Axel Braun Gets It, Yes You Read That Right

While we may disagree on some things Axel Braun showed himself to be one of the more intelligent people in the biz.  He was the Keynote speaker for XBiz 360 and he ended the speech with why we should go all condom.

I have said the same thing many times in the past, now is the time for a preemptive strike and the best way to cripple this legislation is to make it superfluous.  People generally aren’t keen on adding new laws and if the industry is using condoms and making a big show of it, STD rates are suddenly almost non existent, and we are already using condoms…we don’t the law.  It would  be a smart move, which is EXACTLY why The FSC and porn in general hasn’t gotten behind it in the past.  It is how we can begin to combat this law that costs the least yet has the best chance for a positive result.

Combine this with courting pharmaceutical companies and public health involvement and we could win.

Hats off to you Axel It wasn’t what porners want to hear, but it’s the truth…good for you for telling it. Credit where it’s due.

Braun closed his keynote with a controversial topic—condoms in porn. Already an industry leader with his on-set policies of a required seven-day STI test which he pays for, a minimum performer age of 21 and mandatory condoms, Braun pointed to the latest attempt to by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) to push through the statewide “California Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act.” The proposed measure was sent to the Attorney General’s office last week for approval prior to a likely signature drive for a spot on the 2016 ballot.

“If you read the text of the proposed law, you probably figured out that it is not meant to protect performers, [I do wish they would stop with this bullshit…the ONE thing it does MOST is protect performers, y’all REALLY need to get that because denying it simply makes you look foolish. -South] but to destroy the industry. It is not about condoms, it’s about politics,” Braun told the audience. “It’s full of booby traps and will allow people to sue producers left and right, and you mark my words: it will cripple us. Now we can fight it…but do we have a loud enough voice to convince the general public that we are still safer than most workplaces?

“All that people are gonna read on the ballot is ‘Safer Sex Act,’ and they’ll vote for it. So here’s a thought…how about self-regulating before that happens? How about going full-condom so that [AHF President Michael] Weinstein cannot use the condom excuse to pass this law? Think your movies won’t sell anymore? What about Dorcel, a French company that shoots all-condom and outsell most companies here? What about Wicked, one of the most successful companies in the business that’s been condom-only for 15 years? And in my first year shooting with condoms I’ve sold more movies and got more award nominations than ever in my life.”

Braun added, “Look, I’m not here to do a pro-condom speech, or to level the playing field, I’m just trying to tell you what I foresee in the future of the industry. And in this case the possibility of this law passing makes me think that volunteering might be a better option than being mandated. Whatever the case, our strength as an industry has always been in adapting. We adapt, we survive.”


19 Replies to “Axel Braun Gets It, Yes You Read That Right”

  1. common sense

    Other than giving the time of day to MW ( associating with a woman beater? Posing in pictures with him? What is up with that, axel? That doesn’t make you look very good to us in the general public. It speaks volumes! Just sayin! )

    but, putting that aside , there is no doubt that Axel Braun, is by far, the most intelligent guy in this industry.. (Although, that’s not saying much because there isn’t much competition)

    Anyway, what he says here is true. He knows they are going to lose, AGAIN! He confirms, what liars the industry heads and puppets are by not only admitting that CONDOM PORN SELLS, But, after going all condom, he said, his anti condom stance was motivated by financial gain… wow! SHOCKING! 😮

    Oh, and axel also has a 7 day testing policy the cost of which he covers himself..( I believe the producers are suppose to pay for tests anyway) and he also has a 21 and over policy.. So kudos to you, Axel Braun, for doing the right thing! ( which is something most of the people in this industry don’t understand. .. No comprendo! )

    So, yeah, axel is smart, but, MOST, if not ALL, of the producers are smart..( That’s why they make all the money and why they post anonymously on these message boards to spew their bullshit/ lies.. Because they are the ones who have the most to lose… And they want to keep the talent dumb… Mission accomplished! 😉

    I mean, lets face the facts…most of the talent don’t make much in the industry..(which is why they escort, duh!) Most have to beg for money every time they need an operation or something.. (I think even nurse Nina Hartley had to beg) they also beg people to buy them stuff on Amazon. (These people have no self respect) And jeepers creepers…. they don’t even get residuals! Damn!

    Oh, the agents take advantage of them, too. So what does the talent do about all of this? NOTHING! Lol!!! So, I guess they get what they deserve, huh? You can’t help people who won’t help themselves. And you can’t help stupid . It is quite pitiful.. 🙁

    But, look on the bright side, the producers, agents and FSC/Duke LOVE you guys! NO JOKE! TRUTH!

  2. snotty

    for me, condom porn is completely useless crap.
    just because YOU are not put off by it doesn’t mean noone is. so, yes, the condom law WILL damage the cali porn industry, no matter how much you’d like it to be otherwise.

  3. LurkingReader

    Anyone think Nina Hartley, Chanel Preston or Lorelei Lee would turn down a chance to work for Axel Braun cuz they risk getting condom rash?

    Anyone think a homeowner/property owner would turn down Axel Braun (or anyone else paying for tests and using condoms) for fear of being the deep pocket that gets sued?

    Axel can afford a studio but stands there and says folks we need to worry about the booby traps….he’s right and his concern for gotchas that he has eliminated from his business yet still face most every independent earns him much more respect from me than selfies with his newest vehicle.

    Anyone forget that Brooke Ashley won after a ten year Workers Comp fight before Measure B and the non-rulemaking draft proposal by OSHA?

    While folks are focused on HIV there’s a syphillis case winding it’s way through the process.

  4. Jamie Gardner

    Even if the major companies voluntarily go all condom, not every company would do this. People favoring condoms could still emphasize the companies not using condoms. Companies such as Vivid Video went all condom for sexual intercourse in 1998 but Rob Black’s Extreme Associates was boasting about no condoms being in their movies. Wicked Pictures remained all condom for sexual intercourse but Vivid Video stopped mandatory condom use in use in 2006.

  5. jilted

    @Mike south,
    The idea of complying now in order to defeat this bill aint going to work. There is no way the FSC could push this effort without looking like the fools we all know they are. Plus, under this voluntary approach, just like in the industry now, there is no remedy for those who dont follow along. Self regualtion mean no consequences, and no consequences means no enforcement. Hell the say OSHA doenst enforce anything,,,well who the hell enforces any of these so called self regulations. A voluntary program that only some of the industry follows will not defeat this act. Looks like Axels own words will be the best campaign slogans of this election cycle,,,,for the AHF.

  6. jilted

    “Courting the pharmacutical companies”
    Mike and I have talked of this for years. I had pharmacutical companies lined up, ready to take on all the costs of testing and treatment, in exchange for anonymous research. The industry, and AIM wanted nothing to do with it because it meant giving the real std rates to people outside the industry. NOTHING other than hiding the truth was the reason the industry did not particpate in programs that could have saved over 15million dollars directly outof performer pockets since 2003.

    If the comprehensive industry testing over the years showed a lower std rate the information would be out there,,,,but it doesnt, the FSC knows this, it shows exactly the opposite, and that is exactly why testing will never be proven to be as effective as condoms, because it isnt. It could, if done properly, but it isnt,,,,and by properly I mean mass testing and cleansing at the same time, twice or three times a year,,,,,a SIMPLE way to reduce rates, yet still to complicated for the mindtrust that runs the industry testing now, namely, the Fucking Stupid Clowns, and APAPC.

  7. Karmafan

    I’ve bought dozens of porn DVDs over the years and 0 of them are of the male talent wearing condoms and I WON’T buy any that has people wearing condoms.

  8. mharris127

    Mike, I agree that this law would protect performers — in the same way that banning stunts in mainstream movies would protect stunt men or banning policemen would protect the police. Unfortunately it would do so by eliminating their jobs altogether. Axel survives because he makes parodies where the quality of the sex in the scene is secondary to the plot of the movie making the time in which genital to genital contact takes place much lower than a normal porn movie — reducing the chance of condom rash substantially. Wicked as a whole survives on the couples porn market where the women pick out the movies. Also, have you noticed that Wicked usually has performers from the same list of about 20 performers. That is because most performers aren’t often willing to risk condom rash and the increase in VD and other infections from the open wound created on their pussies. I also agree with Axel that this proposal is written, mainly by the religious right and a man that had to pay to treat one or two HIV cases that he thinks came from an adult set (newsflash: it likely didn’t although I cannot say for sure), to decimate the adult industry in California.

    As for the FSC fighting this, they can’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag with slits cut into it. The producers and talent need to band together, create a new organization and aggressively donate themselves and raise money from porn viewers to fight this insanely ridiculous proposed law. It will take at least $20 million dollars to defeat this in my estimation. The other option is to move the whole industry to other states (or a friendlier country) and hope like hell Weinstein doesn’t follow along and create HIV clinics in those other states like he has in Nevada just to continue his revengeful crusade against porn production when porn is not concentrated in two states as it is currently. Also, producers are going to have to be smart enough not to concentrate in one state, a couple of companies are going to have to base in each state without draconian fornication laws (such as Michigan) or we will have this battle again.

  9. mharris127

    Lorelei is exclusively contracted to Kink so she cannot work for Axel. Lorelei is also one of a very few performers that requires condoms in order to work with her which explains why she mainly directs now and actually fucks in very few scenes. Nina — although not requiring condoms as well — is also a condom optional supporter and willing to use condoms in her scenes. As for Chanel, since she has not done any condom scenes (that I know of) I would have to opine that she is likely not willing to work with them and would likely reject a scene from Axel because of it.

  10. LurkingReader


    The question was ….if Axel offered them a job would they say NFW I don’t want condom rash. The contract isn’t forever, Nina would say how much and ignore the stuff she spews about condom rash even if she believes it …and if Chanel’s rent were due you can bet she’d be saying yes.

  11. mharris127

    I would hope that Chanel works enough that she could afford to pick and choose her jobs. She seems to be in at least 20 new scenes a month. Even at $500 per scene (and if that is all she gets she is as dumb as a box of hammers) that is $10K gross, probably $4-$5K net after paying Spiegs his 10% and setting aside the taxes that come due quarterly.

    As for Nina we agree on this one. I said she has done condom scenes in the past, I think depending on the role Nina would probably be willing to work for Axel.

    If Lorelei ever leaves Kink (yeah, right — what porn performer/director in her right mind would give up the $300K plus salary and bennies including health insurance and pension plan she likely gets there and that is just for directing, she gets a per scene rate when she performs on top of that and probably gets to play with Madeline from time to time too) and were offered a role from Axel while a free agent I would think she would at least consider it, he is one of the higher-paying directors in the biz and she requires condoms when she does a scene anyway so it doesn’t matter that Axel also requires them. The only other sticking point I can think of is that I don’t think she has ever done a non-kinky scene before so she might act like a duck out of water on this one. However, I expect Lorelei to stay with Kink until she decides to retire — she isn’t stupid and when a free agent she was known for being a good, concentious worker. In ten years she should have enough money saved up to retire comfortably (considering she is married to Tomcat who has been directing for Kink for 12-13 years now and probably draws a $300K plus salary as well). Between the two of them they might even have enough money to retire right now.

  12. LurkingReader


    You’re clearly missing the point. Regardless of the name performers touting the condom rash party line will ignore it and pretend like it didn’t happen rather than stand on it as a principle to reject an offer from Axel Braun. They say requiring condoms will jeopardize their jobs but none is saying the risks presented with condom rash are such that they refuse to work for or accept work on a condom only set.

  13. spawn777

    The new bill doesn’t protect performers if it significantly impacts their livelihood, physically damages the tools or their trade, or exposes them to overreaching medical classification. STDs are a very obvious agent of harm, but there are plenty of less obvious barbs that the legislation lays on them. Football could eliminate head injuries and concussions if they just changed the rules to two-hand touch, but I wouldn’t classify that as player protection if it significantly depresses the industry. And as I read the legislation, there is a definite undercurrent of the intent to do just that. Combine that with Mike’s anecdotal data of hotties just waiting for these laws to enter the industry on the BG side, and one could make a case that if doesn’t server current performers nearly as much as it purports to.

Leave a Reply