October 20, 2012 | Health Matters

Rhetoric heats up as mandatory condom vote approaches

On November 6 Los Angeles County voters will have their say on whether to require porn performers to use condoms when filming a scene.  

Ballot Measure B is the County of Los Angeles Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act;  it  would mandate producers of adult films to obtain a public health permit from the County, follow all health and safety laws, including condom use, and pay a permit fee to cover enforcement of the law.

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation and its head Michael Weinstein are the primary sponsors of the initiative. The adult industry of Los Angeles County is fighting back. Each side is using whatever ammo it has available to discredit its opponent. 

The latest salvo has to do with the the legally required release of campaign finance information. The "No on B" side, (which calls itself "No on Government Waste") has latched on to the fact that The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has dedicated close to $4 million on the campaign to pass the initiative, money the No side says could have and should have been spent on any number of important AIDS treatment and prevention projects, for example paying for the treatment of 20,000 people with HIV for one year. 

The Yes side is making hay of the fact that most of the funding against the initiative is from porn companies (though that should not surprise anyone). One particular donation of $75,000, from Manwin (which runs Men.com) is "illegal" according to the Yes side, because Manwin is not headquartered in the U.S. So it is not just pornographers - but foreign pornographers - who are against condoms.

Endorsements have played a part in this battle. This week celebrity porn star Jenna Jameson gave her heartfelt support to the Yes side. But the Los Angeles Times has endorsed the No side, concluding that "Performers should use condoms. Producers should encourage them to do so. But the power of law to make them do it is limited. So is the desirability of always turning to government and lawmaking to address all dangers." 

The LA Times editorial is thoughtful and provides an excellent summary of the arguments for and against B.  If you're an LA County resident we recommend you read it, and vote with your conscience.