ABCNEWS
Los Angeles residents may soon vote on whether condom use should be mandatory for those who work in the City of Angel’s prolific porn industry.

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation, an organization that spearheaded the proposal, collected more than 70,000 signatures, which were certified by the city clerk Tuesday. The number of signatures is far more than the 41,000 needed to have the measure considered for city voting.

Under current law, porn stars must test negative for HIV and other STDs within 30 days of filming. Many argue that even the current law should be modified because HIV often does not show up in tests until months after a person contracts the virus.

“There are thousands of STDs in this industry,” Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, told Reuters. “It’s the ick factor. They don’t want to deal with this because it’s sex, and because it’s porn.”

Many in the adult entertainment industry argue that mandatory condom use would destroy the fantasy associated with pornography.

While L.A. residents would vote on the issue during the presidential primary in June, the Los Angeles Times reported that the proposal still faced legal challenges.

City Attorney Carmen Trutanich filed court documents earlier this month that said the state, not the city, had the only legal authority to impose condom use on porn sets.

But Ellen Widess, head of the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, said the proposal is a legal possibility.

In a news release on the AIDS Healthcare Foundation website, Widess said: “We remain convinced that the City of Los Angeles is not pre-empted by Cal/OSHA from asserting its authority to protect the health of employees and others, including volunteers, who may be exposed to health hazards in L.A.’s adult film industry. We believe that cities and counties can regulate under their police power unless specifically restricted by something else, and our blood-borne pathogen standard does not provide that restriction.”

Los Angeles Times

Adult film performers would be required to use condoms to obtain Los Angeles city film permits under a measure local AIDS activists hope to put on the city’s June 2012 ballot, activists announced Monday.

Activists must submit a petition with at least 41,138 qualifying signatures (15% of all votes cast in the last mayoral election) by Dec. 23 in order to place the measure on the June ballot, city election officials said. If they succeed, it will be the first time the issue — which has been litigated and disputed during state regulatory meetings — has come before L.A. voters.

The Times discussed the petition drive with three leading proponents Monday: Michael Weinstein, president of the Los Angeles-based nonprofit AIDS Healthcare Foundation, and former porn performers-turned-activists Derrick Burts and Darren James, who both contracted HIV while working in adult films.

Q: Why do you think we need a ballot measure requiring condom use by adult performers as a condition of adult film permits in Los Angeles?

Weinstein: It’s fair to protect performers the same way we protect workers in non-porn films and other workplaces. There’s been a lot of squabbling about whose responsibility it is to enforce these laws. It’s our belief that the city, the county, the state and the federal government have different jurisdictions as it relates to this. The county department of public health is responsible for controlling disease in the community, and the city has the ability to control zoning and issuing permits.

Q: What are the risks of not mandating condoms in porn now?

Burts: My first month I came up with three STDs in a short period of time. I have herpes and that’s something I have forever. It’s not just HIV. My agent told me, when I told him I had herpes, “Well, you might as well continue doing porn, because everybody has it.” That’s the mindset. They don’t care about the safety of performers.

James: It’s just business as usual. When I tell people my story, they always say “You mean you don’t use condoms?” We think by using a test you’re covered, but that’s false. That’s after the fact. It’s just more stuff that’s exposed about how the industry is portrayed. It’s just an open gun waiting to go off for the next person. A lot of people are left in the dark about what goes on in this industry.

Q: Have you tried to gather signatures before in Los Angeles for similar ballot measures?

Weinstein: This is the first time. We were naïve enough to believe the government has to do the work of protecting public health. This should not have to be taken to the ballot box.

Q: Didn’t the Los Angeles City Council consider the issue earlier this year?

Weinstein: They deflected responsibility to the state. This has been the hot potato we have been dealing with for years. Since we couldn’t get the City Council to act, we have decided to take it directly to the people of Los Angeles.

Q: What have state and county regulators told you?

Weinstein: I think that Cal-OSHA is doing a bang-up job. They have cited these companies and made it abundantly clear that the law is that you must use condoms in the making of these films, and they have expressed their intent to come up with rules as to health and safety in these films.

The county said that the state should handle it and there should be a law passed by the state Legislature. We haven’t been able to find one legislator in five years willing to carry this legislation. The lack of spine by legislators and their unwillingness to treat these performers as people is incredible.

Q: What do you say to members of the porn industry who say condoms are not needed because they already have STD testing?

Burts: Testing only notifies you of what you have or don’t have already. There’s still a large time gap where you can catch an STD and spread it. The real protection comes from wearing the condoms. Testing isn’t required. They should be following the law. On top of that, they should also do the testing.

Q: What about those who say mandating condoms would just drive the legitimate porn industry out of California — to Florida, overseas or underground?

James: They’ve been going on like that for years. I predicted something was going to happen after mine and it happened how many times? All they’re going to do is go back to the same thing. We’re losing focus. We’re losing people — young lives. I’m just getting really tired of hearing the same thing. Somebody has to put their foot down. It’s always been underground. That doesn’t matter.

Burts: A lot of producers are worried if condoms are required, they will lose money. But Wicked Pictures is enormously successful and they enforce using condoms. So I don’t see why they use that excuse.

Weinstein: Companies like Hustler and Vivid with their huge buildings, they can’t operate underground.

Q: If you get this initiative on the ballot and it passes, will it be enforceable?

Weinstein: If you take out a film permit on the basis of the fact that you are not going to follow the law and something happens, your insurance will not cover you. There is a provision in this for spot checks. Spot checking is the way that these laws are enforced. The fact that we’re not going to catch everyone or catch everything is not a reason to do nothing. We’ve demonstrated that we’re not going to give up, and this is just the next step in the battle.

Q: Do you think it will pass?

Weinstein: We’d rather take our chances with the electorate than with the cowardly political establishment. In the ’80s, we didn’t consider gay men’s lives expendable. We don’t consider the thousands of people who we treat in Africa expendable. And we don’t think performers should be treated that way. The message that goes out that unsafe sex is hot is unacceptable.

Burts: Our medical care is not being paid for privately — this is taxpayers’ money. It does have an impact on them. Their opinion matters. County officials haven’t been stepping up to do anything about this. I’d rather leave it with those odds rather than those council people who aren’t doing anything.

Q: Some in the porn industry have asked why don’t you just focus on HIV prevention and treatment?

Weinstein: We’re doing that to a great extent. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. This is our hometown. How can we allow this outrage to go on in our own backyard? We are not anti-porn. We have no problem with people making adult films. A little piece of latex has the ability to save lives.

Q: So what’s next?

Weinstein: We have hired a professional signature-gathering entity to collect the signatures. Then they will be certified by the city clerk, then it will be on the ballot and we will have the opportunity to mount a campaign in every city council district. We will expect every City Council member to take a stand for or against.

Q: Where can people go to sign the petition or find out more?

Weinstein: The committee is called FAIR. For now they can go to www.aidshealth.org.

Dans une édition récente, nous relations le débat entre l’Église catholique et certains militants gais portant sur des propos du Vatican à l’effet que les condoms ne constitueraient pas une défense parfaite contre le SIDA. Certains groupes gais accusaient alors l’Église de propager de fausses informations et contribuait ainsi à nuire aux campagnes de prévention.

Or, bien que le condoms soit une barrière efficace et prouvée contre de nombreuses maladies, Gay Globe Magazine a été en mesure de constater, lors de la distribution de condoms pendant le défilé de la Fierté gaie de Montréal 2009, que l’Église avait peut-être raison dans son propos maladroit. Voici ce qui était inscrit sur un emballage de condom d’une marque populaire distribuée gratuitement: “Les condoms de latex de marque “ABC”, si correctement utilisés, contribuent à réduire les risques de transmission du VIH (SIDA) et de nombreuses autres infections comme…, mais ils ne peuvent pas éliminer ces risques”.

Sans vouloir donner raison à l’Église sur ses positions généralement inacceptables et rétrogrades sur les homos, nous devons nous rendre à l’évidence que sur cette question spécifique, son analyse était probablement exacte!

Rien n’est plus effrayant dans la société que de savoir qu’un chef d’état a l’intime conviction qu’il est infaillible, qu’il est parfait et que tout ce qui vient de lui est inattaquable! Il en existe pourtant un qui vit encore en 2009 et ce n’est pas Adolf Hitler, Staline ou un ayatollah perdu dans le désert, il est le chef reconnu du plus petit état du monde, et légalement représenté à l’ONU. Cet homme est le Pape Benoît XVI et son pays est le Vatican.
Tout a commencé par un appel laissé sur le répondeur téléphonique du Point à Montréal, d’un monsieur deBlois, qui n’avait pas aimé que le Point questionne la position du Pape sur les condoms et qui concluait que le Pape ne pouvait se tromper puisqu’il était infaillible! What the Hell? Bénowa Seize, le chef spirituel des pédophiles de Dieu, celui à la tête d’une nation qui s’est excusée nombre de fois pour ses folies et ses crimes du passé comme l’abandon des juifs pendant la seconde guerre mondiale, les tortures faites aux hérétiques, les abus des prêtres pédophiles modernes et récemment au Québec, les mauvaises décisions “terriblement tristes” de l’église face aux autochtones.
Cet être serait infaillible? What the Hell? Je n’y crois pas et Dieu merci je n’ai pas à y croire. Que l’on tente de me faire passer un chef d’état, un type comme moi et vous comme étant un être infaillible parce qu’il se promène en robe blanche, qu’il est le chef spirituel de 800 millions de crédules comme lui et qu’il n’a de pouvoir que sur le bout de pain sec que l’on voudra bien vous mettre dans la bouche, ça, on ne m’y prendra pas. Les prêtres sont faillibles comme tout le monde, comptez les pédophiles dans l’église… Les évêques sont faillibles comme tout le monde, regardez le Cardinal Ouellette de Québec qui prêche encore la parole du moyen-âge. Les Papes sont tout aussi faillibles que vous et moi, ils sont nés de femmes, mangent et rotent comme vous et moi et franchement, s’ils se croient eux-mêmes dans leur power-trip, qu’ils aillent en enfer car je ne suis pas de ces brebis aveugles qui se contentent de la parole du Christ en guise de repas!