The double standard for HIV testing between gay and straight porn

?LGBT Reporter, Analyst & Cultural Commentator
HOMETOWN: Boston
EMAIL: [email protected]

from:  http://www.gerardcourcyreports.com/disparity.html

The double standard for HIV testing between gay and straight porn is a powder keg in the porn industry that has been building up for years. The Free Speech Coalition’s Diane Duke is always the first to propagate the self-regulation story when there are rumors of possible HIV transmission on a porn set. The FSC consistently spreads propaganda that the porn industry successfully self-regulates HIV with their own self-mandated testing protocols even going as far as stating that “The industry last year increased the frequency of required STD testing for performers from once a month to every 14 days” in an LA Times article.

If there is a hint of HIV on a porn set the FSC blasts out an industry wide moratorium on filming porn. A moratorium that is and always has been 100% propaganda designed to spread the public misconception that FSC’s self-mandated testing protocols are followed by all porn companies both straight and gay, a fact the FSC knows is false but the LA Times believes to be true.

Kink.com is no exception to the HIV testing double standard. The company requires HIV tests for all straight shoots but no HIV tests for gay shoots allegedly even going as far as casting models they know are HIV positive without disclosure to their scene partners. Kink.com purports to follow FSC’s self-mandated testing protocols and kept their own testing double standards a secret until a new lawsuit claiming the company caused a gay porn model to contract HIV on a porn shoot surfaced recently.

Whether Kink.com opts to place the blame on the head of their gay production department who was put on sabbatical or hide behind the old private medical information excuse the one thing they can not explain is their company’s own double standard for HIV testing by choosing not to require HIV tests for the highest HIV risk models they cast. The only logical explanation for keeping a testing double standard is that Kink.com, like Raging/Falcon/HotHouse/NakedSword, wants to continue filming scenes with models they know are HIV positive and FSC’s self-mandated HIV testing protocols hinder that choice.

The next time you read about a self-imposed moratorium on porn shoots blasted out by the FSC know that you are reading propaganda designed to make you believe the porn industry has HIV under control through FSC’s self-mandated testing protocols.

Now you EXCLUSIVELY know that the FSC’s moratoriums and self-mandated testing protocols don’t include gay porn at all. – by Gerard Courcy

119840cookie-checkThe double standard for HIV testing between gay and straight porn

The double standard for HIV testing between gay and straight porn

Share This

10 Responses

  1. I am a fan of Kink’s straight shoots and usually post in support of them. On this one, however, I can’t support their policies regarding HIV prevention for gay talent. All talent in porn should be tested at least once a month (most straight porn producers require a test twice a month) and people with HIV should only have sex with others that have the disease — whether gay, lesbian, straight or TS. This isn’t anything I haven’t said here before.

    As for the cause of their mandatory condom for gay shoots policy not being enforced I don’t know if it is the gay talent manager, Van Darkholme himself (he does not have the greatest reputation) or upper management. I have a feeling that if there was actually an HIV transmission at Kink as described in this post and he is even remotely at fault Van Darkholme will not have his contract renewed when it expires just as Princess Donna’s was not renewed after the tit implant puncture that took place on her set a couple of years ago. I don’t think Kink would have a problem finding a replacement for Van Darkholme, they already have Maestro Stefanos who is purported to swing both ways and could take over the gay sites on the payroll full-time. They also have a separate director for their gay wrestling site (I think his name is Nick Moretti) already so he could possibly take over Van Darkholme’s sites and work full-time for Kink.

    As for the head of gay production being put on sabbatical, I don’t know what that means in porn but in post-secondary education that means the university allows a professor to not teach for a year to work on a special project of his liking while receiving full pay and bennies from the university and guaranteed reinstatement to his professorship at the end. If a sabbatical in porn involves receiving full pay and benefits while not working with a guarantee of reinstatement (I doubt it means he is working on a special project, I don’t see how a porn company could require that) when over that really isn’t much of a punishment for him.

  2. Nick Moretti hasn’t been there in years. They stopped filming on three of their sites, Naked Kombat, Bound In Public, and 30 minutes of torment. Sebastian Keys and some hanger on named Porno Bobbie do most of the casting and production on the gay side of Kink. The problem is that they use some gay talent to shoot on their TS Seduction and Divine Bitches site and most of those scenes are condom free. I don’t know if they cut the gay sites because of the testing issues, they weren’t making money, or that they were very extreme in what they did.

    A number of performers that worked on the TS and Divine Bitches site, shoot bareback for gay productions.

  3. Oh my…gay stuff…we are in the politically correct territory here. So we can’t point out the fact that gay performers are the first responsible for Kink having that double standard, right? Maybe they are just stupid. Or maybe they are just irresponsible. Most likely, there wouldn’t be any gay porn without those double standards because the majority of gay performers have something to gift you with and the minority have habits which will lead them to have something to gift you with, sooner than later. But hey…this can’t be told clearly without being called homophobic. So, let’s call Kink guilty (surely to a certain extent they are) and let’s keep pretending that equal rights pass through being all gay. With pride of course.

  4. I may be on shaky legal ground here – and if the lurking lawyer who weighed in on one of my posts about federal courts appeals is still visiting the site, I’d appreciate his take. But …. I have always contended that you can’t discriminate on performers based on their sexual orientation, even if the prevalence of HIV and STDs in the gay population is higher than the prevalence of the same in the straight population. I think that under the law, what you do for one, you’d have to do for all. Frankly, that is the way it works in every profession except for porn – a dentist doesn’t treat straight patients differently than gay patients. The dentist wears gloves and protective eye wear with all patients. If a gay performer is qualified to perform in a straight film and can do the job, legally I think you have to treat him or her the same as a straight performer.

    There is an exception around giving blood, but even that was under attack. It’s another example of porn just making it up as it goes along and getting away with it because regulatory authorities just find it icky to deal with pornography.

  5. Mike, Can we assume that you either have no relationship or an adversarial relationship with Peter Acworth? Is there no hope of going straight to the horse’s mouth on this one, or are they a “no comment” because of legal issues sort of shop on these issues? Being located in San Francisco, and with as many performers as I see active in SF events and the community (both in activism and in social settings), I would hope and indeed expect them to be a bit more cognizant of Kink’s adherence to some sort of regulatory standard. I understand that it might not be so, but I wonder if anyone that is currently on the FSC’s side is the enemy, if the chance is lost to convince orgs that the emperor is naked thus they are behaving badly and should make changes.

  6. Shows that I don’t keep up with the gay side of Kink (I am not gay). I guess they may be looking for a director for what gay sites are left soon, then.

  7. @BT

    In the current political atmosphere seems the industry testing discrimination will in itself likely be grounds for a lawsuit by a disgruntled gay performer. This morning read that FDA and several other alphabet agencies are not only attacking the 32year ban on gays giving blood but actively pursuing repeal of the ban …not because the blood supply would be safe but because it would be discriminatory to leave ban in place.

    Crystal Ball prediction…look for blood banking services to sprout up across the USA. Blood Banking has been around for a long time & used by many undergoing planned or elective surgery. When not if the ban is repealed it seems logical that someone will make a buck marketing banking ‘just in case’

  8. Actually in many areas a person can already bank his own blood for an elective surgery. A blood bank where people can bank blood in case of an accident wouldn’t be much of a stretch from what is already done. However, that only works if you have that unfortunate accident in your home area. It would take too long and cost too much to fly your blood from NYC to SF or Grand Rapids to Abeline to make it workable.

Leave a Reply