Measure B in California

Last night, Measure B passed in California, which means that male porn "actors" will be required to where condoms.

"In addition to mandating condoms, it will require porn producers to apply for a permit from the LA County Department of Public Health to shoot sex scenes. The fee will finance periodic inspections of porn filming, and violations will be subject to civil fines and criminal misdemeanor charges."

I've heard that if the measure passed, a significant part of the porn industry would leave California. California has been going through some rough times. I don't know how losing the porn industry would effect the economy.

If there's anyone from California, or anyone who has a greater understanding of the economic role the porn industry plays in California, I look forward to hearing what you have to say.

This could just be me, but I don't really see what the problem is with that law. Sure, it wouldn't be as comfortable, but is it really that big a deal? They're doing it for money, not fun.

California is a pile of garbage anyway. They should have a wall built around them to seal them off from the rest of the world, in my humble opinion.

Nice post you got there, let's see how you've completely ignored the topic at hand. You use this as a soap box to completely insult California. You don't even bother to explain why you think this way other the "Oh this should be obvious" when it obviously isn't. You tack on a "humble opinion" to make it seems less of an extraordinarily hateful claim which you have failed by the way. You haven't provided any proof for your statements. All in all you should be ashamed of yourself for doing this.

Also to stay on topic so that I don't further derail this topic, I think using requiring permits for porn shoots should happen. It gives the local government the ability to dictate what people do in their own private time. And yes if this did pass or has yet to pass I'm pretty sure a good chunk of the porn industry will leave California.

Fixed that for you since well, it was misspelled and it's SD. Also, no pun on "measure"?



I would still break out and turn people into my footstool. Aren't you from the east coast too? That means your area is probably more garbage than the west after Sandy. Literally. Also your opinion is shit, in my humble opinion.

OT: As long as there are valid STD documents (there have been a few cases where they have been forged), this is really a pointless bill. I mean, it's great that they say that condoms are good and all since they would help prevent the transfer of STD's but as long as they are clean, there really is no point. This is pretty much the same as that soda bill that was passed in NYC except it's here for porn and in CA.

I just hope that with that move, American porn will have a cleaner and healthier sex scene.
But then, we will miss those cumshots after climax.




That ain't humble, if you ask me.

I have to know your reasoning behind this.

That kind of thinking is exactly what is wrong with this measure. People automatically think that because people are having sex for a living, there must be something wrong. The porn industry adheres to very high health standards.

I guess since the women have to use birth control, than guys should have to use condoms.

Well, simply put:

*Too much crime.

*Lack of sufficient school funding.

*Californians pronounce "merry", "Mary" and "marry" the same way.

EDIT: Aww, how cute. The butthurt Californians decided to -rep me again. Do they really think that I care about their silly excuse for an opinion? -100,000,000 Californian reps = 0 normal reps.

It is pointless and stupid. Testing regulations are very strict within the porn industry (the legal one, anyway), and performers are tested at least every month. Many of the top performers get tested far more frequently, like once a week or every 10 days. The tests have to be done through a specific center, and results are entered into a centralized database. Before performing, the performer's test results are verified to be current by cross referencing through the database, and there is also an on-set inspection for sores, open wounds, etc. Performers can refuse to work if everything doesn't check out, and shooting is usually voluntarily suspended in these cases.

I think someone made a comparison of porn performers to stunt performers--they both take risks in their jobs, but they also work with a certain amount of protection. For example, Jackie Chan does crazy stunts--some without what many people would consider adequate protection. Can something go wrong in the shot, even if they take precautions and plan the shot so that Jackie is safe? Sure, and it has happened--he does talk in his interviews about how he sometimes breaks bones or dislocates joints. However, you wouldn't say that Jackie Chan should ALWAYS wear a helmet, padding, and wires in shots to keep himself safe, right? That is ridiculous. As a grown man, it is Jackie's choice to be a BAMF and do stunts with a level of protection (or non-protection) that he deems adequate. If that means jumping off a building without a helmet, it is his body and his choice to make. In the same way, the STD database and on-set protections can fail, but it as consenting adults, porn performers should have the choice to take the risks of unprotected sex. The porn industry claims it has not had a case of STD transmission since 2004. I am skeptical of the claim, but it should still be the performer's choice, not the government's.

Now, are there companies that bypass the STD tests and inspections, endangering their performers? Yeah, and this measure does nothing, absolutely nothing to stop this. Enforcement will be an absolute nightmare. The small, unscrupulous companies will just be driven underground, where they will be less regulated. They can just shoot without a permit, and honestly, who will stop them? Will county officials bang down on every door in the SFV to check whether they are illegally shooting porn? I think not. The larger companies who do responsibly test will just move to a different location to avoid all the regulations, which will make LA county lose the tax dollars and jobs that these porn companies provide.

Anyway, it's in the hands of lawyers now. I think there is a chance that this will get struck down in courts, but who knows.

Are you really still stuck on that? Talk about obsessive...

OT: It'll be interesting to see how this law will play out.

Of course, one should note that California's usually been at the fore when it comes to tough laws and regulations. Hell, years back, they instituted the toughest regulations for automobiles in the US.

What about those poor people who enjoy watching creampie videos? Damn you Uncle Sam!!!

OT: Yeah...I was kinda confused about that when I first read it. I guess they want these actors to be safe but I don't think you should force them to wear one. Most reasonable people would already wear one.

[edit] Stop going off topic by replying to Mash people. I know the rules say you shouldn't reply to horrible threads, but you can do that to horrible post.

The major thing about this, is think of the long-term implications: Porn Actors today, tomorrow they'll find a way to regulate our bedrooms. And since it's teh goberments and teh law, we're just gonna have to *put up with it* or move to a different country right? As Neko said, this isn't likely to stop corruption and lower level porn companies from endangering their actors, the legitimate big porn industries are just going to take their very lucrative businesses(It'll surprise you how much they're worth) to another state.

I do have to agree though: Between the immigration division in California, the heavy taxes and the education problem and California is right up there with Detroit as failed states in our union. Here's hoping these states recover.

If there is no climax, then Sex is just another form of exercise.

Man, you must hate 3rd world countries too!



Pretty sure they're not the only ones.

Wait, have you even been to California?
Or out of your own state?

OT: I'm indifferent about Measure B.

[color=#2e1a6b]I have no idea whether or not California receives revenue from the porn industry, but this is a really stupid move if they do.

This is similar to a city that outlaws liquor sales; it doesn't protect the people, it just causes them to take their business somewhere else, resulting in a loss of revenue or the creation of a black market

I'm not Californian and neg-repped you because you are an obviously bad troll. Making a hate claim in "Serious Discussion" (I doubt you make serious statements) will usually get the mods attention.

Also, from SD rules:



OT: I don't live in California and do not pay for my porn. I don't care if it was passed or not, but I do believe companies will leave California.

I do not think its a big deal and it encourages others to have safe sex by simply having the act be seen. It does not affect cum shots because its only required during anal or vaginal sex. Coming outside such areas would not fall under Measure B's limitation.

Will some companies move or favor other areas? of course, will it affect anything hugely? no because it affects only one area, LA county. not the whole state.

These situations aren't much a like.