Performers and producers oppose Michael Weinstein’s dangerous and ill-informed attacks on the adult industry. This morning, he will announce that he will place a statewide version of his disastrous Measure B legislation on the ballot.
Measure B, a Los Angeles condom ordinance, resulted in a 95% drop in permits for adult production, and spurred an industry exodus to Las Vegas.
Diane Duke, head of the Free Speech Coalition, released this statement on Weinstein’s latest misguided and dangerous effort:
Michael Weinstein is resorting to the ballot initiative process because he can’t get it done any other way. His campaign has failed multiple times in the legislature, it’s has been opposed by HIV outreach and LGBT groups, it’s been opposed by civil rights groups, it’s been opposed by newspaper editorial boards and, most importantly, it’s been opposed by performers. Why? Because the bill not only takes away performers’ control over their own bodies, it pushes the industry out of California and underground, making performers ultimately less safe.
Anyone who looks at the data around performer health sees that Weinstein’s campaign is more about his dislike for the adult industry than it is about workplace safety. Despite shooting hundreds of thousands of scenes, there hasn’t been a transmission of HIV on a regulated adult set since 2004 thanks to a rigorous protocol that requires performers to be tested every fourteen days for a full slate of STIs including HIV. Yet because it attracts donors to his organization and headlines for himself, Weinstein has manufactured a crisis.
In his one-man war against the adult industry, Weinstein routinely uses performers who contracted HIV in their personal lives, and were stopped from working by testing protocol, as evidence of danger. It’s cynical and shameful, and he’s been reprimanded repeatedly by public health authorities for making claims that don’t stand up to scrutiny.
As a result, Weinstein now uses confusing language, most notably “the performers contracted HIV while working in the adult industry” to imply that transmission happened on a set without making the claim directly. (It’s like saying “Magic Johnson contracted HIV while working as a basketball player”). Having failed at the legislative level, he’s now hoping that he can use such language to confuse voters.
Michael Weinstein’s controversial AIDS Healthcare Foundation has been under fire locally and nationally for using his taxpayer funded organization to enforce various versions of his conservative morality. His misguided morality campaign is not limited to adult sets — as part of his condom-only campaign, he has called for an end to HIV vaccine research, he opposed medication that can prevent HIV transmission, and he has sued the cities [and counties] of San Francisco and Los Angeles when they’ve opposed him.
Performer health is important. But performers, the most tested population on the planet, should have the ultimate right to control their bodies and their health. They don’t deserve to be shamed or treated as a public danger, or to have their rights trampled. Michael Weinstein is using taxpayer money to fund a campaign that is opposed by performers, public health experts, and civil rights groups, in hopes that he can use the ballot initiative to accomplish what has failed in every other venue.
We, likewise, will oppose this.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Diane Duke
CEO, Free Speech Coalition
press@freespeechcoalition
818.348.9373
[…] Michael Weinstein is resorting to the ballot initiative process because he can’t get it done any other way. His campaign has failed multiple times in the legislature, it’s has been opposed …read more […]
[…] Anyone who looks at the data around performer health sees that Weinstein’s campaign is more about his dislike for the adult industry than it is about workplace safety. Despite shooting hundreds of thousands of scenes, there hasn’t been …read more […]
Weinstein’s dug himself a very deep hole. He can’t admit his anti-porn campaign has failed utterly, irreparably damaged AHF’s reputation and made him a laughingstock. Therefore he must press on with yet another Quixotic attempt to prove the earth is flat. Knowing how good he is at collecting fraudulent petitions, he may well get this monstrosity on the ballot. If he does, I hope we’ll be more effective in fighting it than we have been his other attempts thus far. He’s struck out in every inning thus far, but mainly due to the good sense of public officials and not… Read more »
I didn’t think the industry’s showing in Sacramento was “pitifully inept” (at least not portrayed that way)… Am I wrong?
No, that was one of the places where FSC did fairly well, although the fact that Hall’s bill passed the Assembly definitely denies them bragging rights. In 2004 a similar bill didn’t even make it out of committee. This one might well have passed had it not been for the self-interest of the Senate, which saw it as politically radioactive whichever way they voted. The active involvement of performers in last phase of the final battle was somewhat helpful, but very late to the game. The FSC should have had performers out in front from the beginning. Weinstein’s endless search… Read more »
I appreciate the response. I just wanted to make sure that I hadn’t misinterpreted the performers showing in the state legislature, but I see where initial comment comes from. Based on your response, it seems to me at least, that there is idealogical vs pragmatic divide within adult industry, that, from the begining has leaned decidedly in the corner of idealogical. What I mean is, instead of understanding the realpolitik (pragmatic) of what was happening between AHF, CAL/OSHA, and members of the state legislature (mainly Isadore Hall), the adult industry’s belief in the idealogical (in this case 1st Amendment rights)… Read more »
Basically my point, though I wouldn’t say ideology was the issue. I don’t think most producers care much about Amendment One unless or until it becomes an issue for their companies in particular. Actually, I think the free speech issue, ironically, got too little play from out side, as it is a legitimate objection to the kind of compelled speech AHF was pushing. Compelled speech is also a First Amendment violation, but that aspect of the proposed laws got little attention from the producers. I think mainly, like bad generals fighting the last war instead of the one they’re in,… Read more »
Your insight and words of wisdom are greatly appreciated as I am just catching up to the history of things that have went on before I came around. Your insight and words are greatly appreciated. Your knowledge is priceless.. Thank you..
You’re certainly welcome. You’d think the folks at FSC might think I could be helpful, but I was most definitely not at the table when the decisions were made.
Frankly, I look forward to a day when I won’t have to relive these experiences again.