Most of the major adult film companies stopped production in mid-April when it was announced that woodman Darren James and his fav partner Laura Roxx tested positive for HIV. According to an AP wire story last week the two-month ban has already been “partially lifted,” whatever that means.
While the 60-day respite provided good PR for Vivid, Hustler Video and a few other multi-million dollar pussy-grinding machines, most companies continued to churn out DVDs. The fundamental issue boils down to this: rubbers. Vivid and a few other companies began making condom-only films after the last scare in 1998 when John Stagliano and four porn queens tested positive for the HIV virus.
Problem is most guys who buy porn find the safe-sex routines a complete turn-off. Vivid can afford to absorb the loss. The vacuum has been filled by plenty of other companies willing to churn out naked lungings.
Since it is impossible to get the entire industry on the rubber bandwagon, the worst possible solution has been proposed in California. State assemblyman Tim Leslie, a republican from Lake Tahoe, offered up a bill mandating condom use in all adult films. Keep in mind this bill is in the initial stages. It may never come to pass or if it does many changes could be made throughout its long legislative journey.
The bill would require frequent testing for STD’s, something the industry has been doing since 1998. What makes the bill intriguing is a clever bit of buck-passing. It does not mandate condoms. Instead, it calls for the California Department of Health “to set standards necessary for adult performers.” It’s almost a foregone conclusion the health department would determine one standard that must be met is the use of condoms in every film whether produced in Porn Valley or a porn 101-ers basement.
The politician from Lake Tahoe is shrewd enough to realize the condom-only provision will be tough to get through the legislature. Not that Tim Leslie or any of the other legislators have an iota of sympathy or respect for the porn industry, but if the state decrees such a measure for fuck vids, why not make it apply to... oh, say everyone in California? No way that could happen. Having the provision slip through the, uh, back door as a safe sex measure administered by the health department is a more viable option. Although by no means a good option. If this comes to pass, gonna be a lot of underground porn circumventing the law.
One must give credit to assemblyman Leslie’s press secretary, Brian O’Neel, for introducing a novel but perhaps viable solution to the problem: digital imaging. “If Mel Gibson can make a cannonball look like it’s about to take your head off in The Patriot, then there’s amazing things they could do with penises and vaginas,” O’Neel announced.
Coming from the spin control artist for a reactionary republican politician who would just as soon behead anybody working in Porn Valley, that is a refreshing bit of candor. I suspect the cost of removing the raincoat on every stiff stoker in every scene through digital imaging would be very pricey. Nonetheless, this is something Vivid and all those producers in the coalition of the willing sperm tossers should check out.
While I don’t support the mandatory second skin idea, I’ll do my part to support the current temporary ban on porn production this month by not reviewing any DVDs. But I gotta admit this is a ruse so I can finish off my lonely night with a few words on the recent baby-sitting scandal in our fair city.
Amazing the lid was kept tight on the affair between then-mayor Goldschmidt and the babysitter for 30 years. While there’s plenty of talk around town about the former mayor bonking a 14-year-old Lolita, seems like the central concern is whether or not Willamette Week should have blown the whistle on Neil Goldshmidt as he teeters into old age with a bad ticker. There’s a statute of limitation on statutory rape, but none on reporting a juicy scandal.
One windbag editorial writer at the Oregonian penned a screed against WW, saying he was more sickened by the alt-weekly’s dredging up and exposing Neil’s deep affection for his not-even-barely-legal hottie than the deed itself. I’m with him half way. If you can’t get the goods on the guy while he’s in office, it does seem kind of slimy to chop off his balls in the 42nd inning of a 9 inning game. At the same time, would the editorial writer have written that column if it had been the Oregonian instead of WW that splashed the scoop on page one? No fucking way. He’d remain silent if he had any integrity or more likely he’d write a piece blabbing on about the importance of getting the truth out.
WW didn’t do the right thing, only the natural thing any paper would do when the whispered rumors from long ago bubble up into the sunlight of the courtroom. In this case Neil got the shaft when the woman threatened to file a lawsuit against him in 1994, twenty years after they licked each others’ lollipops and what not. Instead of filing a personal-injury lawsuit she settled for $250,000. The enterprising reporter from WW found that in the court records.
Call it payback or a proper settlement for the victim of abuse if you like. Frankly, I’d call it extortion. This babe did him in and got a quarter of a mil out of him to boot. Still, Neil brought it on himself.