pm | 26/07/12

      As far as voting against their own interest - how about every person who voted Labor at the 2007 & 2010 elections…. an awful lot of them.

      Reply

    • Nikki says:

      01:12pm | 26/07/12

      So would they whip the condom off for a spectacular money shot, or finish in it and then sort of empty it out? Bukkake scenes will never be the same.

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      02:26pm | 26/07/12

      From the land that censors shots of a woman’s pubic area.  Cultural differences are always so fascinating.

    • Nikki says:

      03:05pm | 26/07/12

      They solved the censorship problem in Anime porn.  Tentacles or lamprey teeth are way less offensive and much sexier than regular naked ladyparts.

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      01:16pm | 26/07/12

      “It’s placing people’s sexual health in the hands of people who will vote not on their conscience but on their… *ahem* appetites.”

      So, we should place it in the hands of some faceless men with no real experience, who doesn’t know the people involved but have a list of prejudices a mile long and have no qualms about moral pontificating for the next millennium? Next they’ll want to tell us who we can marry and when we can have sex.

      Spare me such a world.

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      02:07pm | 26/07/12

      It would seem from a number of comments to date that there is no ‘moral’ issue and certainly no pontificating for many…it’s just all about their orgasm.  They want to have ‘fantasy’ without thinking there is anything ‘real’ about it…so..they would say no to condoms because their fantasy is far more important.  They don’t want to advise about who should marry who and when people should have sex…unless those directly contribute to the quality of their orgasm.

      There are loads of anime and 3D porn…but I guess they are not real enough for some.

    • Slothy says:

      02:17pm | 26/07/12

      Yeah, the AIDS Health Foundation. Largest provider of AIDS care in the US. I bet they have no idea what might be a simple way of preventing the transmission of an incurable disease throughout a vulnerable population without removing their right or ability to engage in their chosen career.

    • Andy of Sydney says:

      05:36pm | 26/07/12

      And the issue is, Susan? Two consenting people made a choice not to use a condom. Oh, shock horror! They are gonna get AIDS!!!!!

      Gimme a break. And stay out of my bedroom, you perverted lunatics!

    • Miles says:

      01:35pm | 26/07/12

      The thing is, the actual stars of these films - the ones who are actually taking the risk - are not lobbying for this themselves.  This is another example of people forcing their opinions onto others - as is happening far too often these days.  What rights do we have to tell other people how they have to live their life?

      And before people go on with the whole ‘setting a good example in regards to sexual health’ etc, people must be stupid if they think that simply using condoms in porn will lead to everybody using them more frequently in their own sex lives.  People are not mindless zombies…

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      02:23pm | 26/07/12

      Wow…just tried to post but the link I used was apparently “blacklisted”.

      Ok..Jenna Jackson is a fairly well known porn actress and although she didn’t have compulsory condom usage in her own company, she called for a union in 2010 after another death.

      It is also a legal obligation in say California to wear a condom.

      There was also a 2004 case where a male porn actor Darren James tested negative and went on to infect 3 of his 14 co-stars.  Once again this comes back to the testing period.  You can be negative in the morning, have unprotected sex that night, become infected and you are a danger to all those you have sex with.  Or the original negative was a false negative.

      Jenna made the point that many film companies refuse or blacklist actors who insist on using condoms.  That is a wrongful action in my view and removes the actors from being ‘workers’ with rights.  They do have rights.

      As has been said today…a company can’t blacklist you for wanting to wear safety gear while you are working on a roof. If they try to, they are in a shite load of trouble.  The porn industry should be the same.  The director/producer/investors shouldn’t risk your life as a worker just to ensure that Barry in Aussie gets the best fantasy related orgasm he can.

    • Sean says:

      01:42pm | 26/07/12

      I agree with your points Susan but I’ve never watched porn and thought half way through “I wonder if that person is Positive”. Just does not even enter my mind.

      Reply

    • Susan says:

      03:15pm | 26/07/12

      Not sure what I would think as I rarely watch pornography.  I’m so not a voyeur. smile

    • Jason says:

      01:56pm | 26/07/12

      I’m less concerned about the use of condoms in porn (STDs would be a given) than I am the abusive and worsening nature of even mainstream stuff.  It’s rare to find anything online which doesn’t involve every orifice being simultaneously pummelled by multiple 10” penises - or women in such degrading or physically damaging situations that it’s more like watching a full contact sporting event or torture session.  The advertising on streaming sites is usually worse then the videos.

      I’m reasonably adventurous, and understand that in healthy relationships a bit of domination and even humiliation play can be fun for both parties, but the smut out there these days goes way too far in degrading both sexes.

      Reply

    • BILLY BOB says:

      02:09pm | 26/07/12

      I totally agree with Miles and Andy. A small church group trying to kill an industry they oppose….gee religion has done wonders in the past they must know whats right. Let the industry and the actors decide not some church group.

      PS: Brazzers rocks

      Reply

    • Jenny says:

      02:19pm | 26/07/12

      Google Prince Yashuda and Bethany Benz and you will know about the dangers of working in porn.

      Reply

    • nihonin says:

      02:19pm | 26/07/12

      Porn, it’s a f*cking hard wet job!  wink

      Reply

    • Raw Dog says:

      02:23pm | 26/07/12

      This would be the end of creampie category porn :((

      Reply

    • Slothy says:

      02:45pm | 26/07/12

      It appears to me that this is being driven by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, the largest provider of AIDS care in the US. They also appear to provide services worldwide. I haven’t gone in-depth, but I can’t find any mention of religious links on their site or the other google hits their name brings up. Where is this church conspiracy thing coming from?

      Reply

    • John F says:

      03:12pm | 26/07/12

      You have to wonder if porn is actualy reducing the number of rapes and sexual assaults in the Western world. We have all read about some of the horrendous assaults in Middle Eastern countries and other countries that strictly forbide porn. I am actualy of the view now that having porn available releaves the desire to assault and rape women.
      Nothing worse than pent up frustration being released all at once !

      Reply

    • John F says:

      03:12pm | 26/07/12

      You have to wonder if porn is actualy reducing the number of rapes and sexual assaults in the Western world. We have all read about some of the horrendous assaults in Middle Eastern countries and other countries that strictly forbide porn. I am actualy of the view now that having porn available releaves the desire to assault and rape women.
      Nothing worse than pent up frustration being released all at once !

      Reply
 
Sorry, comments are now closed for this article.

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

Colgo 21 May 13 12:03PM

Oklahoma tornado latest - over 50 dead, twister may have been an F5, the strongest known http://t.co/EWoXgE03A2

Daniel Piotrowski

drpiotrowski 21 May 13 12:03PM

@FreeDannyJovica Hi, all good, i got it, big breaking news day today.

Paul Colgan

Colgo 21 May 13 11:38AM

Best concepts for Google Glass so far http://t.co/3HxNuzhdlm

Paul Colgan

Colgo 21 May 13 11:26AM

Canaries? Lots of mining services companies issuing big profit downgrades http://t.co/zC4aKjqE6p

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

by The Punch Team

385

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

by Hannah Harborow

122

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

by Sarrah Le Marquand

251

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter