Nov 01 2012

LA County Measure B Would Enforce Existing Laws on Condom Use in Adult Films at No Cost to Tax Payers

Next Tuesday, voters in Los Angeles will not only be casting their vote for President of the United States, they will also be deciding on the fate of a number of issues from car insurance to condoms. For Angelinos, along with the various Statewide Propositions on the ballot is the local LA County Measure B, also known as the Safer Sex Initiative, which would require all male actors in adult films to wear condoms while filming pornographic scenes.

While city and state laws already require the use of condoms during filming, most film sets do not actively enforce the rule. Measure B would require the Los Angeles Department of Public Health to visit sets to monitor whether or not condoms were being used, and producers of adult films would need to obtain a special permit from the Health Department before they started filming.

The permit would be granted after the producers received special training about sexually transmitted diseases and paid a fee. AIDS Healthcare Foundation or AHF has contributed $1.6 million dollars to sponsor the measure. The group finds that actors in the adult film industry have a much higher incidence of sexually transmitted diseases primarily because production companies do not routinely test actors. Twenty five adult film actors have been diagnosed with HIV since 2004.

The city stands to save money if Measure B passes, as the burden of caring for sick actors falls on LA County taxpayers since most performers are given few benefits by the companies which employ them.

Opponents of the measure feel that it unfairly targets the adult film industry, claiming that actors are already being adequately tested. Industry leaders are threatening to leave the City if the Measure passes.

A $150,000 contribution was made to the No on B campaign from an adult film company based in Luxemburg. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has filed a formal complaint with the Federal Election Commission pointing out that it is illegal for contributions from foreign countries to influence US election outcomes.

GUEST: Samantha Granberry, Associate Director of Media, at AIDS Healthcare Foundation

Visit for more information.

5 responses so far

5 Responses to “LA County Measure B Would Enforce Existing Laws on Condom Use in Adult Films at No Cost to Tax Payers”

  1. Paulon 01 Nov 2012 at 11:24 am

    I was disappointed that the other side was not addressed. First of all, there was much talk about condoms, but that’s not what it requires. This is what it requires:

    (A) Provision. Where occupational exposure remains after institution of engineering and work practice controls, the employer shall provide, at no cost to the employee, appropriate personal protective equipment such as, but not limited to, GLOVES, GOWNS, LABORATORY COATS, FACE SHIELDS OR MASKS AND EYE PROTECTION, AND MOUTHPIECES, resuscitation bags, pocket masks, or other ventilation devices. Personal protective equipment will be considered “appropriate” only if it does not permit blood or [semen, vaginal fluid, etc] to pass through to or reach the employee’s work clothes, street clothes, undergarments, skin, eyes, mouth, or other mucous membranes under normal conditions of use and for the duration of time which the protective equipment will be used. Note : For fire fighters, these requirements are in addition to those specified in Sections 3401-3411, and are intended to be consistent with those requirements.

    (B) Use. The employer shall ensure that the employee uses appropriate personal protective equipment unless the employer shows that the employee temporarily and briefly declined to use personal protective equipment when, under rare and extraordinary circumstances, it was the employee’s professional judgment that in the specific instance its use would have prevented the delivery of health care or public safety services or would have posed an increased hazard to the safety of the worker or co-worker. When the employee makes this judgment, the circumstances shall be investigated and documented in order to determine whether changes can be instituted to prevent such occurences in the future. The employer shall encourage employees to report all such instances without fear of reprisal in accordance with Section 3203.

    Outside of some very weird fetish porn, that will completely put them out of business.

    Then there’s this scary bit:

    11.39.130 Health officer-enforcement.

    The county health officer may ENTER AND INSPECT ANY LOCATION suspected of conducting any activity regulated by this chapter, and, for purposes of enforcing this chapter, the county health officer may issue notices and impose fines therein and TAKE POSSESSION OF ANY SAMPLE, PHOTOGRAPH, record or other evidence, including any documents bearing upon adult film producer’s compliance with the provision of the chapter. Such inspections may be conducted as often as necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions of this chapter.

    That would mean for example, that if a couple were to make a sex tape, and the health department somehow got wind of it they could enter their home and seize that very private video if they “suspected” it might have been intended for eventual sale.

  2. That Dudeon 02 Nov 2012 at 11:22 am

    Let’s be honest about what the intent of this law is: It is to outlaw porn. Nothing more, nothing less. It is not about the health of porn stars. It is not about stopping the spread of AIDS. It is about opposition to the legal porn industry.

    Your guest is either disingenuous or naive when she said that condoms are required in Nevada brothels. There are plenty of activities of “bareback” activities available for the right price.

    Porn will simply become more of an underground activity in the U.S., and production will shift to countries that have fewer safety and health regulations, thus increasing, not decreasing, the risk to the porn actors.

  3. XXXEsqon 02 Nov 2012 at 1:24 pm

    Measure B: It’s more than just condoms!

    With all the discussion about Measure B, something rather astonishing has been overlooked. The ordinance would require performers in adult films to wear more than just condoms. It requires them to wear HazMat suits. Yes, really…

    Measure B is the Frankenstein’s Monster of Michael Weinstein, the head of the benevolent sounding AIDS Healthcare Foundation. Mr. Weinstein’s stated intent for Measure B is to force the government to require the adult entertainment industry, under penalty of criminal law, to promote what Mr. Weinstein has decided to be a preferred “safer sex” message. However, as Measure B actually requires far more, Mr. Weinstein’s actual motivation must be seriously questioned.

    A few facts:

    1) The industry already has a comprehensive and effective testing system in place. Performers are regularly tested for STDs and are not allowed to perform unless they have a recent clean test.

    2) Because of the existing testing protocol, the incidents of sexually transmitted disease are significantly lower in the adult industry than in the general population. Despite there being more than 7000 films being produced each year, there hasn’t been a single case of HIV transmitted on an adult set since 2004, when the testing protocols were instituted.

    3) The two “poster children” AHF props out as their examples of industry related exposure can’t even prove they were exposed to HIV while filming.

    4) Weinstein first bankrolled the legal takedown of the industry’s first HIV testing facility, and now spends millions of dollars promoting Measure B.

    Why would Weinstein spend the millions of dollars – assumably donated from people who actually want to prevent the spread of AIDS – on Measure B, instead of on research, outreach to at-risk communities, or providing medical treatment to those already infected?

    The answer appears in the language of the proposed ordinance. Mr. Weinstein has written the regulation in such a way that it would require far more than just the use of condoms. Measure B requires all performers to use, at a minimum, condoms, gloves, dental dams, goggles and face masks.

    Measure B requires all producers of “adult films” – including married couples who web-cam in the privacy of their own homes – to get a permit, at the cost of many thousands of dollars. To get a permit, they must also employ an “exposure control plan” that complies with California Code of Regulations Title 8, § 5193, the California workplace regulation relating to the control of hazardous substances. The statute was created to protect workers in California hospitals, medical clinics, and testing labs, but was never intended to – nor could it – apply to the making of adult films.

    Under Measure B, it would require adult film producers to provide, and to insure their employees actually use “appropriate … equipment such as, but not limited to, gloves, gowns, … face shields or masks and eye protection … mouthpieces … pocket masks, or other ventilation devices” where “reasonably anticipated skin, eye, [or] mucous membrane … contact with potentially infectious materials” such as “semen, vaginal secretions… saliva … [or] any other body fluid” might occur. You know, like kissing…

    So, if Measure B passes, it will only be legal to make adult films in Los Angeles if the performer can’t actually have any actual physical contact with each other.

    Mr. Weinstein also claims – falsely – that “not one cent of taxpayer money will be spent.” Thousands of local jobs and billions of dollars in revenue – and the resulting millions of dollars in tax revenues – are at stake. The county will get sued, and it will lose. Measure B will be found to be an unconstitutional content based restriction on speech by any reasonable court. Worse yet, as the law would violate both the state and federal Constitutions, the County will have to pay not only its own attorney’s fees, but also the attorneys fees for the adult industry litigants which may run into the millions of dollars. Guess where those dollars will come from. Not from Mr. Weinstein or the coffers of AIDS Healthcare Foundation…

    Mr. Weinstein is trying to dictate what the viewers of adult entertainment should be able to watch. He believes they are to immature, or too stupid, to differentiate between fantasy and reality. He must truly believe this, because if all the people in Los Angeles that enjoy a little porn from time to time are smart enough to actually research what Measure B requires, and then vote, Measure B will go down to defeat faster than would the sales of adult films in which all the performers are forced to wear HazMat suits.

  4. Paul O.on 05 Nov 2012 at 6:22 pm

    Why not emphasize and improve testing performers for disease rather than condoms?

  5. Larry H.on 13 Feb 2013 at 8:32 am

    It would be better just to mention that all actors are passing the health tests before participating in film.