FSC: Condom Initiative Would Result in Performers Being Sued, Harassed

FSC: Condom Initiative Would Result in Performers Being Sued, Harassed
Rhett Pardon

CANOGA PARK, Calif. — A new ballot initiative that would force mandatory condoms into adult film is expected to qualify for the 2016 ballot this afternoon, the Free Speech Coalition said.

If enacted, the measure would allow any California citizen to sue a performer if they did not wear a condom while shooting adult film.

Diane Duke, CEO of Free Speech Coalition, said the initiative would hurt the very people it claims to protect and that it is widely opposed by performers

Calling it “extremely dangerous,” Duke said that the proposal, if passed, would result in the widespread harassment of adult performers.

“Adult performers would immediately be targeted by stalkers and profiteers, who would use the initiatives’ sue-a-performer provision to harass and extort adult performers,” Duke said. “This is an unconscionable initiative that would take a legal and safe industry and push its performers into the shadows.

“Unfortunately, the proponent of the bill, Michael Weinstein, is more concerned with his personal moral crusade than the real-life concerns of adult performers,” she said. “It does not seem to matter to him that this initiative endangers performer’s lives, nor does it matter that his previous attempts to force condoms on porn stars have been opposed by legislators, HIV activists, editorial boards and the performers themselves.

“We once again call on Weinstein to listen to the performers he claims to be “protecting” and pull this extremely dangerous initiative.”

The proposed initiative mandates that all performers in adult films wear condoms, and permits any private resident of California to file a civil lawsuit against performers, producers and any other entity with a financial interest in a film that doesn’t use condoms.

Duke noted that performers, who are currently tested every 14 days, have long protested mandatory condom legislation, expressing that they are unnecessary given the extensive testing regimen.

Duke reiterated that there has not been an on-set transmission of HIV in the regulated adult industry since 2004.

“Weinstein’s AIDS Healthcare Foundation has also initiated new Cal/OSHA regulations that would require that barriers including goggles, glove, dental dams and condoms while shooting adult film,” she said. “Those regulations are expected to come to a vote in 2016 as well.”

Late today, the AHF called out the FSC in a press release disseminated yesterday, saying that the adult industry trade group is continuing “misleading and fear mongering claims about what the updated Cal/OSHA regulations actually entail.”

The AHF, citing Dr. Jeffrey Klausner of UCLA’s Medicine and Public Health unit, said that “goggles” is not mentioned in the proposed Cal/OSHA standard, Section 5193.1.

“Industry claims about goggles are as ridiculous and implausible as industry film plots in which the pizza delivery man or tow truck operator have sex with beautiful women customers,” the AHF said in a release today.

The AHF said that only the current standard, Section 5193, cites goggles as a type of personal protective equipment because the language covers all type of industry workers in California.