How Do You Make A REALLY Tough Decision – EVERY PERFORMER Should Read This!

OK lets say that you are tasked with deciding what decisions to make for your child. When he rides his bicycle he doesn’t want to wear his helmet because it feels better to not wear it, you are his parent and you understand the safety issues involved, you know that eventually he will wreck you don’t want that wreck to cause brain damage, what do you do?

Now lets say that you are charged with rules and regulations and to protect porn performers in the best and most practical way possible. On the one hand you have performers (mostly males) and consumers who tell you that they don’t like to see condoms in the sex scenes, on the other you have epidemic proportions of Hepatitis, Gonorrhea, Syphilis, Chlamydia, Trichomoniasis and venereal warts affecting the very people you are sworn to represent.

The Free Speech Coalition, that represents producers of porn has a two point plan to make porn safer for performers. First they want to administer a weekly injection of Doxycycline to all performers, second they want to maintain the two week testing plan that have been using for quite sometime. The antibiotic injection is used to prevent spreading of many of the above mentioned STDS.

You only other choice is to support the plan put forth by OSHA, that plan is condoms for vaginal and anal sex. That plan does NOT include dental dams or goggles, we have to be honest here because this is the reality of it, dental dams and goggles are NOT going to be required, that is stated specifically by OSHA.

Condoms provide nearly complete protection against infection caused by contact with genital and rectal secretions. Studies show that condom failure rates are 1 to 5 percent, and that most condom failures can be reduced or eliminated by proper training and awareness.
abrasion (a problem cited by the petitioner) can be reduced or avoided by using appropriate lubrication, using condoms made from materials other than latex, and other methods.

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
a. Testing cannot identify infection in the first 2 to 3 weeks.

b. Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP, or Truvada) — adherence to the protocol for using PrEP
usually cannot be fully overseen by an employer, and partial adherence reduces protection proportionately. The manufacturer of Truvada further recommends that condoms
continue to be used to maximize the effectiveness of the drug.

Treatment as Prevention
(TasP) — adherence to the protocol for using TasP usually cannot be fully overseen by an employer. One study showed that the use of TasP only reduced HIV transmission by 26 percent.

Hepatitis infections

a. Hepatitis B testing cannot identify infection in the first 4 to 9 weeks, and blood test results
take 14 days to be available after the blood is drawn. The hepatitis B vaccination becomes fully effective only after several months. Some individuals do not respond to the vaccine. (Note: The Bloodborne Pathogens standard already requires employers to make this vaccine and vaccination series available, in addition to requiring the employer to provide protective barriers. See subsection (f) of the Bloodborne Pathogens standard.)

b. Hepatitis C testing cannot identify infection in the first 2 to 8 weeks. No vaccine exists for
hepatitis C.

Bacterial infections

a. Gonorrhea urine and swab tests cannot identify infection in the first 24 hours to 7 days after
exposure, and the false negative rate is as high as 9 percent.

b. Chlamydia urine test cannot identify infection in the first 2 to 7 days, and the false negative
rate depends on the testing methods used. The most sensitive tests (nucleic acid amplification tests) are more than 99 percent sensitive on specimens taken by endocervical swab; that is, the false negative rate is about 0.5 percent. However, other testing methods and swab specimens taken from other sources, such as the oropharynx and rectum, have false negative rates in the range of 10 to 30 percent.

c. Trichomoniasis testing cannot identify infection in the first 4 to 28 days, and the false
negative rate is approximately 20 percent.

Regarding concerns expressed over the privacy of employees’ medical records, the existing Bloodborne
Pathogens standard requires employers to ensure that employee medical records are kept confidential and not disclosed or reported without the employee’s express written consent to any person within or outside the workplace except as specifically required by the standard or required by law. (See California Code of Regulations, title 8, subsection 5193(h)(1)(C).)

If you have read this far you are taking this seriously, good because you have to, you have been entrusted with the decision to do what you believe is in the BEST INTEREST of your constituents not what is popular, not what uneducated people or people with a vested financial interest want you to do, your integrity is on the line to do what is BEST.

You wish you could have been around for the formation of these rules because you you think do have better ideas, but that is not the case so at this point you are left with the choice to support one side or the other.

You know in your heart what it is you have to do, you know what is right. You could do the wrong thing and maybe increase your popularity, just as you would if you told that child he didn’t have to wear a helmet. But what happens when the inevitable happens and someone gets harmed very badly, or even dies, you are going to feel pretty bad about the decision you made that you knew to be wrong, you sold out the people you were sworn to make the best decisions you could because it would be more popular.

When you visit that child in the hospital and know that your decision is going to result in him never being able to care for himself, his quality of life is forever changed, all because it made him happy and against your better judgement you chose that over safety.

This is real y’all and this is exactly how it is with Prop 60. You believe that in the long run you can change things to make them better but right now you have only 2 choices.

I don’t care who you are, a performer, a fan, a director or the Leader of The Free Speech Coalition the choice comes down to what is more important, the health and safety of performers or your desire to make money or to think you will have a better orgasm. If you don’t see performers as human beings who have no value to society or anywhere else then it’s pretty easy, you don’t care if they die, another will be along in her/his place tomorrow.

But that isn’t you. You love performers because you identify with them because at one time you were one, just like you were a kid that didn’t want to wear her helmet when riding her bicycle. You made a promise to these performers that you would promote their health and safety above all else, including money.

Such was the choice that Phyllisha Anne was faced with when she as a person (not the Union) made the decision to support Prop 60. It is the kind of choice that leaders have to make all the time. Some do better jobs of it than others. Some regret the choice they made. Phyllisha chose to do what was right, that is the kind of choice you expect from a leader. I expect that the Performers Union will follow suit and or issue a statement on where they do stand and why.

But if you get right down to it and toss aside personal preferences and money it really isn’t that tough of a choice. The rules can be improved but right now, it is what it is, as they say.

If you can explain to me how and why you would disagree I would love to hear it, I will post it with no comments from me. I am searching for justification to support The FSC proposal

Finally I spoke with my contact at Cal-OSHA who made it VERY clear that the wild west days of porn are over, and that porn companies will play by the rules in regard to performer safety or they will be out of business. He further explained why moving to (pick your state) won’t help. “These standards are federal OSHA standards and use of barrier protection IS the federal standard and no state may have a standard that is lower than the federal standard, what the FSC has proposed is significantly lower. This is now a priority for OSHA, it isn’t going away, you will comply or we will hurt you financially way more than using condoms would….WAY more.

added note: I know that the Union is experiencing some growing pains, they are to be expected, I support performers looking out for themselves. and i trust that they will make the union what it should be

15 Replies to “How Do You Make A REALLY Tough Decision – EVERY PERFORMER Should Read This!”

  1. SabrinaDeep

    I don’t embrace this idea that a leader of an organization is to be praised when goes against the organizations members will, I’m sorry Mike. I’m not discussing the merit of the matter, about which i mostly agree with you. But if she can decide for everybody and against everybody (like she already did at least once with the board ballots) then there is no reason for a union. I’m afraid our views are at the antipodes here. If she is not representative, then people will keep representing themselves. I see no difference in the method between what she did and FSC trying to rule for everybody about preemptive antibiotics. She just killed the union for good, assuming that it was still alive, and she just demonstrated that she is on someone’s payroll. She really didn’t do it on a personal level, she did it as the union founder. She didn’t tweet about it, she was at the hearing representing the union. If she really did it on a personal level she should have made that clear and probably resign from the union. Something tells me that you haven’t understood well whom we’re dealing with yet. But maybe I’m wrong. We’ll see. On thing, again, is for sure: the union as it is it is useless. Performers keep having no voice and keep being subjected to decisions taken by single characters, from whatever side they come from. To use your own words: If you can explain to me how and why you would disagree I would love to hear it. Respectfully, a hug.

  2. LurkingReader

    Leaving all the drama dujour on the side the issue is signature etiquette.

    Like professional degrees, certifications and elected office ‘Founder xyz org’ is a retained title, added to signatures at the discretion of the owner when relevant.

    Once an org has designated authorized spokespersons other than the founder; signing ‘legal name, founder xyz org’ indicates personal accomplishment rather than an organizational endorsement. Signing ‘legal name, founder and president xyz org’ would indicate an endorsement by someone authorized to speak on behalf of the org.

    Leno & Weiner wrote a joint letter opposing prop 60…as individuals unless a separate endorsement letter was enclosed on their office ‘offical’ letterhead.

  3. SabrinaDeep

    You called her a leader, hence I brought the union in. She is the owner at the moment. Leaders are a different thing, in my book. On the prop60 vs antibiotics, as I said, I agree with you. The idea alone to impose preemptive medications would be considered criminal here in Europe, so…But as I said on the other post, without a common code of conduct developed, endorsed and enforced by performers themselves, first, it will be a continued war conducted by the the different parties for their own personal gain. With no principles and no people ready to stick to them there won’t be any good done to the performers ever. I don’t remember Melissa complaining when she and Phyllisha unilaterally threw the union ballots in the WC. Now she complains about Phyllisha unilaterally taking decisions under the union’s brand. These people have no credibility before my eyes and they are not worth my and many other performers trust, I’m sorry.

  4. LurkingReader

    What were seeing now is why I questioned the wisdom of creating union chapters before the union had its structural & administrative ducks in a row.

  5. MikeSouth

    i did qualify with

    Such was the choice that Phyllisha Anne was faced with when she as a person (not the Union)

    and further I consider plenty of people in porn to be leaders who arent associated with any organization what I wanted to point out is how difficult it sometimes is to do the right thing.

    I am aware of issues with Phyllisha and the union and that story IS coming. also not to nit pick but she cant own a union and she doesnt own this one, that is being made very clear to her right now.

    and I agree with you about credibility but from where i sit The Union is taking the steps necessary to maintain its independence and its status as democratic, when you have a lot of people involved it doesnt happen overnight, even in this country it took YEARS to settle on our constitution, it also took several tries before they got it right, but they kept at it instead of giving up, they worked, they compromised and they changed the world as we know it.

  6. Jaybarry

    A lot of us are immune to all these things. I have worked 4 to 5 times a week for the last 10 years condom free and have never contracted a single thing. What do people think about that?

    The answer is to educate people on the risks and let them make their own decisions, we’re not kids riding bikes, we’re adults.

    Mike, you’re sound like a typical politician. fighting for one thing but practicing the opposite in your personal life. How can a bukkake site be safe went you’re dumping cum in a girls eyes and month?

    We’re entertaining people, if we want to take a risk so be it! What people should be concerned about is the mental abuse in porn. In a lot of cases girls don’t get to make their own choices on how they’re treated. Emotional abuse can last a life time.

  7. SabrinaDeep

    @jaybarry. Never say never. We are all at risk and luck plays a great role, when it comes to other people involved in your decisions. However, this doesn’t go against what you are saying, to the contrary, and I know what you mean. Laws, rules, regulations…it’s all good eventually, but they don’t eliminate the risk. People do (at least they can diminish it greatly). If we don’t work on performers education and we keep not holding them responsible for their actions nothing is due to change ever. I keep hearing that there are performers with level 2 gonhorrea and stuff like that: who are they? Someone must know them if they mention them. Whoever knows, they must be named and put on quarantine and medications. Stop them from working until they are clean. We need a code of conduct and a pact of honor, deliberately breaking which can also lead to radiation from sets. It’s not that difficult, really. If you know that you are sick, you shouldn’t work until you are healthy again. All the rest are palliatives: condoms, preemptive antibiotics…they are all fallible screens which don’t eliminate the bad health problem, but they rather encourage people with bad health to not give a shit about it. And condoms break. And preemptive antibiotics can fail too, on top of causing other health issues.
    – code of conduct
    – 6 weeks total moratorium
    – sex history passport *
    – random test on performers who have shot in the last 4 weeks
    – HIV test on site
    – 8 weeks halt on any positivity
    – radiation from sets after the 3rd episode within a certain lapse of time

    *(Obligation for anybody who shoots porn to insert the performers into a common database for every shoot. This way if a case rise, you test all the people involved and it’s easy to figure out who fucked in private without the due safety parachutes and whoever did should be halted until eventual radiation at 3rd offense. Come on guys…stds originate from private sex, ultimately. If you work in porn you should pay the same if not even more attention to whom you fuck in private and how that you pay when you fuck another performer. If you’re not professional, medal and goodbye…there’s plenty of other jobs in life.)

    Is it harsh? No, it is necessary. People in many sports already go through much worse stuff than that.
    Is it costly? Yes it is. But with a serious plan, funds can be found. For a start, let’s decapitate the testing mafia and open the testing market creating competition. What tests cost in the US right now is outrageous and there are no reasons for it. In Europe I pay 55$ (45 euros) or less for a full set of tests which includes also Hepatitis C [aHCV] and with a much more sophisticated and secure results delivery system, compared to 155$ from talentesting. It’s ridiculous. If I was part of the union, that would have been the first thing I would have focused on: stop the robbery. The second thing would have been to sit with IRS and demand total deduction from taxes of tests costs for adult performers. Those are the battles that I expect a performers’ union to fight for. And don’t tell me that especially test costs reduction can’t be achieved: talenttesting alone claims to perform about 500 tests a month (by the way…doesn’t it look like a scary low number to you?)…let’s go on strike one month and let’s see. Anyway…too much meat on the grill, I guess. But it’s clear to me that without drastic and radical structural changes and especially without an official code of conduct for performers there is no way out. You gotta hit the bottom to rise up. That’s why, discarded for obvious reasons the FSC idiotic and nazi idea of drugging performers preemptively, I hope for the condoms thing to take over: it will make things worse within a year (more serious contagious cases, sorry Mike…you know it too well too that if you give a condom to an irresponsible performer, that performer will act even more irresponsible, shielded by the condom excuse) and then hopefully people will start focusing on real changes, rather than palliatives.

  8. BT

    Ever since a federal judge in Los Angeles ruled against Vivid in its suit against LA County – a ruling that was upheld on appeal – I have been writing on this site that the real threat to porn was not LA County, which has shown no interest in policing porn, but in OSHA. Why? Because this is a workplace safety issue and a public health issue. That’s not just my opinion – or even just OSHA’s opinion: It was written into the decision of the federal judge, which again, was upheld on appeal. Porn could have further appealed but chose not to. As if it needed more, that gave OSHA ammo.

    OSHA has been dipping its toe in the water, with fines against John Stagliano, Kink.com, James Deen and others. Now, we read the following quote from Mike’s reporting: “These standards are federal OSHA standards and use of barrier protection IS the federal standard and no state may have a standard that is lower than the federal standard, what the FSC has proposed is significantly lower. This is now a priority for OSHA, it isn’t going away, you will comply or we will hurt you financially way more than using condoms would….WAY more.”

    If OSHA truly has set its sites on porn, then the industry will have to decide how much it is willing to spend to go underground, go off-shore, go wherever to skirt OSHA. But remember – there is a federal ruling. Any other jurisdiction can hang its hat on that if it wishes to regulate porn within its boundaries.

    Jaybarry writes: “We’re entertaining people, if we want to take a risk so be it!”

    Would that it were so. Unfortunately that’s not the law. Entertainment is an industry, a porn site is a workplace and porn performers are workers. As such, they have to abide by workplace safety regulations the same as any other industry, workplace and worker.

    In your personal life, you’re free to do whatever with another individual as long as its consensual and everyone is of a legal age. Heck, you don’t even have to be educated. But as soon as it becomes work for pay, that all changes.

    The porn industry doesn’t like to hear that, and to date, no regulatory agency has been willing to enforce it, so porn has managed to chug along. But, if OSHA really does get serious about this, that’ll change.

    Again, its the law, its been upheld by a federal judge and appeals court and porn chose not to argue.

  9. Karmafan

    Random testing sounds like a great idea. It will help to weed out folks like Mr. Marcus that faked his positive test.

  10. rawalex

    BT, the problem however is twofold:

    1 – is a condom enough? Condom plus testing? Condom plus testing plus no kissing and no other fluid exchanges in any manner? The truly “safest” thing would be not to have sex at all. Everything else from there is like a sliding scale of risk. So unlike, say, working with chemicals in an industrial process, there is in fact little or no real actual need for porn.

    2 – As porn is “art” and free speech, at what point do the health and safety regulations impinge on free speech? If a girl expresses her “art” by doing a Bukkake scene, is it up to the state to stop her because of the risk inherent in exposure to cum and uncovered dicks?

    No agency really wants to enforce safety standards because they are pinned between the two: Don’t do enough, and people get sick and sue the state for failing to protect them, and do too much and get sued by someone who is losing their free speech rights.

    No matter how nicely people try to put it, being in porn is like being a high wire walker. There is a point where the choice of profession is itself the risk, and not the equipment.

  11. jilted

    Rawalex,
    The free speech here belongs to the producer, not the performer. The performer is just a ‘cog’ if you will for the PRODUCER to produce his product. Producing speech does not trump the health and safety of those PAID to perform your speech for you.
    OSHA laws always account for the fact that no matter what protections are used that accidents can still happen. It is how the employer reacts to those situations when they happen that is the crux of the problem here. In porn, history has proven over and over again that producers do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING when performers are exposed to disease while creating their product. That is why every business is supposed to have written plans (IIPP) on what they will do in case of exposure. Many of the companies fined by OSHA in the past have been fined for not having an IIPP. And other companies have been fined for not following the IIPP plans they had in place.

    Simply put, your right to free speech does not make you immune from the consequences of producing commercial speech.

  12. Karmafan

    Anytime anything happens that can lead to a potential loss of life or catastrophic illness the govt. will regulate that industry thru OSHA. Yesterday 16 people died when a hot air balloon caught fire and fell to the ground killing everyone on board. It was started that hot air balloons are not regulated. You can be sure that soon that will change.

    Porn is no different. OSHA is responsible for work place safety. In porn’s case the workplace safety is the health of those that are engaging in acts that can lead to illness or death (STDs, Herpes, HIV).

  13. BT

    Rawalex: The problem is not two-fold at all.

    The problem is that porn wants to continue to fight the last war, which it has already lost. It’s over and porn waived the white flag of surrender.

    First, there is no First Amendment right to film condomless porn. None. Nada. Zippo. That was porn’s argument in the Vivid v LA County suit. A federal judge ruled against porn – he specifically said there is no infringement on porn’s First Amendment rights. Porn appealed that ruling and lost. At that point, porn had a choice: It could appeal further to the Supreme Court, or it could accept the ruling as law and move on. Porn chose to move on. Anyone who continues to argue porn’s First Amendment right is wrong on the law.

    Second, whether condoms are sufficient or effective doesn’t matter. The second part of the federal judge’s ruling, upheld on appeal, is that there are workplace health and public health issues at stake and that requiring condom usage was legal. While porn people talk all the time about condoms breaking, condom rashes, condom whatevers, they never argued that in court. It was not part of their legal argument for why condoms are unnecessary. Porn’s legal argument – which is all that matters – is that its testing system is great and condoms are unnecessary. The judge rejected that out of hand and said: Condoms are the law. Porn appealed and lost. Porn then surrendered.

    So, all the talk about First Amendment and effectiveness is interesting, but its not the law. It’s a little like arguing with a Massachusetts State Trooper that the Click It Or Ticket law isn’t really constitutional because seat belts in and of themselves have problems. Then, he gives you a ticket for $250 because, as the sign says: Click It or Ticket Is The Law.

    If porn is really serious about this, it can start filing suits every time OSHA issues a fine and make your arguments. But again, the problem is: Condoms are the law as a direct result of a lawsuit filed by the porn industry, and porn accepted the verdict.

    From a legal standpoint, porn brought this on itself.

  14. LurkingReader

    @rawalex

    Been to the circus lately? The highwire has for all intents been replaced with vertical ropes/fabric. Shriner’s still have motorcycle on highwire WITH guide wires.

    Producers and agents are in the same boat garment factory, saw mill and other labor intensive industries when they didn’t want to comply with labor safety.

  15. Karmafan

    Piss OSHA off and they will fine you into the stone age and put your studio out of business because you can’t cover the fines.

Leave a Reply