CA may require condoms in porn

[MascMountainMan]

Here's the latest volley from the condom nazis.

Since the IML censorship and similar tactics aren't working, it seems that the next step is pushing bareback companies out of business, or at least out of California.

Note that pressure to require condoms in porn is coming directly from AIDS activist groups. That would be the folks who think that YOU are incapable of making an informed decision about your own health and that they need to regulate your sexual activity for you.

This makes me want to go to California and shoot a bareback porno. Preferably right on the front steps of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

Hmm...I'm thinking of a pretty cool rape-style vid, except instead of watching a "straight" guy learn to enjoy gay sex, the target is a condom nazi instead, who learns about the joys of barebacking over the course of the porno.

[slowfuck]

Nanny state gone mad. Apparently all bodily fluids so that would include saliva. Actors will no doubt be required to wear latex full body suits - kind of like a massive condom with arms and legs. The latex fetish guys will be pleased... but no one else with any degree of sanity. [shakes head with disbelief but fear that it will come to pass]

[Belfast-Bottom]

"such moves could force filming to leave California, causing a blow to the MULTI-BILLION porn industry that has many operations in the San Fernando Valley"

I can't see it passing. California won't want to lose that revenue stream.

[NastyRigPig]

It'll just move it to Nevada. BB porn is here to stay, I am not worried about it disappearing.

[DocThor]

They don't have the money or personnel to enforce it. People are fkucing like rabbits and anyone with a camera can capture it...smoke and mirrors.

[seaguy]

Just like the war on drugs this will be a complete failure. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation needs to stop being on thier politically motivated morality campaign again BB porn and instead do what it should be, educating people and looking for a cure.

[Deaner]

I have to wonder, is this targeted at gay porn only? Kink.com has made several comments that they will never allow bareback sex in any of their videos, yet they routinely use models who do bareback for other studios (and think NOTHING of doing bareback STR8 vids...)

I hate all-or-nothing politics. I can totally get behind the anti-circumcision ban in SF, except that it's a TOTAL ban. Same with the smoking laws. If you want to get a point across, that's fine... but leave a few loopholes here and there for people who disagree with your definition of moral superiority.

[rawTOP]

This is actually a far bigger problem for straight porn. Much bigger money involved. Still, I'd love Treasure Island to move to NYC or something...

[MascMountainMan]

This is actually a far bigger problem for straight porn. Much bigger money involved.

I think straight porn has a huge advantage over gay porn in that you can find a ready supply of models just about anywhere. Gay porn needs a reasonably large gay community to draw models from.

I have started noticing condoms turning up in straight porn a bit more lately. By no means everywhere, like it used to be in gay porn, but it is becoming more frequent. And there hasn't been an anti-condom backlash, yet (among other things, I'd definitely call gay bareback porn a backlash against the condom message).

It seems to me that this kind of regulation is likely to make crossing over between the two less likely, not just for models but also for behind the scenes people, and that porn in general will become more of a decentralized business, rather than mostly based in California. That's likely to affect quality, at least at the top end. Having these people physically located close together seems to keep the level of competition high. Think of Silicon Valley or Hollywood, which both draw people who are striving to break into their respective professions, even though either computers or movies strictly speaking could be produced anywhere in the world. That's where the talent is, so that's where the new talent goes.

Still, I'd love Treasure Island to move to NYC or something...

I'm sure we'd all love to see Treasure Island move into our backyard. The problem is that wherever you have cities with large gay communities that have traditionally been friendly to us (like SF or LA or NYC), you've also got firmly entrenched activists who are pushing this sort of thing. If you doubt that something similar could happen in NYC, ask yourself what happened to all of the bathhouses there 20 years ago.

The trick is finding a place with ready access to lots of gay men that's also fairly libertarian when it comes to regulations like this and open to "morally questionable" business activity...not necessarily an easy combination to find. I could see Las Vegas moving in that direction, and it does have the advantage of having huge numbers of tourists passing through which would allow for the models to do escort work pretty easily. It's also a reasonable trip from LA (4 hours each way by car). The question is, is there enough of a community there to draw a solid base of models willing to actually live there?

And you never know which regulations are going to trip you up. Colorado, for instance, has an extremely intrusive department of health that requires doctors to give them the names and contact information of anyone who gets an STD so they can harass the patient. So even if the business climate is relatively friendly, you may find your models targeted instead.