Are Diane Duke and Mark Kernes Taking Money From AHF?

We already know that Diane Duke is a whore for anyone who will pay her relatively low price….she whored herself and the FSC to Fabian.  It makes me wonder if people in the FSC like her are taking money in order to throw the AB332 fight.

Yes its part tongue in cheek but good God how are we supposed to win this fight when complete idiots like Mark kernes post headlines calling it the “Forced Hazmat Suit Bill”  come on Mark….are you trying to lose this?

What brain dead imbecile at AVN let Kernes post that horrid piece to begin with?  Am I losing my mind or is the industry losing theirs?  Am I the only one who thinks we should be taking this fight seriously? doing something substantive to win this instead of relying on tactics that already failed miserably?

Do you people not see that AHF is in this for the long haul….even if you do get the bill defeated in committee (unlikely) or in a vote of the legislature (even more unlikely) do you not know that next it goes on the ballot?

And our answer to a multi million dollar effort to pass this is to use glib and incorrect (not to mention stupid) statements calling it a forced hazmat suit bill?

In what universe do you idiots live that you think this will work?


74370cookie-checkAre Diane Duke and Mark Kernes Taking Money From AHF?

Are Diane Duke and Mark Kernes Taking Money From AHF?

Share This

18 Responses

  1. Well, jackass, you’re wrong again, as you usually are. Here’s the response to your ignorance, so how about READING THE LAW before you decide I don’t know what I’m talking about!:

  2. I didn’t know Mark Kernes was so morbidly obese.

    It’s game over and the folks at the FSC already know it. There is no way to stop this bill. AB 332 is a done deal and companies are already planning on moving. While they are at it they should consider moving to Europe because AHF will follow them across the US.

  3. Kernes if you think this is a winning strategy you are a bigger idiot than i think you are and that pretty fucking big. Remember what happened last time you used it YOU LOST
    Is your idea that you lost because you didnt have enough money to explain it to people? Good God y’all are fucking stupid.

  4. Hey Kernes,
    why dont you identify yourself as a board member of FSC when you write about them. Its called journalistic ethics, of which you have none.

  5. Mike South is a libertarian but he is sure trusting of the government when it comes to the legislation mandating condoms. A porn company got fined over $13,000 for it’s handling of a saw. The saw did not have anything to with condoms. I think Mark Kernes does a good job showing that there is wording in the law that could be used to go beyond condoms being used for intercourse. South is making the assumption that the government is going to do the honorable thing and interpret the law as voters intended, when they voted on it. Another factor is the possibility of the slippery slope which advocates of guns and abortion frequently bring up. Government can more take away freedoms more effectively if it is done gradually rather then done massively, all at once.

  6. Jamie you clearly misunderstand I dont like the idea of this legislation….even a little. I like the idea of choice period, you want to use a condom use one, you dont, dont. I dont like the idea that it has to be all condoms or no condoms. I want to see AB332 defeated but my point is that unless we approach it realistically it wont be, same as measure B. Empty rhetoric and holding our breath and stomping our feet saying we will take our toys and go play in another playpen isnt going to win it. I want to see the STD rate addressed honestly, I want to see this industry take some responsibility, otherwise the government is going to do it for us…and that is reality

  7. Wow! Name calling? WTF? Hey everybody, look at the big bad mark kernes calling people names!!!! Hey mark, don’t you know that when you resort to name calling, you’ve lost the argument already? Didn’t you take debate or did college evade you?
    Just saying

  8. Unlike Mike South, I feel that the industry is COMPLETELY incapable of protecting the health of it’s sex workers. mr. marcus is a prime example proving my point. I was talent for close to twenty years and I would still be talent if STD’s didn’t make me choose between my job and being able to have children in the future (I’m only 43). There are multiple reasons STD’s became SOOOO rampant.
    1. Viagra. Before Viagra, the male talent pool was relatively small, and all of the men made a decent living. They could afford to turn down a shoot, call in sick, etc. and still pay their rent. After Viagra,the producers decided they could hire any schmuck for a tenth of the price (if the schmuck wasn’t actually willing to pay them) and save a buck or two. The male talent pool exploded, and the lower end performers found themselves in a tight position. Get kicked out for lack of rent, or spread a disease that nobody else knew they had yet!
    2. The statement of pride that the talent say “I’ve never caught an STD”-James Deen. Lies lies lies. Look at Dr. Riggs customers and the truth becomes evident. Besides 18 year old boys being forced to use viagra or not work, the talent go to outside sources to keep a squeaky clean STD history. Or, even worse, they order meds online (or go to Mexico old school style) and if they feel that itchy feeling they simply self medicate (fostering stronger resistance towards the medicine for the STD) just enough to ‘do the shoot’.
    3. Two different producers got angry with me for turning down their shoot at the last minute because I had just started having symptoms of an STD that morning! Gross, I know! Not going to go into details either, but they never hired me again! So the pressure to live up to your commitments can cause a sex worker to willfully infect a fellow sex worker (I wouldn’t, so I lost work)
    4.When Syphilis was discovered, the entire talent pool was tested and treated all at once!!! I begged Sharon Mitchell to do that concerning gonorrhea back in 2006, but she said it would cost too much. So instead, it gestated and became more and more prevalent, to the point that I effin quit acting all together.
    Just say it, Jamie! You don’t believe that porn performers deserve even the slightest protection from unscrupulous employers who would sacrifice their health for nothing more than profits sake.
    Oh, and the way you incorporated guns and abortion into your comment? Brilliant, if your audience is uneducated and ignorant, but here at MikeSouthLand, we are educated and perfectly capable of spotting bullshit when we see it! Now go tell Marci I’m getting closer and closer to telling her’s and my story! Goodbye

  9. While the “hazmat suit” concept is a bit over the top, in some ways he isn’t far off. This isn’t a forced condom law, it’s pretty much an outlaw sex on camera law. You can get an STD from oral sex, you can get it from kissing (oral herpes), and for that matter, you could even get it from a shared sex toy (no more lesbian double headers!).

    The way Kernes put it is shocking and out there, but the concept is correct. Any sex act (even kissing) is risky. AB332 might even make it so that mainstream hollywood movies have to change their methods, because kissing could spread things. I doubt it would be enforced, but the wording is certainly not careful enough to exclude it.

    That being said, the porn industry (and the groups fronting for it) have brought this on themselves. The testing regime has big enough cracks in it that even Mr Marcus can fall through. That’s scary, and hats off to Mr East for hanging up his hat before someone hung it up for him.

  10. Uh, yes, rawalex, he is far off! Condom use for anal and vaginal penetration. How hard is that to understand? I swear I remember when conspiracy theorists were laughed at. But due to this so called ‘overbearing’ condom initiative they are coming out of the woodwork!!!! Oh no!!!! Mainstream Hollywood may have to stop doing kissing scenes!!!! Condoms cause friction burns on the girls!!! Oh no! Condoms haven’t been tested!!! Oh no, business is going to leave California!!! Oh no!
    Then theres the whole “if we start using condoms, the competition in other countries will have an advantage because they won’t use them”!!! Two words for that argument… SO WHAT? Nobody is keeping you here! In China they have children working in sweat shops giving them an advantage in sales. Should we incorporate sweat shops here in America to even out the playing field? Yup, that’s how stupid that whole argument REALLY is!

  11. All this arguing at this point is worthless. AB332 made it out of committee. There is absolutely no way to stop the bill at this point. Companies need to start moving now if they plan to shoot without condoms…

  12. Of course, the FSC is hedging their bets on a legal challenge. The judicial system is not an optimal vehicle to affect public policy. Playing with judges is like rolling a pair of dice– to say the least. Except the chance to “play” could be drawn out for years costing hundreds of thousands of dollars while uncertainty prevails…

Leave a Reply