Friday, 20 September 2013

Making porn stars wear condoms - well...duh?

Infected porn stars say the outbreak of HIV infections

shows the industry needs to get serious about condoms

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/hiv-positive-porn-stars-argue-condoms-article-1.1460438#ixzz2fR6HaOvT

Following the above controversy, a friend and I had a discussion about whether or not porn actors should be forced to wear condoms at work.  My view was that this should definitely be an industry requirement (which common sense tells me it already is, just maybe not adhered to) - and perhaps even legislated at some level.  Sure, the 'tactile pleasure', as he called it, wouldn't be as awesome, but it's better to sacrifice a bit of TP than to contract freaking HIV.

He went on about 'freedom of choice' and something about 'those who don't want to wear condoms are looked down upon by peers'....some weird shit like that... which is either:
1. something he just assumed cos lul iunno HE HAS A DICK THAT NEEDS TO BE LIBERATED FROM A HERMETIC RUBBER PRISON.
2. or something legit because he knows the porn industry like the back of his hand

Regardless, the peer pressure thing ultimately didn't make sense to me. Wouldn't producers want the actors and actresses to do it without a condom for better performances? If anything, I would have thought there would be more pressure on them to do it without protection. Feel free to rebut me on this... lel.

Anyway. The current outbreak clearly shows that despite certain health groups and organisations encouraging the use of condoms or setting a requirement for its use in pornography, and despite the growing  awareness about the dangers of contracting HIV for the last decade, porn actors and actresses (well, they can request it) are not using condoms enough. Maybe they're in reckless denial about the risk they're taking. Maybe it's just pressure from producers or co-workers.

Whatever it is - the consequences are manifestly clear.


2 comments:

  1. Why not just require mandatory regular HIV and STD testing of porn actors/actresses, and if they return a positive result then either a) give porn companies the choice to either continue with them (and make them use protection) or fire them, or b) fire them.

    Seems like a better solution than making it mandatory for everyone at all times. Best of both worlds...no?

    ReplyDelete
  2. From what I've read in the article, there are already guidelines which mandate tests every 28 days for HIV and other STDs for porn actors/actresses. They want to cut this down to 14 days, but that's barely going to change anything - if you get HIV, you get it.


    Having tests more frequently doesn't prevent people from being infected, and I think that's the point you're missing: why would you want to fire actors/actresses so they're left without their livelihoods while at the same time, automatically perpetuating a social stigma against people who contract HIV/STDs? Workers in the sex industry are already stigmatised enough and giving porn companies unfettered discretion to just fire their actors if they get HIV/STDs is really irresponsible and unfair. In the article, the actor had gotten a cut on his penis during filming, but it seems that due to pressure to continue with the scene, they ultimately went through with it and voila - HIV and STDs errbody.


    Apart from that, using a retrospective system of testing will mean 1. more expenses for the testing 2. more time wasted 3. not actually preventing people from being infected 4. actors and actresses get their lives ruined but porn companies will never need to be responsible for anything that was indeed their fault (e.g. pressuring actors to act without protection, not providing hygienic working environments, not giving actors enough information about the risks of the acts they're doing etc).


    I mean come on - I think the need to protect people, especially porn actors/actresses against HIV >>>>>>> that little bit more 'tactile pleasure', which they can get outside of their hazardous line of work.

    ReplyDelete