Twitter

Which Is A Bigger Turn Off Gay Guys in Straight Porn or Condoms

Fans have been complaining about gay guys in straight porn for ages, a lot of people even think that is one of the big reasons that porn has been in steady decline ever since gay performers started showing up more and more in straight porn.

Now all the studios in L.A. are resisting the condom mandate vehemently claiming it will hurt sales but the way it looks from here casting gay guys in straight porn also hurts sales, maybe even more.

So what say my readers on this issue?  Which do you find a bigger turn off condoms or gay performers or both?

81710cookie-checkWhich Is A Bigger Turn Off Gay Guys in Straight Porn or Condoms
Picture of Mike

Mike

Which Is A Bigger Turn Off Gay Guys in Straight Porn or Condoms

Share This

79 Responses

  1. First off, I wouldn’t use the term “gay”- these men are bisexual, but I’m well aware that many people refuse to believe there’s such a thing as bisexuality. As a female, I couldn’t possibly care less if the male performer is bisexual or supposedly 100% straight. I care about them giving a good performance. As for condoms, if the content is good enough, I can overlook them. But if the content is sub-par to begin with, condoms are a deal-breaker.

  2. The gay guys CANNOT maintain an erection wearing a rubber, period. There, I’ve said it! That is what the fuss is REALLY about. And why do they hire gay guys? Simple! They need to advertise their ENTIRE stable of prostitutes to MEN! Next time you see a new porno, just realize that what you are watching is what you can get yourself for the right price!!! Sad but true! Times have changed, my friends. Oh, how they’ve changed!!!!

  3. How does one know that they are gay? If they are singing show tunes during sex on camera then I can understand that it may turn some people off, but if they are balls deep in a woman how would sexual orientation even be a factor? Are people able to see someone naked having sex and get turned off because they notice that the male performer is gay. How do you notice? That’s a slightly bigoted question.

  4. Condoms are a bigger turn off. I don’t know of gay pornstars other than those mentioned here so I don’t think about it.

  5. Gays in porn are a bigger turn off to me. One of the posters asked, how do you know they’re gay. It’s a good question, since I’ve never gone to a gay website catering to men. So, I wouldn’t know who crosses over just from watching. But, there is just something you can tell. Long before I knew his affection for trannies, I was turned off by scenes with Christian. Now, he’s a good looking guy. And, for a year, he wrote a really great blog on being male talent in LA. It was well-written, entertaining and I checked in daily. There was just something about his scenes that bugged me.

    I’ve had the same experience with some other actors who I later learned crossed over.

    There’s just a chemistry that’s missing.

  6. Since the beginning of the condom debate, I have always said that Bang Bros has ALWAYS shot with condoms since as far back as I can remember almost any scene Ive scene them produce has condoms in it. They have the most awards and some of the biggest sites in online porn.. they also sell DVD’s etc right? Some people have said, that some of the guys that are male talent there have been doing gay 4 pay , but are straight or bi or just doing it for the pay.. so, I think this proves in both cases that neither HURT sales. Though I’m not stating an opinion on this for myself, just simply stating what I see to be a real scientific answer, considering Bang Bros and their entire network has been around longer than 10 years producing quality amateur/reality porn. I personally think it’s a better message to the civilized to use condoms considering sex education should be part of porn on SOME level.. even if it is teaching you how to give your GF a facial or showing some guys where the FUCK THE CLIT IS? Condoms are smart, and though some people may be allergic to latex or various other reasons.. and that’s certainly a reason not to use them… but a drop in sales is not a good reason. I think there’s a bang bros helicopter…it lands at the bang bros McMansion.. etc.

  7. Personally, Christian XXX is gross. Too muscular. I don’t think he is exuding homosexuality in his performances though. He doesn’t look anything like Rod Daily who is obviously gay. Women and gay men are the only ones that make duck faces when taking selfies.

  8. I am allergic to latex condoms. I have to use ones made out of various plastics. There is a newer synthetic latex that I haven’t used yet, but there are alternatives.

  9. So Condoms yes for safety and health of the performers and NO on Bi-boys. You got to go! and get rid of those (BI) and or gay agents that pimp them off. The Industry only needs one agent and people from other agencies that a good employees affected by the “ridding” of the
    other fucked up agency that let people with Heppie for 3 years and other deadly diseaes, You got to go to Prison and deal with the reality like Seymour Butts and his fucked up, shitty, I need attention productions! You suck!

  10. I use condoms always in my private life, and so the sight of condoms doesn’t bother me in the least. I honestly don’t understand how they would bother anyone who uses them regularly. I guess maybe if you’re married or in a committed monogamous relationship, and don’t use them anymore, then maybe they might be a turn off. But if you use them regularly I don’t see why they would bother you.

    The moral of the story? Probably that WAY too few people are using condoms in their private sex lives.

  11. So I’m assuming you haven’t seen much major-studio gay porn, nearly all of which require condoms? Beg to differ.

  13. Don’t wear condoms either. 7 kids and one woman in my life…whooaa!
    That’s it for me. Clip!

  14. I was confused about the majority of your response, but I thought this part was hysterical and very well put.

    “Kink.com has a very bright future with Peter Cockworth and he is a
    very brillant cocaine user and crack smoker that loves seeing female
    having the shit kicked out of them and gay men he sucks off before they shove their cocks up those girls asses and ripped and shredded to nothing, Hell, look at Franchesca Le’s ass and she’s been doing for 40 years!”

    Amen.

  15. @Ricco: I have absolutely no fucking idea what you were attempting to say in your comment, I just happened to notice that I was mentioned. Beyond that, the reason you prefer unattractive male performers is because you find them unthreatening. More women than ever watch porn now and we prefer to see attractive men, neither old ugly bald guys nor obvious steroid freaks. PORN IS NOT JUST FOR MEN.

  16. I know a lot of women with tattoos that say a lot of men don’t like them. The tattoos always wind up being one of the reasons why the relationships end. However, those who date guys with tattoos don’t complain.

    Tattoos aren’t the future. I don’t have tattoos and I don’t want someone with tattoos. I don’t want to see someone covered in poor choices. In the case of porn I would already be watching that. It isn’t erotic if I overdo it.

    Tattoos are a trend. It will end. When the baby boomer children realize that our parents worked hard to have what they have and they see the tattoos stopping them from getting that life it will end. Yeah, that tattoo on the guy or gal’s neck will get them the job as the bank manager. Right? Tattoos are not the future.

    Heavily tattooed strippers with no fame make less than those with no tattoos and no fame. I don’t think that is because those without tattoos put on a better show. Remember, those people are paying customers.

  17. The only future tattoos have on the countries future is riding it into the toilet faster. Sideways hates, tattoos and pants near the bottom of your ass all equal one thing……. Minimum wage. This countries fucked. The companies removing tattoos in 7 years will be prospering at all the white trashes expenses. Sorry but true. What a mess the US is in. Very sad for the next generation. Won’t even be able to put food on their table …. Oh sorry I forgot about obamas food stamp program. That is one warped view on the future. Very sad to hear.

  18. Pants near the bottom of my ass and tattoos mean minimum wage?

    *scratches head*

    A lot of the trash I know that tattoo also offer removal. Apparently, offering that doesn’t hurt business.

    *scratches head*

    So, the US is in a mess because of tattoos?

    Shit. It is worse than I thought…

  19. @CPanzram/Cmonreally: oh for god’s sake, some people like tattoos, some don’t. Those who choose to have themselves covered in ink from their toes to their eyebrows obviously don’t have their sights set on a bank job. Tattoos are no more and no less than a form of self-expression. And if a man is so damn shallow that he’d dump a woman over her having tattoos, why was he with her in the first place? And somehow it’s OK for men to have tattoos, but not women? Burning Angel is still doing quite well, so obviously there are a fair amount of men who like tattoos on women. It’s a personal choice. Just live and let live. I’ve never seen so damn many conservative Republican opinions on a porn blog…….

  20. I could give a shit about condoms in teh fucking scene, but you’ll never get a nation-wide law, which means shooting will just move elsewhere.
    Guys who shoot gay scenes shouldnt be in straight porn. Sorry, but the testing on the homo side is terrible . Listen to these two assholes.

  21. The trash that do the tattoos didn’t create the laser technology they are using to remove them. That’s a separate company. It’s similar to a server at McDonald’s serving the Big Mac or other white trash with a sideways Nike hat. You obviously don’t get it and neither does 99% of a once opportunistic country. When these girls are 60 god bless they live that long their tramp stamps and other dirty art will be wrinkled and look like shit to their poor grand children if any or they know the father. I doubt they get that far. Ignorance becomes reality in time and it will do it again. This time it’s too late. Immigrants still come here to work hard and provide. Why? Cause they are taking advantage of the lazy new generation American who would rather believe they are owed something than work for it.

    Tattoos only hinder opportunity outside of dirty work opportunities. The only ones who used to wear them well deserved marines and navy seals. And they were not all over their body like ROYGBIV. Wake up the games over in this country because of the views of the next generation. Pathetic.

    Handouts aren’t the way to run a country and without this trash coming up next. we wouldn’t need it.

    I would bet there are more minimum wage workers with tats than not. Take it to Vegas they won’t hold that bet and you can mark my words they won’t. Add in low riding white trash pants and you cover 90% of the minimum wage and unemployed.

    Sad but true. Good luck with your view on this.

  22. Take a look at the video below. You can always see it in their eyes. They walk around with a glazed stare all day long. You can pick up,on this in a straight porn. It’s disgusting they are allowed to crossover and its more disgusting the females fuck them. If they are gay and fucking females you can bet they are fucking farm animals too. They don’t care where they put it. Let them play in their own sand box and spread the disease where it’s most dominated. Gays don’t belong fucking chicks in straight porn. These poor girls have no shame. Let them do their eye glazing on their own. Not that there’s anything wrong with that

  23. Just how gay could they really be?

    Anyway, a bigger turnoff to me than condoms in porn is guys with six-packs. Why is all pornography now geared toward women, with all the male talent in-shape with rock-hard visible abs?! What happened to the days of Harvey magazine and Ron Jeremy? I want to watch porn of regular middle-aged guys with too much belly fat like me getting laid, not guys that are in much better shape – watching in-shape guys just makes me feel bad half the time. How at least 1/3 of porn doesn’t cater to its male consumers by featuring regular guys is beyond me.

    Oh, and if you are looking for talent that fits that bill, I have a handful of credits, BTW…

  24. @Dirk: because they figured out that couples and women were a lucrative market and women want to see attractive men just as men want to see attractive women. Porn is not “just for men” anymore. If you’re looking for men who fit the physical type you’re more comfortable with, look up Tim Von Swine’s productions. His mission is bringing the Ron Jeremy type back to porn. Also, have you seen Anthony Rosano? He’s 40-ish, not toned at all, and average-looking, yet he consistently works with the hottest female talent. Porn should cater to all different aesthetic preferences, not just one type. It’s all there if you look for it. Oh, and for the record, most women don’t like the steroid-freak, spray-tanned Tommy Gunn types either. Somewhere in the middle is preferable. Manuel Ferrara is very popular with women, and he doesn’t have a gym-toned body, and James Deen definitely doesn’t work out, and is more on the skinny side than anything else. I think you can spare 1/3rd of porn for people with different preferences as to what they want to see.

  25. I’m talking about sleeves and things along those lines. If someone has like 2 or 3 I don’t care. I can easily let that slide without a problem. I’m referring to people that look like coloring books.

  26. It is only legal to shoot in Cali and NH. Therefore, no one is asking for nationwide. A mandatory condom law isn’t needed anywhere else minus those two states. They can already be busted just for shooting. Therefore, using condoms would be common sense because the idea is to not give them a reason to bust you.

  27. I know tattoo shops that also offer laser removal. Creating it doesn’t mean anything.

    You’re right. I would say 50 instead of 60. Tattoos can be nice if you are young, but they aren’t like Color Forms where you can just peel them off. (Shit. I just showed my age) The arms aren’t going to stay tight. If you pop out a kid that tat on your belly is probably going to look deformed.

    I’ve seen amazing tattoos. Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes they are beautiful. In 5 years the detail is clearly going. In 10 that portrait of Mike Tyson that Rod Daily has on his arm is going to look like shit. (Why would you get a tattoo of a convicted rapist on your arm?)

  30. @CPanzram: the hints with tattoos are to choose wisely when picking an image and an artist, have them in places where the body changes less as you age (forearms, behind the neck, ankles, shoulder blades), use sunscreen when exposed, and get regular touch-ups every few years to correct fading. They are not maintenance-free. And NEVER get facial or hand tattoos, bc there’s just no way those aren’t eventually going to look like a bad decision.

  31. @CPanzram: some people can get away with sleeves- tattoo artists, musicians, bikers- it requires a certain attitude. And they have to be extremely well-done. As for porn stars, Bonnie Rotten’s tattoos are atrocious, while Sophia Santi has a beautiful Japanese dragon tattoo that covers most of her back and part of her left side. It’s like night and day.

  32. Damn, Ricco! Seven children, that is a lot. You are a much better person than I. I guess your wife is part of the Quiverfull movement whether she wants to be or not. 🙂

  33. I’ve met a lot of bikers with sleeve tattoos way before they were even popular. (Remember back when that person was unique?) Years back they looked great, but bikers and a lot of more hardcore musicians don’t stay out of sun or use moisturizers/lotions and such to help preserve them or the skin they are on. Therefore, after years of life the tattoos look smudged, faded, and no where near as amazing as they once looked.

    I was referring to the Bonnie Rotten types originally. Their life in this industry is limited. However, young girls with a lot of tattoos that still look nice will always have fans.

  34. @CPanzram: a lot of people don’t seem to realize that tattoos require maintenance and skincare. To me it’s obvious.

  35. Let me reiterate, k? Gay guys cannot have sex with WOMEN using condoms! If they are with a guy, they can use two or three of them and be fine because they like what they are doing!

  36. @Nick East: you aren’t reiterating, since you didn’t state that in the first place. As for “gay guys,” whom you mention to the point of obsession, sexuality is a continuum. If a supposedly gay male can stay hard using a condom while having sex with a woman (reference Blake Riley in “Shifting Gears”), he is bisexual, not 100% gay. I seriously doubt there are any 100% gay men having sex with women in straight porn, but if that’s what you believe, that’s YOUR issue. “Two or three condoms”?? I will assume you’re being facetious with that remark.

  37. I agree with Dirk, for me guys that look too pretty (model type) or are gay looking are the biggest turn off. So If guys like Xander, Deen or Evans are anywhere in the movie, I will rather not watch it, even if it is the hottest girl in the planet. I prefer more porn with regular guys. Ferrera is also not my cup of tea. I feel like porn particularly in the last 10 years are now full of dudes that look straight out of gay porn, metro sexual, and also full of girls just infested with tattoos or masculine women. That is why watching sometimes movies for the smaller websites, or the back couch, even allure with more regular joes is better. I felt like back in the day even Rocco Sifredi was kind of too pretty for porn but the quality of the European women was pretty good, and he was always mixing it up. Now he appears ok versus the newer talent who are super gay, are often look like clones of each other

  38. @dan11: why is it that an attractive male performer looks “gay” to you?? Is it somehow threatening to you to have a good-looking male performer onscreen? I don’t want to see ANY unattractive performers, female or male. The things I dislike are obvious enormous fake breasts and spray-tans on female performers who likely looked better before they altered their appearances. But others DO like that look, and that’s their preference. I don’t know how old you are, but the way younger men have gotten their wives and girlfriends to watch porn stems from the existence of performers who DON’T look like Ron Jeremy. There are still performers like Anthony Rosano and Tim Von Swine who fit the aesthetic of the 70’s and much of the 80’s. Again, why do you feel that good-looking straight male porn stars appear “super gay”? Tattoos, also, are a matter of personal preference. There are still plenty of female performers who have either no tattoos or just one or two small ones. As for “masculine women,” the only ones who come to mind are Jewels Jade and Chyna. Again, porn is not just for men, and not just for a single aesthetic preference. It’s 2013 now, not 1980, and change is to be expected.

  39. I know you like to be politically correct, sachertorte but you have no idea what you are talking about. Gay guys are vicious. I say that as someone who identifies as straight but could be considered queer. There is an entire stable of bareback guys from the 70s and 80s who are dead. DEAD. There’s no memorial to them or nothing. No acknowledgement of the fact that their deaths were entirely preventable. Porn just rolls on by as if they were nothing. That’s the truth of gay pornography–even pornography in general–they don’t give a crap.

    Likewise, having sex with a tranny might be a popular fantasy but it is a surefire way to contract a disease. I feel for transgendered people but they are not safe in this Industry.

    Keep gay guys out of straight porn–for the safety of women. You could have done gay-for-pay in the past but it must be in the past. Male performers who fuck trannies must be blacklisted. Again, I understand it is a common fantasy but it often leads to disease.

    And, frankly, women generally don’t want gay performers in straight porn. All the top male performers loved by women do not concurrently perform in gay pornography. Manuel is fiercely straight and he’s the most loved male performer of all time. Likewise Lexington Steele, Sean Michaels, Mandingo, Jon Jon, Mark Ashley, Kerian Lee, James Deen, Voodoo, Mark Wood, Mick Blue, Jordan Ash, etc are all straight. And six-packs are nice but they aren’t everything. Women love Manuel but for the longest time he notoriously never had a six pack. I understand you might watch gay porn in your private life–and that’s fine–but why would you want a guy looking out the window while he’s having sex with a ravenously beautiful woman?

  40. @origen01: I don’t know what you’re getting from my previous posts, but they have nothing to do with being “politically correct” it’s called being open-minded. Far too many off the commenters on here call any male performer they dislike “gay,” some use “faggot” to attack those with opposing views, and I have been called “slut,” “whore,” and “cunt” by one in particular who for some reason originally decided I was a bisexual man from Los Angeles. There’s an astonishing amount of really old-school homophobia on here. And actually I DO know what I’m talking about. I’ve known numerous gay men, and some are vicious and some are perfectly decent people. As for gay porn, all the major American studios- Falcon, Titan, Raging Stallion, Lucas Entertainment, all of Chi Chi LaRue’s studios, etc, have been condom-only for years. How is that not giving a crap? Chi Chi LaRue famously stopped directing straight porn for Vivid when they decided to ditch the mandatory condoms. On the other extreme, Treasure Island Media/Paul Morris of course don’t give a crap- the whole idea is to be as transgressive as possible and treat HIV+ status as a sort of badge of honor- but TIM remains an extremely controversial studio and many online vendors and adult stores won’t carry their releases. So I feel you are tarring everyone with the same brush.

    As for pre-op MTF transsexuals in porn, or “she-males,” there’s no reason for them to be banned if condoms are being used and testing is being done. “Male performers who fuck trannies must be blacklisted.” I find this incredibly discriminatory. USE CONDOMS. TEST. Christian XXX should be blacklisted?? Really? If he insists on going BB, you have a valid reason, but not if he’s using protection.

    I never implied that women “want” gay performers in straight porn. Crossovers cannot be considered “gay” if they enjoy fucking women. There IS such a thing as bisexual men. I have yet to see any scene with a “crossover” performer in which he was “looking out the window.” I have seen plenty of scenes with straight male performers in which there was zero chemistry with the female performer, which has the same “looking out the window” effect you referred to. The gay men I know and have known are generally revolted by the idea of vaginas, and I can’t imagine any amount of money or performance-enhancing drugs that would enable them to have sex with a woman without looking thoroughly unhappy. as for the straight male performers you listed, I had already mentioned Manuel Ferrara as being very popular with women despite not having a gym-toned body. Rocco Siffredi remains popular with many women despite not having aged that well and his famous roughness. As for Lexington Steele and Mandingo, I have always considered them mediocre performers. With them, it’s all about “I’m here and I have a huge cock.” I also mentioned James Deen, who is currently the most popular male performer among younger women, and also the fact that his build veers more towards skinny/average than ripped. I have never known any women who felt Mark Wood was particularly attractive. You left out Erik Everhard, who’s definitely not a ”pretty boy,” though he obviously keeps himself in shape, and is popular with many women as well. I never implied that everyone needs a six-pack. I will watch nearly anything with Manuel Ferrara because he has that intensity going for him, he has that accent, and he has a nice face. I would actually find it odd if he took time off and suddenly reappeared looking like an MMA fighter. Along the same lines, most women are turned off by obvious steroid users like Tommy Gunn and Marcus London. Most women prefer something in between chunky, pasty, unfortunately-coiffed Anthony Rosano and spray-tanned, muscles-where-they-wouldn’t-exist-in-nature Tommy Gunn.
    .

  41. sachertorte, I have an open mind but you are just trying to be politically correct at the risk of acting foolish. I don’t want to be rude but I really want to stress the seriousness of my point. You don’t really know what you’re talking about because you haven’t had promiscuous gay sex a man now, have you? You haven’t been around the bathhouses. You don’t know how reckless these guys can get–despite the good efforts of a minority comprised of the likes of Michael Lucas and Chi Chi La Rue. If you know what you are talking about you would know that bareback is what’s “in” with gay pornography and it is known that most bareback performers are poz. As for tranny porn, condoms are not often the norm.

    Let’s look at the Industry HIV outbreaks of the past decade. All of them except one were related to cross-over performers and transsexuals. From Darren James to present day…

    And enough with the homophobia taunt. I’ve already gave you a hint as to my sexuality. This is not about hating sexual preferences this is just stating the reality. This Industry is shady and dangerous. We don’t have the option to “give everyone a chance”.

  42. …But i’m sorry some posters have called you dirty names on here. Such people are not men and are not deserving of the company of women.

  43. Here’s what I find most interesting about the cross-over talent. On the one hand, you have individuals who say we can’t mandate condoms in porn – some talent going so far as to say that condoms will actually increase the incidents of STDs in porn because condoms break. That, even though every medical and disease expert on the planet except the FSC 3-doc advisory board recommends the use of condoms to prevent STDS.

    Meanwhile, people suggest that the industry ban cross-over talent because gays engage in high risk activities when that would be a clear violation of employment law. You cannot discriminate against someone based on their sexual orientation – if a cross-over talent has a clean bill of health, they’re no different than straight talent with a clean bill of health.

    What I don’t get on the high risk sexual activity ….. how is Julia Ann or Lisa Ann performing bareback double anal penetration any less risky than gay sex – a penis or two in an anus is no different if the receiver is a man than a woman.

  44. Bt, every person in porn is at the same risk level as the riskiest person in the pool of performers, and right now, jennifer White is the standard. The degree of seperation between all performers is too small to think that any individual is at less risk than anybody else.

    Some companies require 30 day tests, while others say 15 But that girl who works for the company that requires a 15 day old test worked yesterday with a guy who had a 25 day old test.

    That crossover performer who had a 10 day old test worked yesterday on a gay shoot with a guy who was not tested.

    A female performer says “I dont do anal creampie” but then works with one of the guys from the 50 man gangbang. So, she does, in effect, do anal creampie.

    Female perfomrer says “I dont escort” but in one month works with five guys who all worked with five other girls who do escort. And some of the guys she worked with escort to. But she doesnt escort?

  45. Jilted: You and I are in complete agreement on this. I’d add that the female performer who says she doesn’t do an anal creampie today probably does tomorrow. I use Lisa Ann and Julia Ann as the standards since they’ve been around for years and are considered “stars.” Both have done anal and vaginal creampies, DPs, double anal, and gang bangs.

  46. Its different because if they are doing with gay guys, those guys are getting dicks shoved up their asses, too, which is the best way to spread HIV. If they do the scene with guys that don’t allow other guys to stick cocks in their ass, those guys are far less likely to have HIV.

  47. @BT *sigh*. I’m sorry but you just don’t get it. I wish The Colonel was around to break it down for you. You need some of that Old Testament wisdom…

    Lisa and Julia Ann getting DPed is a high risk but HIV–and right now we are only talking about HIv–is more prevalent among men who have sex with men. Also, in my experience, MsMs are far more promiscuous than women who consider themselves promiscuous–so there is a more fluid vector for transmitting the disease.

    As for “clean bill of health” we both know that is baloney. We already know testing doesn’t work and is just a confidence booster for performers who roll dice whenever they fuck on camera. Testing does not occur frequently enough to ensure detection of STIs and there is a latency period that inhibits detection for a good number of therm–including HIV!

    I mean, prostitution opens up the door to all sorts of diseases–HIV included–but we are talking about the source that has the highest risk level–and that source are men who have bareback sex with men.

    As for discrimination, again, nobody is pissing over anyone’s sexual orientation–this is simply an industrial firewall relating solely to one’s occupational practices.

  48. Origen. I don’t disagree that there is a higher prevalence of HIV among gay men than heterosexuals.

    Second, I have no dog in this argument. In my personal life I’m not gay or bisexual. I have no interest in gay or bisexual porn. Heck, I’m not even a fan of girl on girl porn. Like Mike, as a consumer, I prefer condomless sex.

    What I’m saying is that porn is a workplace. As such, porn has to abide by workplace rules. Under the law, you cannot discriminate based on sexual orientation. Heck, under the law, you can’t even ask about sexual orientation.

    There is no porn exception to workplace rules. Porn attempts to make arguments that imply that it is a special class of business that demands special protections or exemptions over other businesses. There’s no basis for that in the law. Porn just learned this in the decision that recently went against it. The judge found that AHF presented evidence and experts to support its legal arguments. Porn just said stuff – the same stuff we read over and over – while offering nothing more than its point of view and statements from porn talent. The judge rejected their arguments out of hand.

    Employment law says you cannot discriminate against a potential employee solely on the basis of sexual orientation. If a gay porn actor has a clean bill of health, they have to be treated like any other potential actor with a clean bill of health. Sorry that’s the law.

    Look at it this way: A restaurant employee is required to wash his or her hands after a bowel movement. In porn, you can put an unwashed penis in someone’s vagina or mouth after removing it from someone’s rectum. In any other industry, that would be grounds for a lawsuit or a shutdown by the Department of Health or OSHA or both.

    Porn does not seem to realize that condoms are not porn’s biggest threat. OSHA, the Department of Health and Equal Employment Opportunity Commission are porn’s biggest potential threats. I guarantee you that’s why AHF is pushing workplace complains against Kink.com and others. Their actions are asking government agencies to treat a porn set like any other workplace.

  49. @ BT,
    I’m saying to you that this not an issue of sexual orientation. This has solely to do with occupational history. If it is known that a particular talent is shooting gay/tranny content and posting ads on rentboy.com, that person should be blacklisted. The reason he/she should be blacklisted is because of their proximity to HIV and not because of their sexual orientation.

  50. I understand. And, what I’m saying to you is that blacklisting someone who has a clean bill of health today because of their proximity to HIV in the future would be a violation of equal employment opportunity law.

    Every occupation that involves the potential transmission of a disease, sexually transmitted or otherwise, injury to employees or product contamination is required by law to have some kind of protections in place. A janitor, for instance, has to wear latex gloves to clean toilets. That’s not to protect the toilet. It’s to protect the janitor.

    Porn’s legal position, as argued in the Vivid Video case, is that porn should be exempt from the same type of protections required in every other occupation. Specifically, condoms are not required in porn because testing procedures protect talent from the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, regardless of the acts committed, and regardless of off screen activity.

    Porn has not argued that testing is effective, except when actresses do privates with the general public, or when male talent performs in both homosexual and heterosexual scenes or does high risk privates with homosexual individuals.

    Porn’s legal position, as argued in court, is: We do not need regulation of any sort because testing works, period. End of story.

    As soon as porn says that testing only works if we exclude certain talent that performs certain kinds of scenes, its legal argument falls apart. We don’t know how Cameron Bay acquired HIV, and we don’t know Rod Daily’s status, so I’m only using this as a scenario and not implying anything. But, let’s say that Cameron Bay was living with Rod Daily. Let’s say that he wasn’t professional talent. Just a dude who liked to have sex with gals and guys. And, let’s say that he acquired HIV and passed it on to her. Are you saying that porn should also blacklist any actress who lives off-screen with a guy who is not part of the industry but may have high-risk hobbies?

    Last, the example you’re using applies to HIV. But, the legal standard for protection against the transmission of disease is not limited to HIV. You cannot protect employees from HIV but expose them to other STDs. Female talent is every bit as vulnerable to STDs other than HIV as male talent.

    Back to equal employment, if a valid test is the standard by which talent is deemed eligible to work today, you cannot legally say to a segment of the potential employment pool with a clean test that you are denying them the opportunity for work today because they may not have a clean test tomorrow. That’s just not legal.

    And again, once porn says that testing is only effective for performers who don’t engage in certain activities (or have sex with persons who engage in certain activities), then testing doesn’t work.

    Remember, porn’s argument related to Cameron Bay is: testing worked. We caught it before it spread to other performers.

    To my original example: A janitor is required to wear latex gloves to prevent the spread of disease from cleaning a toilet. However, female talent is routinely expected to swallow semen from an unwashed penis that was just in her rectum.

    In any industry but porn, CAL-OSHA or the Department of Health would shut that business down in a heartbeat and someone would either get fined or go to jail. Which again is why porn has more to fear from AHF putting heat on Cal-OSHA than the condom mandate.

  51. It probably wouldn’t be considered a violation of the equal opportunity law if it was put in the context that Talent A (crossover talent) works for companies that don’t test nor require a test. Talent B (non-crossover) only works for companies that test. In the end the female performer should always have the option who they want to work for. I don’t think a court is going to find cite a company or performer a company in violation of the law if they don’t want to have sex with somebody.

    It’s not a secret that a number of female performers refuse to work with African American talent, and certain companies will haven’t exactly been great with their hiring practices with African American performers. It’s not right, but it’s not challenged much.

    I think the point is moot because I doubt any male talent would ever challenge or make an issue of not getting work because they are crossover talent. Most of the talent pool is not in a financial position to make a complaint.

    In mainstream Hollywood, many performers who have sued producers have paid dearly for it and have been blacklisted, I wouldn’t expect to be much different in porn.

  52. In the recent judge Preggeson decision he noted that the industry provided NO expert medical testimony that testing was a vialble substitute for barrier protection. While the FSC may trot out the Medical Advisory Board you will notice that they did not put any of them on the stand, under oath. And we all know why. Because no doctor in their right mind would testify to what the FSC has been selling the industry. IF the FSC had medical experts who would testify that testing is as good as barrier protection they would have put them on the stand, but they didnt have anyone willing to do that becasue it is simply a ridiculous argument.

    I was in a head on car collision about ten years ago. The seatbelf actually cause my shoulder to be dislocated. Becasue the seatbelt wasnt 100% effective in preventing any injury does that make the argument valid that you shouldnt wear seatbelts? Of course condoms dont make it 100% safe,but it is SAFER than no condom at all.

  53. Jilted – in complete agreement with everything you wrote above. I’d also note that Judge Preggeson indicated that porn’s First Amendment argument was unlikely to succeed. Does not mean that porn can’t appeal. Does not mean that they won’t win on appeal. But while it’s one of those arguments that sounds great in a bar after four beers (or with all CAPS in a post on Luke Is Back), their legal argument was not very forcefully argued at all. That’s not where they hung their hat.

    dodogoodman – agree 100% that porn talent is unlikely to file a complaint, which is the reason porn gets away with so much. But in porn, the OK to perform is based on getting a clean bill of health. And, porn’s legal argument is that porn is safe because testing is in place. Performers don’t act if they don’t have a clean bill of health.

    If that’s the standard, you can’t have two sets of criteria for people with clean bill’s of health. Then, its discriminatory.

    Having a no list in which an actress declines to do interracial is different. In that instance, the actress is declining to participate in an interracial scene – talent has the right to turn down a job because they don’t like some aspect of the job just like you and I can decide we don’t want to take a job digging ditches because we object to digging ditches. A company can even choose not to produce interracial movies. But a company cannot have a policy that says: Don’t send me black talent because I don’t want to employ them.

    Beyond that, porn’s legal theory is that testing is adequate regardless of what a performer does in their private lives or other sets because they are tested before their next performance.

    If porn’s system is only effective under certain conditions, and only by excluding certain types of individuals, then the system doesn’t work. This is especially true in an industry that thrives on new blood – everyone wants the new hot girl who may have done who knows what in her personal life – and on pushing sexual boundaries further and further.

    Again, I’d use Cameron Bay as an example – and again, just creating a scenario. I’m not implying anything about how HIV was transmitted or from whom. You have an actress who tested regularly but who lives with a cross-over actor. What if she was a Vivid or DP contract star who did Vivid and DP style movies – pretty straight forward scenes – but lived with a male who was not talent but crossed-over in his personal life. Does the industry begin OKing girls based on their private relationships even if their screen activities are pretty straight forward?

    Remember: When you have sex with a person, you are also having sex with everyone they have had sex with and everyone those individuals have had sex with.

  54. I appreciate you understanding where I am coming from. You never know what a performer does behind the camera so the blacklist should only pertain to occupational history. During periods in the past, porn would blacklist performers who were known street prostitutes–what I am proposing is not dissimilar.

    I’ll support the “Mike South rule” when it comes to condoms–a performer should ALWAYS have a right to use one and be free from any repercussions–but I still believe it should be fundamentally performer’s choice as is any sex act a performer performs on camera. However, according to California regulations, condoms are the law and California producers should abide by it.

    As for female performers and IR–female performers are not employers. Give them a break. Seriously.

  55. Origen. Completely agree that performers are not employers. A performer has the right under the law to turn down any job offer, for whatever reason they want to turn it down. If female talent is offered an IR scene, an anal scene, a gang bang scene, or a BJ scene with someone they don’t get along with, they’re free to pass on the job offer. No different than you or I deciding to turn down a job offer from Company A but accept a job from Company B.

    It’s the employer who gets in trouble.

  56. The idea of blacklisting is not just discriminatory but also pointless. Is there going to be someone monitoring what each of the performers does off-screen that would be considered high-risk? This is just another way to get those performers some people personally find offensive bc they have done transsexual or GFP scenes out of the industry.

  57. @origen01: really, I’m NOT trying to be “PC”- most “PC” women I know dislike the vast majority of “mainstream” hetero porn (“exploitative,” etc.) in the first place, and even more so the BDSM side (“degrading”). You keep insisting I don’t know what I’m talking about when it comes to gay men. I have two gay male roommates, have had numerous gay friends over the years, one friend who’s HIV+ as a result of being sexually assaulted by two HIV+ men at a meth-fueled party; another with with full-blown AIDS via HIV he contracted from his supposedly monogamous ex-boyfriend. Of course I haven’t HAD promiscuous gay sex, as the last time I checked, I didn’t have a penis. I have heard all the stories and witnessed reckless behavior. I have friends who have told me all about the bathhouse adventures they’ve had. I’ve watched some scour Craigslist, manhunt.com, and adam4adam looking for quick hookups. Grindr as well. I worked in a video store for several years in which the clientele was 70% gay and bisexual men, some out, some on the DL. They enjoyed hanging out at the store and telling me their stories, as if I was a bartender. I KNOW THE “LIFESTYLE.” I also know gay men who are monogamous and have never been to a bathhouse, looked for tricks online, or done anything remotely reckless. You seem to be saying all gay/bi men have the same lifestyle. Of course BB porn is what’s “IN” in gay porn, just as it is in straight porn. The fantasy factor creates the high demand for it. There are still men who won’t watch BB gay porn bc they firmly believe it’s irresponsible and sets a bad example. If there wasn’t still a high demand for condom-only gay porn, Falcon, Titan, Channel 1, Hothouse, Raging Stallion, and Lucas Entertainment would all be out -of-business. As for most BB performers being HIV+, I’d like to see the figures to back up that claim. And as I’m not the only person on this blog to have picked up on this- check some of the other threads- I’m sticking to my assertion that there is a definite streak of homophobia running through all this. The same person who called me “whore,” “skank,” and “cunt” also engaged in the repeated use of the word “faggot” toward someone who disagreed with him, as well as asking him if he “wanted some” from him. And it’s present in more subtle ways from other commenters.

  58. @BT: “If porn’s system is only effective under certain conditions, and only by excluding certain types of individuals, then the system doesn’t work. This is especially true in an industry that thrives on new blood – everyone wants the new hot girl who may have done who knows what in her personal life – and on pushing sexual boundaries further and further.
    Again, I’d use Cameron Bay as an example – and again, just creating a scenario. I’m not implying anything about how HIV was transmitted or from whom. You have an actress who tested regularly but who lives with a cross-over actor. What if she was a Vivid or DP contract star who did Vivid and DP style movies – pretty straight forward scenes – but lived with a male who was not talent but crossed-over in his personal life. Does the industry begin OKing girls based on their private relationships even if their screen activities are pretty straight forward?
    Remember: When you have sex with a person, you are also having sex with everyone they have had sex with and everyone those individuals have had sex with.”

    This is exactly why the concept of blacklisting makes no sense.

  59. BT their can be one standard for both sets of the industry in terms of testing. The gay industry only has a few companies that require a (somewhat)full panel test. In the late 80s the gay side universally decided to use condoms across the board. That has changed in the last decade and condom less gay porn the norm and now their top sellers. The days of condonm/non condom performers not working together in the gay industry are gone. One gay studio, the infamous treasure island got a fine from OSHA and the owner proudly proclaimed they don’t do any kind of testing there. Guess what? One of their performers showed up in at least one straight devils film scene and bragged on a forum that he bare backed with his HIV positive boyfriend.

    There already is a blacklist that exists, it’s called a talent no list. Last year 3 girls were upset that a male performer from shy loves agency had shot gay scenes just two days before they shot with him. Both said if they knew he was a crossover they would not have worked with him.

    Another interesting angle of this story is that rod daily, derrick Burts, and brenn wyson had the same agent in the gay side. Howard at fab scout who according to brenn wyson downplayed his concerns about his hep c status.

  60. And yet you are perfectly okay with calling Michael Weinstein a ‘TOOL’! He hasn’t called you any names at all, has he? You, sache, are funny! And Michael Weinstein is AWESOME!!! Here you are, complaining about being called names, yet I don’t hear you apologizing for calling Michael Weinstein a tool? WTF?

  61. @Nick: you’re really equating calling a PUBLIC FIGURE a “tool” exactly ONCE with one particularly crude commenter on a blog personally attacking another commenter with the far worse epithets of “whore,” “skank,” and “cunt”?? And calling a male commenter “faggot” repeatedly?? You really do live in your own little world. So you think Weinstein is “AWESOME.” Sure he’ll be pleased to know that. Many disagree with you.

  62. dodogoodman: Sorry, but you’re confusing a couple of issues. Both are unrelated to employment law. More importantly, they are unrelated to porn’s legal argument to justify working without condoms.

    First, porn’s legal argument is that condoms are not required in the industry because testing works. Period.

    The Vivid suit does not make a distinction between heterosexual porn and homosexual porn.

    It does not make a distinction between what a performer does on set and what a performer does off set in their personal life.

    Porn argues that testing is sufficient to catch STDs – however and wherever they were acquired, regardless of the circumstances, regardless of the performers off-screen activities. Jennifer White wants to do a 50-man anal creampie with anyone and everyone? No worries. Our system is effective.

    Remember a male performer could choose to only perform straight scenes in his professional life and be gay as Liberace in his personal life, including having bareback anal sex with his partner who turns out to have an STD the morning of a shoot.

    Similarly, female talent could be a paragon of professional virtue on set have bareback anal sex in her personal life with her boyfriend, the bisexual, needle-sharing wannabe fashion model who is never tested because he’s not part of the industry. Or, she might bareback the day before a scene during an escort appointment with an otherwise straight businessman who occasionally takes a walk on the wild side with a male prostitute.

    If testing works, it must work in all of those scenarios or the justification falls apart because porn can’t control who decides to enter the industry.

    For all the shouting from the bleachers about First Amendment rights by James Deen, read the Vivid suit and the Judge’s decision. Vivid makes little mention of the First Amendment and what mention it did make was rejected by the Judge as not likely to prevail. Porn’s real argument was that this is an unnecessary intrusion into the industry’s business practices because the testing system works.

    From an employment law standpoint, an employer is allowed to administer tests as a condition of employment. You can test for alcohol and drugs. You can do a criminal background check. You can even do a financial check. And, in porn, you can do an STD check.

    However, an employer is not legally allowed to investigate the off-set sexual lives of potential employees.

    Porn is not allowed to investigate who an actress chooses to live with or what she chooses to do in her off-screen life.

    The fact that three infected actors share an agent isn’t a variable that has anything to do with whether testing works or the industry should use condoms. Again, an effective system doesn’t care.

    The fact that female talent chooses not to perform with certain male talent, for whatever reason, is a different issue from producers having two sets of criteria for hiring talent with a clean test that clears them to work under the industry protocols.

    As employees, you and I can choose not to accept work for any reason at all. An actress could choose not to accept a scene with a specific male actor because she doesn’t like the socks he wore in the last scene she viewed.

    An employer, cannot establish the criteria that qualifies someone to work – a clean bill of health – and then establish a second set of criteria that discriminates against individuals who otherwise meet the qualifications for the job. You cannot say a clean bill of health is the criteria for performing in a scene, but we will not work with you because you may not have a clean bill of health in the future. That could apply to any talent, not just cross-over talent.

  63. Sachertorte, think about it. The typical guy who is having frequent gay sex for money is not the kind of guy who has never been to a bathhouse. This is a vice industry. Virtuous people are in the minority. Most performers are either excessively flaky, greedy, deceitful, cruel, ignorant, depraved or a combination of some or all of these traits. I love performers and it doesn’t make them evil, per se, but this is the sad reality. Performers don’t care about living good, decent, and non-reckless lives because to them “good” is whatever the fuck makes them happy.

    In anthropology there is a term used for a type of non-quantitative analysis called thick description. You want studies to back up the presence of HIV in bareback gay porn? You’re not going to find them. What do think this is, the university library? This is porn–an Industry where a significant amount of transactions occur under the table and in a clandestine manner. But several commentators on the gay porn industry have noted the presence of the disease. Read the story of Mason Wyler.

    Homophobia on boards like LIB, XPT, and MikeSouth is just childish squealing. I honestly don’t even pay attention to it. Straight porn owes everything to gay porn–barebacking, anal, DPs, and creampies all began on the gay side (as did blowjobs, BTW–see Christopher Hitchens). Plus, if you acknowledge the fact that the average straight porn viewer is also watching an exposed MAN having sex with an exposed woman, you could claim the homophobic jeering is just a sign of psychological projection.

    I stand by my support for blacklisting crossovers who perform CONCURRENTLY on both sides of the Industry. You cannot police every performer’s private life, but it would help. Numerous people (a la Den of Den’s Reviews) would be more than glad to scour content and the internet to “out” crossover performers and male escorts. I would definitely make a difference. If Rod Daily would have been blacklisted, he would have never had a chance to infect Cameron Bay. I know, at this point the previous statement is speculation but time will reveal all.

    This opposition to crossover performers is not new. For many years there was a veteran pornographer named The Colonel who posted on LukeFord.com and LukeisBack.com. He voice some truly wise words concerning this topic. See the article and comment section:

    http://www.lukeisback.com/2009/06/the-colonel-weighs-in-on-the-new-hiv-outbreak/

  64. Who disagrees with me, Sach? Michael Weinstein is AWESOME and so is Isadore Hall!!!! Before you go accusing others of calling names, remember that you started it!!!! look at the timeline and you’ll see distinctly that people calling YOU names only started AFTER you called Weinstein a ‘tool’! And when are you going to explain why european porn profits should mean as much as a hill of beans to us here in America, please? Why you felt the need to comment that the european porn industry is going to have a ‘windfall’ over our lack of shooting!!! Like we care!!!! Why should we? Answer me that, Sach!!!

  65. BT I think a few examples would probably put Vivid’s legal argument into question, including Kira Kener’s lawsuit against them in 2005 in regards to catching an STD from a toy on set and the Mr. Marcus debacle with the visible syphilis lesions on his penis.

    I think current employment law would be hard to apply in most legal porn issues. Too many lawsuits on the books where Partner A didn’t disclose to Partner B that they had an STD and Partner B ends up getting it and suing Partner A.

    In the business or (real life) world, employers are now checking Facebook pages, doing search engines searches etc… before hiring an employee, which if the employer found out a guy they might hire regularly works in gay porn it would be a way to not hire them without actually telling them and pass it off as “we went with someone else”.

    I don’t think there can ever be any kind of universal testing in all genres of porn, but the “we can regulate ourselves” argument has become laughable.

    My comment about the 3 performers didn’t have anything to do with a legal point, moreover a general comment, but I don’t think for a minute that a producer wouldn’t cross out a performer if they saw his photo on the agent’s website. If what Wyson said was true about what Howard said, I think it’s deplorable.

    NicaNoelle wrote that there a number of performers that shoot straight that are bi or gay in their private lives. Considering the current climate, I could not imagine wanting to work in the current environment.

    For some it’s a gay/straight issue, but for me it’s all about the testing or in the case of the gay industry a lack there of. I agree though that neither side can be proud of their testing history protocols. Two diseases that are almost never part of the discussion are genital herpes and the over 100 different forms of HPV. The last time I checked both had life long affects and weren’t cheap to treat.

    The porn industry has veered towards more extreme sex acts but hasn’t done much to adjust their testing to that change.

  66. I want to amend what I said about performers being excessively vice-ridden. That was a really condemning statement. In my own life, I struggle with vice and sin–as does any human–so I really have no ground to stand on.

    I’m really sorry and I know blanket discrimination is wrong. I just think people who do high risk acts should be exposed and policed but I’m not trying to get earnest people out of a job.

  67. @Nick: again, get things straight, Exactly ONE commenter called me names on here. ONE. And I won’t mention him by name because he isn’t worth my time. And he called me these names WELL BEFORE I said ANYTHING about Weinstein, which YOU were the only one to object to. His name-calling had absolutely NOTHING to do with that AT ALL. He had first decided I was a bisexual man when I objected to some comments he made re Xander Corvus, so first came the anti-gay epithets. When I explained that I was in fact FEMALE, out came “whore,” “skank,” and “cunt,” and offering to put his dick in my mouth so I’d shut up, and that I obviously “wanted it.” But I “started” it, according to you? You are obviously one of those people who never admits he’s wrong. And YES, many people disagree with you that Weinstein and Hall are “AWESOME” and “heroes”- would you like me to compile a list and include it? But of course, we have the “Nick East is never wrong” rule. Textbook narcissism.

    “Why you felt the need to comment that the european porn industry is going to have a ‘windfall’ over our lack of shooting!!! Like we care!!!! Why should we? Answer me that, Sach!!!” AGAIN: BECAUSE I FELT LIKE MAKING THAT OBSERVATION. If you don’t like what I post, feel free to ignore them. I was quite content ignoring your comments until you decided to mock another commenter for daring to have a different opinion. Bored now. Bye.

  68. dodogoodman: I think we agree on far more points than we disagree. You and I and Origen and I have been swapping a lot of posts on this thread, but even when we disagree, I respect the thought you guys put into your responses. If you saw Origen’s request to amend a prior post, you know what I mean. People don’t do that on other sites, where they fire first and never ask questions later. I hope I haven’t come off as a jerk in any of my responses. That dialogue is what I enjoy about Mike’s site.

    For the record, as a consumer I prefer my porn without condoms. At the same time, when you see an industry put the health of talent at risk that has given me a lot of pleasure, you gotta speak up, even if you’re only a consumer.

  69. @origen01: thank you for amending that statement. It really was extremely judgmental. But I still hold that blacklisting is an untenable position unless we are going to have spies lurking under the beds of every porn performer. Just enforcing condom-mandatory laws is going to be difficult enough. And I am aware that opposition to crossover performers isn’t new, but it has become far uglier.

  70. @origen01: also that you for acknowledging this: “Straight porn owes everything to gay porn–barebacking, anal, DPs, and creampies all began on the gay side (as did blowjobs, BTW–see Christopher Hitchens). Plus, if you acknowledge the fact that the average straight porn viewer is also watching an exposed MAN having sex with an exposed woman, you could claim the homophobic jeering is just a sign of psychological projection.” Most male fans of hetero porn would never admit to any of that.

Leave a Reply

Mike South

Offering the latest adult industry news and porn star gossip! Have a story? Contact us!

Recent Comments
Brazzers