10 Reasons Why Gay Porn Stars Need To Be More Angry, and Scared, About AB1576

The highly controversial and poorly written “condom bill” that’s now working its way through the California legislature, known as AB 1576, has inspired a ton of reaction on the straight side of the porn industry, where condom use has been all but non-existent in the last few decades. But gay performers definitely need to pay attention and also voice their opposition to this thing, or else they risk not only loss of jobs and income, but also some serious violations of their privacy.

Just to back up, the spurious and reactionary AIDS Healthcare Foundation in L.A., which helped pass Prop B in L.A. County making condom-free porn shoots illegal, also sponsored this bill. And while, on the surface, it purports to protect workers (in this case porn performers) from potential HIV infections, it accomplishes nothing that the industry hasn’t already done for itself in terms of testing performers.

Gay models Sebastian Keys, Conner Habib, and Trenton Ducati have all been vocal on Twitter and elsewhere about their opposition to the bill, and a group of performers both gay and straight are expected to turn out in Sacramento next Wednesday, June 25, to show their opposition to the state senate’s labor committee, who’ll be deciding whether the bill moves forward.

Here is a list of reasons why they, and other models, are and should be worried about this thing. It’s only going to take 3 votes to either kill this bill in committee or let it move on to a bigger senate vote. And there’s a lot at stake.

1. It’s a solution to a problem that’s non-existent
In the last nine years there have been zero documented cases of HIV transmission on adult film sets — as you should recall, the case of those two Kink performers that was widely publicized was an off-set transmission. And where was the state, and Cal/OSHA, back at the height of the HIV/AIDS epidemic in the 1980s when porn studios were shooting bareback without acknowledging the risks of HIV transmission? We’re talking about tackling a problem 30 years too late that isn’t even a problem anymore — setting aside the example of Treasure Island Media which pretends to flout the notion of HIV safety, even though, anecdotally, they do sero-sort. Semi-monthly testing is already mandatory for all active performers. Also, Truvada is making the condom issue even more of a moot point for gay men, as long as its taken properly.

2. The bill will move the industry out of state, at least at first, and possibly overseas.
That means that a performer who comes to San Francisco for a week to shoot for five studios will probably end up doing a lot more traveling to get the same amount of work. And since budgets are already low, we’ll likely see a decrease in jobs available overall. In the wake of the passage of Measure B in L.A., a bunch of straight porn companies have already relocated to Nevada.

3. AB1576 removes the element of choice from performers.
For HIV-negative gay models, this means they will no longer be able to perform with HIV-positive models with protection should they choose too, further stigmatizing a disease the industry has long learned how to deal with.

4. The entire thing is poorly written, disease-shaming, and not well thought out.
As Habib points out, “The language of the bill also utterly ignores people who are already living with HIV. There’s no structure in place to protect HIV+ performers from being blacklisted… The bill would also require two HIV+ men to get tested and used condoms if they wanted to do a scene together. That’s lunacy.”

5. Anyone producing content on their own, and not abiding by the letter of the law, could go to jail.
The law would also criminalize any adult production that violates its tenets — so you might actually see some performers, particularly those who are involved in production in some way, or shoot a sex tape, or doing webcam work — going to jail.

6. The law would present extremely serious violations to privacy around HIV
Companies would be required to report positive test results to the state, but there’s no language addressing confidentiality in these results, and nothing preventing insurance companies from finding out results or penalizing those found to be HIV+, who were able to keep their status confidential in the past.

7. AB 1576 doesn’t even understand how the industry works.
Assembly member Isadore Hall, who helped craft the bill, seems to believe that porn performers are all employees of their respective companies, when by and large they are all independent contractors.

8. Michael Weinstein is a self-aggrandizing, panic-mongering fool.
We’ve said it before, but this asshole behind the AIDS Healthcare Foundation would have us all believe that Truvada is a sham, and all sluts should be shamed.

9. Many of your favorite porn stars will disappear from the screen, and be outed as HIV+.
Fan should all know by now that many performers on the gay side of the industry are HIV+, and they perform, safely and with condoms, with HIV-negative and other positive performers. AB1576 will essentially create a witch hunt for these performers, and out them by virtue of their sudden absence from the industry.

10. The bill is framed like an anti-porn crusade, and lots of respectable organizations have come out against it, as well as over 1,000 performers signing this petition.
If you don’t trust me, then listen to the Harvey Milk Democratic Club, the Transgender Law Center, the St. James Infirmary, the Erotic Service Providers Union, the Center for Sex and Culture, and the Adult Performers Advocacy Committee.

Sign the petition. Now. And you can take things a step further by using this form to send a message to one of the five committee members voting on the bill on Wednesday.

Previously: I HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY. . . ABOUT AB1576

75 thoughts on “10 Reasons Why Gay Porn Stars Need To Be More Angry, and Scared, About AB1576”

  1. If this whole bill weren’t such a disaster it would be funny. Congratulations to Chi Chi and the Titan guys, you’re getting your wish and making all of porn uninteresting and and allowing criminalization of adult content creators and providers to boot! Great outcomes! This is only minimally about the health of performers, it’s really about the egos of a group of people who haven’t faced the changing nature of HIV and who have staked their entire reputations and legacies on condoms. If condomless sex were the risk factor they claim it is for porn sets we would be looking at hundreds if not thousands of infected performers over the last 4 decades, not 4 maybes.

    1. I don’t think Chi Chi and Titan are to blame here, everyone in the industry is trying to survive at this point so to worry about things outside of their own business is mute anymore. The two driving forces of all this legislation from day one has been AIDS Healthcare Foundation (ie. Michael Weinstein) with the help of their hired lobbyist, Rand Martin, along with Democrat Isadore Hall who is term-limited in his current elected position and wants to go out saying he “made a difference” before running for the CA Senate.

      I’ve said this over and over and over…..the outrage all of us should share is the simple fact that one man, Michael Weinstein via AHF, has been allowed to control the entire conversation about HIV/AIDS. He says condoms are the ONLY method of HIV prevention and dismisses all others, shames the use of PrEP, refuses to put financial resources towards vaccine research, has made no effort to support once-a-month injectable PrEP research to overcome his belief that gay men aren’t capable of taking a daily pill, does little to promote education about PEP and PrEP, denied AHF employees the right to unionize, has used his position as President/CEO to engage in HIV/AIDS fear mongering to make himself some sort of deity of all things HIV/AIDS at a time when others are challenging his opinions….the list is endless. I also should ad, must be nice to have so much money at AHF that they can pay to be the official sponsor of Cleveland Pride this weekend and take out a full 2-page ad in the Cleveland LGBT newspaper at a time when there are people on waiting lists who can’t afford their meds or any other number of more important uses for AHF funding, but those things don’t push their agenda like a 2-page ad does!! Priorities!

      #removeWeinstein

  2. I think any adult who is informed and chooses to engage in sex with any other informed adult(s) has the right to choose how they are going to have sex. On film or or in their personal life. Having anything written into law just removes a choice and ultimately (in my opinion) encourages a culture of not being responsible for one’s self. I look forward to reading about this being defeated.

  3. @JJ What you are calling my “opinion” is not mere opinion, but FACT.

    FACT: In November 2012, the voters of Los Angeles County–one of the country’s major centers of porn production–approved the Safer Sex In the Adult Film Industry Act (“Measure B”). The act requires the use of condoms on all pornography productions during all vaginal and anal sex scenes filmed in Los Angeles County.

    FACT: AB 1576 is a statewide version of LA County’s Measure B.

    FACT: Nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights is there any mention of a freedom not to use a condom. In January 2013 a Federal district court ruled that making actors wear condoms during porn shoots does not violate the First Amendment.

    FACT: In the workplace, an employee’s “personal freedoms” are subject to the requirements of his employer. The porn set is a workplace. If the producer says you will wear a condom, then you WILL wear a condom. So let’s not indulge in the fantasy that wearing a condom on the set of a porn shoot is a personal freedom.

    On the other, your statements are OPINIONS, not FACTS:

    YOUR OPINION: “I do believe that condoms should be used in porn but also that it is not my place to strip away the performers/studios from making the choice to use them or not.”

    YOUR OPINION: “It may be your opinion that condom use is not a freedom of choice but that doesn’t mean you get to say that is everyones opinion and make laws accordingly.” That is not my opinion, but a FACT that in the workplace one does not have the same freedoms that one has in the privacy of one’s home. The workplace is subject to the health and safety regulations of the workplace. It is also a FACT, not an opinion, that existing health and safety regulation ALREADY require the use of condoms.

    1. “FACT: Nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights is there any mention of a freedom not to use a condom. In January 2013 a Federal district court ruled that making actors wear condoms during porn shoots does not violate the First Amendment.”

      That is your interpretation of the law and that judges interpretation, not fact. You can repeat it over and over again but it does not make it fact. Hell the argument you use is the same that conservatives make against same sex marriage well no exact mention of it etc means it’s not protected.

      “FACT: In the workplace, an employee’s “personal freedoms” are subject to the requirements of his employer. The porn set is a workplace. If the producer says you will wear a condom, then you WILL wear a condom. So let’s not indulge in the fantasy that wearing a condom on the set of a porn shoot is a personal freedom.”

      Not fact your opinion, if this was a case of someone being told to remove a muslim head scarf or a star of david you wouldn’t be saying it’s the work places right to make them remove it.

      “YOUR OPINION”
      Like I clearly said my opinion(never tried to say otherwise) and most of what you say is your opinion/interpretation of the bill or right etc. So how about you stop trying to step on everyone else’s rights/opinions who does see things 100% the same as you.

      1. You can repeat over again your simplistic assertion that a performer has the right not to wear a condom on a porn set, but that doesn’t make it so.

        Your assertion is easily disproved. If a porn producer tells a performer he must wear a condom, and he refuses, he can be fired.

        1. One love how you ignored my second reply to your facts about measure b.
          Two I said it is the studio(say it with me STUDIO) and performers right to make that choice.

          1. 1) “love how you ignored my second reply to your facts about measure b.”

            I will reply now so you won’t feel ignored.

            FACT: Judge Pregerson’s ruling on Measure B declared unequivocally that making actors wear condoms during porn shoots does not violate the First Amendment.

            2) “I said it is the studio(say it with me STUDIO) and performers right to make that choice.”

            It is merely your OPINION that such a right exists.

            FACT: There is no law or ruling that upholds your opinion that such a right exists.
            FACT: In November 2012 a majority of the voters in LA County approved the county’s Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act (“Measure B”). The Act mandates the use of condoms on all on all pornography productions during all vaginal and anal sex scenes filmed in the county.
            FACT: Studios AND performers (say it with me, “Studios AND performers”), do NOT have the right to choose not to use condoms in pornography productions during vaginal and anal sex scenes filmed in the county.

          2. Still ignoring Jay

            The judge’s job is to interpret the laws and the constitution.

            Example Roe V Wade, The majority of the Judge interpreted abortion as a protected freedom under the constitution. Two Judges Byron White and William Rehnquist did not.

            So Dean D. Pregerson’s mixed ruling stating that measure b did not violate first adamant rights was his interpretation of the law not fact of law. He also stated that enforcing such law did raise constitutional freedom questions. Meaning it is not as clear cut as you would like it to be.

            Pregerson wrote, “Given that adult filming could occur almost anywhere, Measure B would seem to authorize a health officer to enter and search any part of a private home in the middle of the night, because he suspects violations are occurring. This is unconstitutional because it is akin to a general warrant.”

            So he pretty much ruled that it was his interpretation of the law that it was legal but not enforceable. So next time state all the case info not just the parts you agree with.

            Further More the verdict was appealed and is currently awaiting verdict. These judge could very well have a different view of the law.

    2. The judge’s job is to interpret the laws and the constitution.

      Example Roe V Wade, The majority of the Judge interpreted abortion as a protected freedom under the constitution. Two Judges Byron White and William Rehnquist did not.

      So Dean D. Pregerson’s mixed ruling stating that measure b did not violate first adamant rights was his interpretation of the law not fact of law. He also stated that enforcing such law did raise constitutional freedom questions. Meaning it is not as clear cut as you would like it to be.

      Pregerson wrote, “Given that adult filming could occur almost anywhere, Measure B would seem to authorize a health officer to enter and search any part of a private home in the middle of the night, because he suspects violations are occurring. This is unconstitutional because it is akin to a general warrant.”

      So he pretty much ruled that it was his interpretation of the law that it was legal but not enforceable. So next time state all the case info not just the parts you agree with.

      Further More the verdict was appealed and is currently awaiting verdict. These judge could very well have a different view of the law.

  4. A great article on AVN today that explains in more detail why many workers in the adult entertainment industry are against this bill. For everyone posting comments here in support of condoms in porn, you need to understand what these actresses are saying; porn sex is NOT the same sex we experience in our personal lives. As well, this legislation was written without any input or feedback from producers or performers in the industry which is unheard of when legislation is written. It simply must be withdrawn and re-written in a way that ALL parties have input.

    http://business.avn.com/articles/legal/Adult-Actresses-Deliver-Petitions-to-Isadore-Hall-Office-UPDATED-564968.html

    1. I think that condomless heterosexual porn is EXTREMELY dangerous for the straight community. I know so many straight people that are totally misinformed about AIDS/HIV as well as STD’s as they feel they do not need to know. There is a tacit feeling of safety in the hetero world that is just incorrect. So many people assume they are safe, when this is not the case at all. Condom use needs to be stressed in heterosexual relations just as much as in the homosexual relations and thus also in heterosexual porn. I cannot claim to be familiar with heterosexual pornography, since I only review gay porn, but there must be a way to use condoms in it. If need be, the condoms can be replaced after short bouts of very rough sex to avoid micro-tears.

      Again, I feel that this bill is about employee safety, not choice. I cannot just go to my job and do as I choose, since there are safety rules to be followed. It is life-threatening to expose oneself to blood borne pathogens; so when working with them I wear gloves and a lab coat as per OSHA requirements. It is just as life-threatening to have sex with another adult who may be infected with HIV or STD’s. Thus on a working porn set, models must wear condoms. This is clear and simple logic to me and about employee safety, NOT CHOICE.

      1. Sue, I know you are coming from a place of love and concern BUT you can’t make sex on film equate to OSHA standards! If that is what people are seeking via legislation then that ultimately means an end to cum shots anywhere on the body, no oral sex without condoms or dental dams, no rimming without dental damns, no watersports, and god knows some doctor somewhere will protest the atrocities to the body from fisting putting that to an end….next comes all the wackos who say anal sex leads to leaky butt syndrome and anal sex will be banned! It sounds crazy and humorous but all of these are potential realities if we really want to regulate porn sex under an OSHA mentality.

        Let the actors and studios work this out, not the government.

        1. Porn studios will have to follow not strict OSHA type standards, but this bill, in that: studies have shown that HIV transmission from oral sex is nil if the performer swallows cum or spits it out; models can shower/wash after scenes removing fluids from skin and eyes; and urine does not contain HIV. This is even true in the lab; if one is exposed to a blood borne pathogen, it can be washed off.

          This bill is very brief and not written in stone. Bills can be amended if needed.

          Also, the industry has had decades to regulate itself and hasn’t in this regard.

          As to the concern for privacy, if some studios are testing now, why such concern for the mandated testing? I realize that the government would have access to the results, but the conern I heard was about blacklisting by studios.

  5. Dean is correct, the industry will go elsewhere because the consumer demands/dictates what is produced visually in porn, whether gay or straight. Having worked in adult distribution, on the hetero side of the industry one category of top selling porn is all the anal sex titles that have flooded the market over the past decade and the nature of it is to be non-condom because hetero men, not unlike gay men, want to see sperm shot in holes, in mouths, or on faces. Of course on the gay side of the biz we see non-condom porn as the biggest sellers, again because of what the consumer is demanding. No amount of legislation will change the viewing habits of the porn consumer, all it will do is drive jobs out-of-state and/or limit the amount of work available to actors….then if AHF chooses to go after adult production companies in other states, as they have indicated they are going to do, it will drive the industry out of the country resulting in even more job losses here.

    If everyone wants to be supportive of something, you should be fighting for AHF to put its resources towards financing vaccine research, injectable PrEP research, greater education of PrEP/PEP, etc. which they blatantly are unwilling to do. Why? Because the less people who are HIV positive leads to less income and jobs for AHF, their business model is based solely on more people being infected, not finding a cure. That is the real travesty here that everyone should be in an uproar over, not laws about condoms in porn. #removeWeinstein

    1. So Erik to be frank, your view is driven by profits; give the customer what the customer wants to see and make mucho bucks in the process. It has nothing to do with the health and safety of the models or their concerns as employees which this bill would ensure. Well, at least we see what side you are on. Profits instead of safety; the typical industry standpoint.

      BTW – I used to work for big pharma and finding a cure/vaccine for AIDS was a huge goal. The problem is that HIV is constantly changing thus becoming resistant to therapies. [Hence we see a multi-drig approach to treatment.] A cure is a very long way off so far as I know and creating a vaccine presents challenges of its own. AHF is not the only group focused on HIV issues. Why lay all of this at their feet? Just because they support a bill you dislike? That is really unfair to them.

      One of the goals in fighting HIV is zero new infection rates. That is also a laudable and perhaps more achievable goal. A place to make strides in this regard is requiring condoms in porn. I see it as a problem that viewers prefer condomless porn because it inidicates that they might partake in unsafe sex themselves, since they enjoy watching it. It is true that this might be a slim minority of viewers, but it leaves room for improvement as far as achieving zero infection rates to make condomless porn largely unavailable.

      1. Sue, wait one minute. NEVER have I said that I am in favor of profits over safety. Never. I love the people who work in the adult entertainment industry just as much as you do; I want them to be healthy, happy and have successful careers BUT this can happen when all voices are heard, not just a few.

        What I know about AB1576 is the industry (performers, producers, company owners) had absolutely NO voice in this legislation whatsoever, NONE. Why??? There are companies that are condom-only on both sides of the industry, shouldn’t they have been asked what works and doesn’t work in order to produce an effective piece of legislation? That would have been the first place I would have gone to for information, to ask questions, and to understand the realities of producing sex on film from the perspective of a performer or producer. I also would have gone to the non-condom producers to get their feedback on what works and what doesn’t. What about HIV positive performers, why did they not have a voice in this legislation and how it may affect their careers? Do they not matter or have a right to be a performer in the sex industry? Why were only the wants and needs of AHF realized in this legislation? When did government suddenly know more about sex than actual sex employees?!?!

        I also am a realist, having worked for a adult distribution company I know what sells and what doesn’t. Condom-only porn is simply not as popular as non-condom porn, whether it be the str8 or gay side of the industry. That is reality, legislation will NOT change what the consumer demands or watches. What this legislation will do is drive companies out of business, and actors out of work, while “tube” videos flourish along with European porn producers; the amateurs/Europeans do not use condoms so the legislation is already defeated in its purpose….is AHF going to go after them next? Non-condom porn isn’t going away, that is reality and the nature of the business.

        Let’s not forget too, performers already have a choice to work in condom-only productions on both sides of the industry. Every day performers have a choice to make in what work they will or will not accept. Performers are their own boss, being your own boss comes with a personal responsibility to make the correct decisions the protect “your business” however one sees fit. Many performers are strict condom-only businesses, other performers are non-condom businesses; I feel it is every adults right to make those choices for themselves/their business.

        I know this legislation will pass, as bad as it is, and we will start to see the fallout because of it.

        1. I didn’t say that you “said” profits over safety, your choice for barebacking proves my point no matter how you feel about the issue.

          The industry has had decades to have input but hasn’t.

          Again, it is not a “CHOICE” for models, the porn studio is a workplace. This is another workplace safety issue.

          I would like to thank THE SWORD for printing all of the opposition comments in their entirety. I think this is very helpful for the debate.

          1. Just to be clear, my issue against AB1576 is not about my personal preference of non-condom sex over condom sex. I watch both and enjoy movies from companies such as Hot House or Raging Stallion as much as I do from Dark Alley or Dickwadd. As a consumer, I want to have a choice.

  6. This bill is stupid. People are NOT going to just accept condom porn. LOL no, they won’t. They’ll simply look elsewhere for it, and those studios will move production to another state. If they don’t, and continue to make AB1576 porn in all its terrible shittiness, they’ll go out of business.

    1. Ignorant bullshit.

      Existing California and federal regulations already require the use of condoms. The bill would enforce those regulations.

      For more than a decade after the advent of AIDS, virtually all gay porn was condom only; “safe sex” warnings were ubiquitous and “safe sex” meant using condoms.

      Falcon Studios in California continues to require condoms, as do several other studios in California. Randy Blue and other studios in Los Angeles county operate successfully under the county’s “Measure B,” which requires the use of condoms.

  7. I wasnt sure if we studied that issue in college coz I was educated at a Catholic University maybe in Biology class. And yeah they told us then that AIDS was brought by gay man who had sex with male monkey. Lol I think Im happy that being a virgin at 33 make me safe and healthy. What bothers me is the loneliness sometimes.

    1. “Catholic University maybe in Biology class”

      Pretty much guaranties half of what your learned is false. Especially about how aids came to exist, maybe try opening an real science based book once an a while.

      The exact origin of HIV is unknown, most scientist believe it originated in primates and was transferred over to man when they ate the infected primate.

    2. lol Jordi Lim you can change your screen name all you want at this point we can tell it’s you.

      And suicide I hear is a lovely cure for inside loneliness. You should try it sometime.

      1. @sxg go to hell bully I felt alone sometimes not everytime. What if I changed my name to “ALIBATA” it’s our old way of writings before the Spanish came, dont wanna use my twitter here. What’s your problem Grandpa?

        1. Grandpa? I’m actually younger than you. And why don’t you want to use your real twitter name? Is it because people will find out you are the same douchebag along with the rest of your cronies harassing guys in gay porn for their sexuality? Here’s a few of your friends

          https://twitter.com/TrisWang



          and of course you https://twitter.com/jordi_lim

          give these guys a round of applause people, they’re fighting the good fight by telling all the g4p/bi/rumored not-gay pornstars to go to straight porn!

          1. Omg @sxg you are stalking on us? We were not harrasing them I didnt know them but we have a common goal to bring back the gay porn to real gay model and gay men as well. Was that hurting you well I thought so coz u’re a g4pay advocate.

      2. Sxg advocating for another gay man to commit suicide. Your mother raised a fine example of a human being! You make me ashamed to be human!

  8. Does anyone have a fucking clue what it means to be HIV positive, with a suppressed viral load, and undetectable?!?! Do people really think on gay bareback porn sets guys are positive and not on meds?! Wake up and get a clue!

    Recent scientific studies have shown that infection does not occur when a HIV positive partner (undetectable) has sex with a negative partner, there is no “re-infection,” and nobody is spreading HIV on bareback porn sets when the men having bareback sex are already HIV positive and on medication!!!

    In a weird way this whole debate has forced me to understand how truly uneducated people are about sex, sexuality, and HIV/AIDS in 2014. It is incredibly sad.

    1. There is too little data at present to be certain that there is a 0% transmission risk. It is estimated to be near 1:100,000. However there is no rule or oversight by the studios that mandates that performers be on medication or be undetectable. In fact the studios I worked with dont do any sort of HIV testing for people who have HIV. No requirement to prove they are compliant with their meds, that they are undetectable, or that they are even on meds to begin with.

      Talking about how great it is to be undetectable is all fine and dandy but you can’t assume that people are undetectable unless there’s some evidence to back up that claim.

      1. All of the recent studies coming out back up this claim, which is why so many non-AHF HIV/AIDS organizations are not only pushing for more testing and immediate introduction of anti-retrovirals but also are coming out in SUPPORT of PrEP which AHF refuses to do along with refusing to invest the millions they receive in income to put towards vaccine research or monthly injectable PrEP research. I have done enough of my own investigation on all of the controversies out there associated with AHF, including the legislation this article is about, to know that if AHF is behind something or in support of something, we should all do the opposite. #removeWeinstein

  9. GOD DAMNIT, are many of you that dimwitted?? Many jobs are going to be lost and leave California. Forget performers for a whole think about the people working behind the camera. The editors, marketing people, web site designers all these people will be out of jobs unless they want to be uprooted and leave or Vegas. So many jobs lost and some of these people have their life here and families. Falcon is already leaving San Fran thanks to this bill. It’s sad but many of you on here apparently don’t do your research or read up. This is not just a “condom bill”.

    1. The bill hasn’t even passed yet! What evidence do you have that “Falcon is already leaving San Fran thanks to this bill?”

      And even if it did pass, explain how it would impact a studio like Falcon that already uses condoms?

    2. The only people opposed to this bill are the following:

      1. Producers of bareback videos who want to continue making profits by producing bareback videos.
      2. Porn performers who want to continue getting paid to do bareback videos.
      3. Consumers of bareback videos who want bareback video production to continue.
      4. People who haven’t read AB 1576 and naively assume that the panic-mongering propaganda claims against the bill are true.
      5. People who think not wearing a condom while making porn is a freedom granted by Constitution.
      6. People not aware that existing California state and federal workplace safety regulations already require the use of condoms in the workplace to prevent or minimize exposure to pathogens.

      1. I’m just going to make one statement that will probably piss a lot of you guys off: Have you noticed that about 90% of gay porn performers from the ’80’s and ’90’s are dead today? Do what you want! You are adults!

  10. Straight porn absolutely has many HIV Positive models they are usually doing a gangbang and orgy with 10+ guy and girl without protection. Christian Wilde had sex in straight porn without condom.

    1. Completely FALSE
      Of the decades of HIV, there have only been tiny number of str8 performers that have caught HIV from a porn shoot. The studios are very active in testing. Yes a few have altered tests and spread HIV. Consider gay porn where openly HIV performers have sex with others with NO protection. You cant name ANY str8 performers or str8 studios that do this. Gay porn has numerous studios that do this. This is where the anger and argument belongs. Others still want to avoid this reason for the legislation in the first place.

  11. Well in my perception the HIV positive model shouldnt allowed to perform with negative model it’s risky. Everyone can get AIDS even on oral sex. Honestly I never touched a condom in real life just shy to buy it in stores. I have so many things in mind but dont know how to translate those in English. :@

    1. The proposed legislation would not prohibit an HIV+ person from performing with an HIV- person. What it would require is that porn producers, in their role as employers, implement workplace health and safety requirements that are already defined under existing California state law and federal law.

      1. Correction to my previous post: I suggest you educate yourself by actually reading the bill BEFORE declaring other people uneducated.

  12. 1. “…zero reports of HIV transmission on adult film sets.”

    Zero reports of transmission on adult film sets doesn’t prove zero incidents of transmission on adult film sets. In many cases, people that get infected don’t know where they got it.

    “Truvada is making the condom issue even more of a moot point for gay men, as long as its taken properly.”

    According to the TRUVADA manufacturer, TRUVADA does not cure HIV-1 infection or AIDS; can cause serious side effects; just taking TRUVADA may not keep you from getting HIV-1; if you have HIV-1 and take only TRUVADA, your HIV-1 may become harder to treat.

    2. “The bill will move the industry out of state, at least at first, and possibly overseas. That means that a performer who comes to San Francisco for a week to shoot for five studios will probably end up doing a lot more traveling to get the same amount of work. And since budgets are already low, we’ll likely see a decrease in jobs available overall. In the wake of the passage of Measure B in L.A., a bunch of straight porn companies have already relocated to Nevada.”

    Randy Blue already operates under “Measure B” in LA County. SeanCody shoots in San Diego, CA and for years has required its performers be tested and disclose the test results to prospective scene partners.

    Jarec Wentworth already has to fly out to NYC monthly or bimonthly to shoot for MEN in NYC. The studio pays for his transportation and housing.

    The gay porn studios exist to make a profit, not to provide a livelihood to performers. Few performers make a living from this. And for most performers, their “career” in porn is over before 30.

    3. “AB1576 removes the element of choice from performers.”

    On a studio set, there is no democracy and there are no “stars.” The performer does as he is told or he is shown the door. The studio calls the shots, not the performer.

    4. “The entire thing is poorly written, disease-shaming, and not well thought out…There’s no structure in place to protect HIV+ performers from being blacklisted…”

    Performers are already blacklisted, for various reasons. No studio has to hire you. A studio can decline to hire you if they simply don’t like your looks.

    5. “Anyone producing content on their own, and not abiding by the letter of the law, could go to jail. ”

    Highly unlikely.

    6. The law would present extremely serious violations to privacy around HIV…Companies would be required to report positive test results to the state, … and nothing preventing insurance companies from finding out results or penalizing those found to be HIV+, who were able to keep their status confidential in the past.”

    Under existing laws, certain infectious disease reporting is already required.

    Under the Affordable Act Act, you can’t be denied coverage or charged a higher premium for a preexisting condition.
    California already has laws that give even stronger consumer protection than the Affordable Act Act.

    7. “AB 1576 doesn’t even understand how the industry works…Assembly member Isadore Hall, who helped craft the bill, seems to believe that porn performers are all employees of their respective companies, when by and large they are all independent contractors.”

    In many ways, performers on a porn studio set are more like employees than independent contractors. E.g., they work under the close supervision and direction of the studio, at a location and times designated by the studio, and using equipment (clothing, toys, etc.) provided by the studio. Performers must also abide by the studio policies with regard to testing, disclosure of test results, use of condoms, etc.

    8. “Michael Weinstein is a self-aggrandizing, panic-mongering fool…”

    Blah, blah, blah…

    9. “Many of your favorite porn stars will disappear from the screen, and be outed as HIV+…Fan should all know by now that many performers on the gay side of the industry are HIV+, and they perform, safely and with condoms, with HIV-negative and other positive performers. AB1576 will essentially create a witch hunt for these performers, and out them by virtue of their sudden absence from the industry.”

    Talk about “panic-mongering.” The bill if passed only applies to California. Many studios already operate in other states. HIV+ performers can work for those studios.

      1. Falcon already uses condoms.

        Why would Falcon leave because of bill that hasn’t passed?

        Explain how this bill if passed would change the Falcon current production and hiring practices.

  13. Such a BS bill authored by bigots.
    If it passes all it will do is push out all the porn studios in CA and send them to Nevada.
    Guess not a tax money is equal in CA

  14. Lets get something straight(no pun) right now, I am very vocal about using protection especially when I see other 20 somethings not using it but forcing people(even porn performers) crosses a big line. Whether or not a studio or performer chooses to use a condom should be up to them as long as testing has been done and shared with all parties involved. Stripping away that choice is stripping away freedom plane and simple. Whats next telling the average joe he has to use a condom.

    1. After reading the bill and doing a lot of research i’m torn because I can see the bill is truly aimed to protect performers which is a good thing and should already be done(in some case it is, some it’s not) but on the other hand it’s a slippery slop between protecting and stripping away individual performers rights.

      They should have focused only on the testing and mandatory condom use for positive performers, then this bill would be a lot less controversial.

      1. There are other STDs besides HIV that condoms protect against. You can be HIV- and still have an STD (e.g., hepatitis, herpes, etc.). The bill does not say STD-infected performers cannot perform with an uninfected performers. This is not bill is not about anyone’s “rights.” No one has the right to disregard health and safety regulations in the workplace, whether that workplace be an industrial environment or a studio set where porn is being filmed. The bill in only “controversial” to

        1. Producers of bareback videos who want to continue making profits by producing bareback videos.
        2. Porn performers who want to continue getting paid to do bareback videos.
        3. Consumers of bareback videos who want bareback video production to continue.
        4. People who haven’t read AB 1576 and naively assume that the panic-mongering propaganda claims against the bill are true.
        5. People who think not wearing a condom while making porn is a freedom granted by Constitution.
        6. People not aware that existing California state and federal workplace safety regulations already require the use of condoms to prevent or minimize exposure to pathogens.

        1. I should have mention other STI’s my mistake. I get what your saying but the choice of wether or not to use a condom is a personal freedom, this bill may be aimed at porn now but what would you say if it was aimed at everyone?

          1. Whether you use a condom off the set of a porn shoot may be a matter of personal choice.

            But on the set, you are in the workplace, and in the workplace one’s personal choices are subordinate to health and safety regulations of the workplace, which regulations ALREADY require the use of a condoms during vaginal and anal sex.

            There can be no question that the bill is “aimed at porn.” The bill gives teeth to the existing California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 by clarifying that employers and employees engaged in the production of adult film are subject to the act and by criminalizing a violation of the act under certain circumstances.

            The following is the California LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST of the bill:
            AB 1576, as introduced, [by Assembly Member Hall]. Occupational safety and health: adult films.
            The California Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1973 establishes certain safety and other responsibilities of employers and employees. Violations of the act under certain circumstances are a crime.
            This bill would require an employer engaged in the production of an adult film to adopt prescribed practices and procedures to protect employees from exposure to, and infection by, sexually transmitted diseases, including engineering and work practice controls, an exposure control plan, hepatitis B vaccinations, medical monitoring, and information and training on health and safety. The bill would define terms for those purposes. Because a violation of the act would be a crime under certain circumstances, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime.

          2. In November 2012, the voters of Los Angeles County–one of the country’s major centers of porn production–approved the Safer Sex In the Adult Film Industry Act (“Measure B”). The act requires the use of condoms on all pornography productions during all vaginal and anal sex scenes filmed in Los Angeles County.

            AB 1576 is a statewide version of LA County’s Measure B.

            Nowhere in the Constitution or Bill of Rights is there any mention of a freedom not to use a condom. In January 2013 a Federal district court ruled that making actors wear condoms during porn shoots does not violate the First Amendment.

            In the workplace, an employee’s “personal freedoms” are subject to the requirements of his employer. The porn set is a workplace. If the producer says you will wear a condom, then you WILL wear a condom. So let’s not indulge in the fantasy that wearing a condom on the set of a porn shoot is a personal freedom.

          3. That is your opinion Jay, not mine and not others. Stop trying to force your opinions on other!

            Not that it is any of your business but I do believe that condoms should be used in porn but also that it is not my place to strip away the performers/studios from making the choice to use them or not. It may be your opinion that condom use is not a freedom of choice but that doesn’t mean you get to say that is everyones opinion and make laws accordingly.

  15. 1. This is simply not true. As this past year there were 4 cases where a transmission was suspected on set. We may not know for absolute certainty if it did or did not, however there remains the question.

    I worked in the adult industry for 2 years. 20+ scenes. I can definitively say that there is NO BI-MONTHLY TESTING REQUIREMENT. I had many shoots where I was not tested at all beforehand for anything.

    Truvada is NOT perfect, nor is it provided by the employer to the models. Until this happens it’s a moot point.

    2. So what? If an industry cant abide by the safety regulations they should be run out of town, and run out of the next town, so on and so forth until no one will take them.

    3. Nowhere in the legislation does it prevent serodiscordant scene partners. It only states that everyone must be tested.

    4. No it’s not. Did you even look at it? All it says is condoms must be used for anal and vaginal sex, and HIV (and other testing) must be done not more than 14 days before the scene. It’s pretty concise, being only 41 lines long.

    I also don’t see what’s wrong with 2 HIV+ models using a condom when together.

    5. Yes, it makes it clear that violating this is a CRIMINAL offense. So ANYONE who violates it may be arrested. If you are to produce adult content you should familiarize yourself with the legislation. Ignorance of the law is rarely if ever considered a legitimate defense.

    6. The legislation does not say the test results have to be disclosed to anyone. It merely says that the model must consent to disclosure that they TOOK AN HIV TEST, AND THAT THE TEST WAS PAID FOR BY THE EMPLOYER. Nowhere does it say anything about disclosing the results of that testing to anyone. Further the comment about insurance companies is completely unfounded as the records are not shared.

    7. It doesn’t matter if they understand how the industry works, under both federal and state (labor) law almost everyone who performs in the adult industry is technically an employee.

    8. Irrelevant to the facts.

    9. See 3 and 6.

    10. The bill merely says that: As part of the exposure control plan, (it clarifies that) condoms must be used and that testing must be done and paid for by the employer.

    Did you even read the bill? It’s 41 lines long, it doesn’t take that long. You should probably look at it.

    On a side note, it’s already a legal requirement for condoms to be used. It’s also a legal requirement for employers to evaluate exposure to OPIM and offer PEP at the employers expense. This does not occur either.
    See California Title 8 Section 5193 (excerpts from subsection d).
    “General. Universal precautions shall be observed to prevent contact with blood or OPIM”
    “Engineering and work practice controls shall be used to eliminate or minimize employee exposure.”
    “All procedures involving blood or OPIM shall be performed in such a manner as to minimize splashing, spraying, spattering, and generation of droplets of these substances.”

    According to OSHA a condom is a necessary element of protection in an effective Exposure Control Program.

    1. Thank you for your much needed corrective reply to the false and misleading claims of the “panic-mongering” blog.

    2. Good points… sure but you did NOT answer BIGGEST reason this legislation was proposed. Stop glossing over the issue with condoms and HIV performers wearing condoms. That is ok and will continue to be ok. Why did you NOT mention the countless gay porn companies who do not test, do not let performers wear condoms, and hire people without knowing their status and let them work with other people. Hmmmmm, please address this. These ridiculous companies have ruined it for everyone. And until people call them out this is what you will continue to get. No witch hunts. You want to put apples and oranges together. Nothing changes with companies that require condom use. There are performers with full blown AIDS wearing condoms in gay porn today. Have you seen the performers lately? So the slippery slope argument is pretty silly. The HIV promoters are against this legislation because it wont allow them to push it down anyone’s throat anymore. Gee, I remember a time when performers, studios, and directors all spoke for safe sex. Now, no one will mention it and look the other way when studios put lives at risk.

  16. #removeWeinstein

    All gay men should be aware of this issue, on top of the anti-PrEP issue, brought to us by Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation. There is a very powerful and harmful undercurrent out there of anti-sex mentality at a time when HIV has never been better understand, medicine has never worked better, and we now have medicine to prevent infection when taken correctly! On the near horizon is a once-a-month injectable PrEP treatment and beyond that potential vaccine treatment to prevent HIV infection….ironically BOTH of which Michael Weinstein/AHF do NOT support and do NOT invest their millions of dollars to further research on. This insanity must end, and it starts by DEFEATING this legislation in California!!!

  17. As much as people are focusing on HIV, what about the other STD’s performers are getting. The CDC just came out with a study on adult performers and STD’s and it didn’t look good. Hepatitis, herpes, and HPV are no walks in the park. Also, in straight porn extreme sex acts are quickly becoming the norm. The story about rosebuding on Vice.com doesn’t exactly help porn’s cause. Neither does the CDC’s findings that of the group they sampled 25% of the talent did scenes that they wound up not getting paid for. Nor do the stories of talent getting torn anally and having to undergo surgery after doing a anal gang bang or double penetration scene.

    The people who are trying to defeat AB1576 haven’t been very effective in doing so. With the self proclaimed fact that porn is a “multi billion dollar industry”, the adult industries own trade group raised very little money to fight the bill.

  18. #1 reason to pass this legislation….stopping the HIV infection and re-infection constantly happening on gay bareback porn sets. Str8 porn would never allow HIV positive performers to have sex without protection. NEVER. So why is it commonly accepted in gay porn? Are gay people worth less than str8s? Is HIV a right of passage for every gay male? The legislation correctly casts out the companies who don’t care about the spread of HIV.

    1. THERE HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTELY ZERO (YES, ZERO) HIV INFECTIONS ON ANY SET OF ANY PORN MOVIE AT ANY TIME. THIS IS A NON-PROBLEM. MR. HALL (BILL SPONSOR) IS DEEP IN THE POCKETS OF THE MISGUIDED MICHAEL WEINSTEIN AND THE AIDS HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION. BOTH ARE TRYING TO PERPETUATE THE GAY FEAR-MONGERING THAT “HIV PREVENTION” ALLOWS. #removeWeinstein

    2. Luke wrote: #1 reason to pass this legislation….stopping the HIV infection and re-infection constantly happening on gay bareback porn sets. Str8 porn would never allow HIV positive performers to have sex without protection. NEVER. So why is it commonly accepted in gay porn? Are gay people worth less than str8s? Is HIV a right of passage for every gay male? The legislation correctly casts out the companies who don’t care about the spread of HIV.

      Gay porn sites what use bareback porn performers check the status of their performers. The performers who test positive know this and do not hide their results from their prospective partners. Who are you to take someone’s Freedom of Choice from them? Do you take into account that these men who are infected may be undetectable for viral load counts? In essence, while not negative, are a very low risk of transmission passers? And again, the men who CHOOSE to be part of the industry may have a fantasy to be intimate with the partner they are paired with. They know the risk. If a bill like this is passed, then it will force businesses to go outside the state and eventually, outside the country to complete the work that there is a DEMAND FOR. Now get off your soap boxes, let me welcome you to the twenty first century, and worry about your own HIV status.

      1. There have been at least 3 or 4 str8 and 1 gay (UK) well publicized, well documented, factual on-set transmissions. There are likely many, many more, particularly on the gay side of the industry, but there’s simply no way to know if a positive performer was infected in their personal life, their escort work, or an on-set performance.

        I don’t support the wording of this bill, but I urge you to learn YOUR facts before attempting to speak with any authority.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 50 MB. You can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Scroll to Top