To AHF and Weinstein its all about money…Nothing more…. Check Out Anthony Kennerson’s take on the last 48 hours
Porn Panic 2012: The “Weinstein-Lubben Model” Expanded To Homemade Webcammers; Plus, AHF Volunteers To Become The Official “Condom Nazis”
Just in case you thought that it couldn’t get any worse, it gets much worse.
Mark Kernes has now posted at AVN.com his recounting of yesterday’s meeting of the LA City Council committee involved in enforcing the condom mandate law, and it confirms two disturbing developments that I first mentioned on my update to my original post.
First off…there is this exchange that is documented between Immoral Productions chief “Porno Dan” Leal and FilmLA VP Todd Lindren regarding the scope of the new law regarding personal webcamming. Remember that Leal’s company was paid a surprise visit by LAPD Vice the night before, and cited for not having a valid permit under the new law.
The first speaker was Immoral Productions owner Dan “Porno Dan” Leal, who informed the Group that one of his independent contractors had been given a citation by one of the eight members of LAPD’s Vice Division who arrived at the location, for shooting a live webcam show without a permit. Leal explained that since the citation has been issued because the show, which was not yet under way when the police arrived, was being done for commercial profit or gain, he surmised that every webcam performer in the city would not be required to get a permit from FilmLA, and asked the FilmLA representatives if that was correct?
“It has been consistent that any commercial production, including webcasts, needs a permit,” responded FilmLA’s Lindgren.
“So any webcam show shot by anyone in the city of Los Angeles will now need a permit, is that correct?” Leal asked.
“Has always needed a permit, right,” Lindgren corrected him.
“Ergo, any married couple shooting in their house, who’s shooting a webcam show for profit or gain, which by definition would be every single person that shoots webcam, would now need a permit, is that correct?” Leal pressed.
“Under the city ordinance, if it’s for commercial purpose, it needs a permit,” Lindgren stated.
“And therefore, they would need condoms under the new regulation, is that correct, that logic?” Leal continued.
“We’re in the process of developing that specific—and I can’t answer that question,” Lindgren responded.
At that point, Santana cut Leal off, stating that the comment period wasn’t supposed to include a question-and-answer dialog with Group members, leaving Leal to finish by stating, “We will be happy to comply with whatever the city decides to do.”
In other words, it isn’t just about intimidating the big studios into wrapping up anymore; it’s about forcing condoms on everyone who does any form of adult sexual media for profit.
Indeed, it isn’t even about condoms, come to think of it…since the new law now extends the requirement of a permit to include even homemade adult webcamming — and remember, the new Cal-OSHA regs could potentially require “barrier protection” (read, dental dams and gloves) for girl-girl and even solo scenes) as a means of “protection” — that means that ANYONE who does an adult webcam in the city of LA is now liable to be required to apply for a permit, or face stiff fines and even jail time.
Now, whether or not the city has the means or the will to enforce this equally on all is a legitimate issue, but the fact remains that the city now has that hammer with which they can stomp anyone not meeting Mike Weinstein’s or Cal-OSHA’s rigid standards of “protection”.
And then, there is the real issue with the collection of such information in the filing and handling of permits. What about the risk of a potential permitter having their information exposed and used as blackmail against them, or exploited by antiporn groups wanting to banish them “for the sake of the children”?? And, what about the very real threat of public exposure of private cammers as a means of shaming them, or outing them to their families?
Anyone who doesn’t see the potential mass violation of basic privacy and sexual liberties inherent in this law is either dense or blind. But, hey, they’re all just ignorant sluts, and this is for their own good and protection, so who cares??
Of course, the folks who put forth this law in the first place will always complain that even that is not enough, and will volunteer their services to drop the hammer down that much stronger. Witness the testimony of the only AHF representative at this meeting, Mark McGrath, as documented by Kernes:
AIDS Healthcare Foundation’s (AHF) Mark Roy McGrath spoke next, and began by claiming that during the investigation of the 2010 Derrick Burts HIV infection, the LA County Department of Public Health had no problem identifying “all the production companies, all the secondary producers… in quick, short order,” charging that those companies “continue to violate California law, they continue to act as outlaw entities, and we feel that… it’s time that this industry act with legal responsibility and show a modicum of corporate citizenship.”
McGrath claimed that the law “does not distinguish between content, but on acts,” adding that, “they can create any content they want that’s simulated. This law is specifically looking at infectious disease transmission and exposure.” (Of course, most adult content fans won’t buy simulated sex, but that’s not something that worries McGrath.)
While noting that neither he nor AHF is “happy with the draft language,” he asked, “How is it going to be logged? How are we going to conduct these investigations? If the fire department and police camn’t do it, where are we going to do a Request for Proposal?”
Of course, several prominent adult industry members have suspected all along that part of the reason AHF got the new ordinance put on the books was to eventually offer its services to the city as the only official “condom inspectors,” so it will be interesting to see which entities respond to McGrath’s suggested RFP.
First off…I thought that the 2010 outbreak featuring Derrick Burts took place in Florida, right?? And that there was really no investigation by either FilmLA or Cal-OSHA, but from the LA County Department of Public Health, which AHF had already dismissed as “stonewalling” to begin with?? (And, dare I mention that even Burts admitted that he was infected in a shoot where condoms were already used??)
And of course, McGrath would say that it’s only about acts and that if producers wanted to show authenticity, then they could always rely on simulated sex. Yeah, right…like everyone’s going to move over to late night Showtime or Cinemax to get their fix of losing bareback sex.
But, it’s the last sentence that is the most important: since AHF obviously doesn’t trust the LA Vice squad to enforce their condom mandate the way they want, they wouldn’t mind getting paid by the city to do the enforcement themselves.
WOW…outsourcing the enforcement of a public law to a private for-profit entity….that’ll go well, and won’t be abused. Like bloody hell, it won’t. Ask the victims of the original Porn Wikileaks.
To put it simply, this is the Swedish Model for sex work applied to porn, shifted a tad, and then jacked up to heights unknown. Julie Bindel and Gail Dines would proudly support this…and I’m sure that Gail will give her blessings next chance she gets to post a CounterPunch essay. Only thing missing is the “Real Men Don’t Buy Bareback Porn” ads and celeb endorsements.
Neoliberal antisex censorship. Just like right-wing fundamentalist antisex censorship….but neoliberal.
Seriously, we have GOT to fight this. To the fucking WALL.
Check Out Other Posts On BPPA