• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do You Support Laws Mandating Condoms in Porn?

Northern Light said:
I'm also torn. Whether or not people want to admit it, porn has a huge psychological influence on people's sexual practices, especially young people who are just learning. In the gay community for example, HIV rates are climbing again because PREP medications and barebacking porn have given them them the a-ok to go back to a lifestyle that, for men in the late 80's and early 90's would've been unthinkable. It's like this generation has completely forgotten the HIV epidemic that killed so many.

There's drug resistant syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia now. Meaning, if you catch these strains, there's no cure.

So... commercial porn does have a certain responsibility, not just a moral one, but a safety one. I realize that it's showcasing a fantasy but not everyone treats it that way, especially people who are addicted to porn.

And let's not even get into the misogyny that's still rampant in the porn industry.

I don't think the law should have to mandate condom use. I think studios should have common sense, and be petitioned by viewers to be better. But there is such little viewer responsibility in that industry. People are just passive consumers, there's not much activism.
Click to expand...

Oh for the love of god. So you're thinking it might be a good idea to regulate porn for social engineering purposes? **** that. People that want to use government force for social engineering shouldn't vote and shouldn't be elected to office. Liberty is not up to your social engineering agendas.

Not enough people are using condoms. What should we do? I know, we will just take away this parties freedom to encourage use! Brilliant! **** that logic.

Also, don't make up responsibilities out of your ass and then treat them as fact.
 
Last edited:
Hawkeye10 said:
I wonder how many times this has happened in CA now that the porn industry has been driven off the grid, now that they dont do things like get permits:

A 18 YO wants to do porn, maybe she thinks she will like it maybe she is desperate for money who knows. So she gets directed to a cell phone number of a guy who makes stuff only they got to keep it on the down low because of these idiot laws YA know. She shows up to a certain house as directed and on-time. There are a bunch of rough looking guys there, along with the guy she talked on the phone. So for the first 30 minutes or so she thinks, and is allowed to think, that she is trying to get into porn. Maybe there are cameras and the place looks legit. Maybe she is allowed to leave thinking that this is what happened, but in truth she was there to be used by men.....the porn thing was nothing more than rape bait. Our victim had no way to know what she was walking into like she once had, when porn was a legit business.

I wonder.
Click to expand...

Its done now. So many woman come to the San Fernando valley to get into porn, most only last a film or two. The money isn't what they expected, and the things they are asked to do for that money, is degrading to put it nicely. More than a few of the porn stars these days are escorts that use their porn films for advertising.
 
Calm down, and stand down.

I never said anyone should do anything. I'm outlining that I see why some people might think this is a good idea.

Lay off the night caps or whatever it is you're on. :roll:

Henrin said:
Oh for the love of god. So you're thinking it might be a good idea to regulate porn for social engineering purposes? **** that. People that want to use government force for social engineering shouldn't vote and shouldn't be elected to office. Liberty is not up to your social engineering agendas.

Not enough people are using condoms. What should we do? I know, we will just take away this parties freedom to encourage use! Brilliant! **** that logic.

Also, don't make up responsibilities out of your ass and then treat them as fact.
Click to expand...
 
Henrin said:
Actually requiring condoms does dictate how the content will be done and how the individuals involved will have sex. As for your safety regulations argument, please, the people involved are responsible for their own life decisions and can freely decline a job offer if they want a condom to be worn.
Click to expand...

Which is why Henrin categorically rejects all airline safety regulations.

molten_dragon said:
No, I don't support them. If you want to act in porn, you accept the risks that come with the territory. STDs and pregnancy are two of them.
Click to expand...

If you want to fly in airplanes, you accept the risks that come with the territory. Wings falling off due to lack of basic maintenance is one of them.
 
molten_dragon said:
No, I don't support them. If you want to act in porn, you accept the risks that come with the territory. STDs and pregnancy are two of them.
Click to expand...

If you want to fly in airplanes, you accept the risks that come with the territory. Wings falling off due to lack of basic maintenance is one of them.
 
Henrin said:
The real issue is that it's treating the people involved like idiots that can't even make their own decisions towards their own person. The government should stop treating people like children.

I would also love to know who's rights exactly are being violated by people deciding to not wear a condom. Oh right, no one's rights are being violated. Thought so.
Click to expand...
Should a person, when working on a paid job, be required to wear breathing protection when doing asbestos work?
 
Henrin said:
Is the government looking to put in place their solution to a problem? Yes or no? Is the government going to respect the decisions of the people in the industry on the matter? Yes or no?
Click to expand...

Which people in the industry? The owners or the workers?
 
maquiscat said:
Should a person, when working on a paid job, be required to wear breathing protection when doing asbestos work?
Click to expand...

In a society strong enough to let the worker die without support or compensation? Or in one that forces other citizens to pay?
 
Henrin said:
If people can leave an industry when they find themselves in disagreement with the conditions exactly how is my position moronic? Why is the freedom to choose somehow of so little importance to you? Why do you think the government knows better than the people actually doing the work?
Click to expand...

Does this stand for all safety regulations? Should none exist then? As a truck driver why should I be limited to a 10 hour driving day, with a mandatory 8 hours sleep before driving again, when I am the one doing the actual driving and not the government?
 
Yes I support regulations requiring condom use in porn just like I support regulations requiring restaurant servers wash their hands, healthcare workers never reusing needles, and various other workplace safety and public health regulations. Porn is a job like any other so why should it be exempt from the same kind of health and safety regulations that any other industry would be subject to.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...michael-weinstein-condoms-porn-california-law

Also this:



So here we see that the guy driving the CALI bus is a hard core lefty and is also a "ALL PRAISE THE CONDOM" freak, which according to me is expected. There is no HIV problem in porn, so if that were the reason this is a "solution" in search of a problem. No, what this is is an attempt to get condom usage considered the norm by the little people, and our refusal to use them considered recklessness, which ideally comes with a huge penalty to discourage the practice (as the writing of the proposed law shows clearly) .


EDIT: there have been ZERO known HIV transmissions in CALI PORN for well over a decade, porn talent who have gotten it have done so on their personal time.
Click to expand...
The issue is not HIV, per se, but all STD's. To try to shift the goal posts to only HIV, is a red herring at best.
 
joG said:
In a society strong enough to let the worker die without support or compensation? Or in one that forces other citizens to pay?
Click to expand...

Not quite sure where you are going with your response. I am showing how Henrin's position is applied to other areas of life.
 
Sometimes, in business, there is a fine line between labor not having the choice to do something, and not having the choice to not do something.

I am torn on this issue, but I am also not deeply invested in it.
 
ecofarm said:
Being against all industry safety regulations because "people can choose" is a close second for most moronic position of the day. This thread wins gold and silver, gratz.
Click to expand...

you're talking to someone who wants to allow child labor for the same reasons

yeah, a true libertarian
 
Northern Light said:
I'm also torn. Whether or not people want to admit it, porn has a huge psychological influence on people's sexual practices, especially young people who are just learning. In the gay community for example, HIV rates are climbing again because PREP medications and barebacking porn have given them them the a-ok to go back to a lifestyle that, for men in the late 80's and early 90's would've been unthinkable. It's like this generation has completely forgotten the HIV epidemic that killed so many.

There's drug resistant syphilis, gonorrhea and chlamydia now. Meaning, if you catch these strains, there's no cure.

So... commercial porn does have a certain responsibility, not just a moral one, but a safety one. I realize that it's showcasing a fantasy but not everyone treats it that way, especially people who are addicted to porn.

And let's not even get into the misogyny that's still rampant in the porn industry.

I don't think the law should have to mandate condom use. I think studios should have common sense, and be petitioned by viewers to be better. But there is such little viewer responsibility in that industry. People are just passive consumers, there's not much activism.
Click to expand...

barebacking porn, especially amateur, is often done by gay men who clearly know each other. It certainly should not give anyone the impression that this is risk-free with a random grindr hookup. I find it interesting you don't seem to blame lackluster sex ed which should *include* info about resistant syphilis strains

it's not that i disagree with your intentions, but ultimately the real fantasy is that you can regulate this to any meaningful extent. You can force condoms on the commercialized gay porn market, and everyone just turns to the amateur variety. There is no shortage of attractive college guys willing to get together and broadcast without condoms
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
Yes I support regulations requiring condom use in porn just like I support regulations requiring restaurant servers wash their hands, healthcare workers never reusing needles, and various other workplace safety and public health regulations. Porn is a job like any other so why should it be exempt from the same kind of health and safety regulations that any other industry would be subject to.
Click to expand...

because it is different...a restaurant server can give an unwitting customer disease and not reusing needles prevents accidents for starters. Porn can be consensual and fully aware of risk just the same as if they're at home with the cameras off. Heck, a married couple can produce porn. The real enforcement that's needed is **accurate** std tests. There have been cases where porn stars got stds because they were lied to about their partner being std free, or the test was so long ago

Similarly, workplace regulations, the kind henrin seems to abhor, are necessary because an employer like walmart owns the building, won't allow its workers to inspect it to make their own informed decision if they even have such expertise, and cares so little about worker safety it would tell them get back to work and lock the doors as a fire breaks out in the back. In fact, this has happened in its 3rd world centers where such regulations don't exist. But libertarians, who never at any point have had to work in such conditions, seem to jerk off to such tragedies
 
chromium said:
because it is different...a restaurant server can give an unwitting customer disease and not reusing needles prevents accidents for starters. Porn can be consensual and fully aware of risk just the same as if they're at home with the cameras off. Heck, a married couple can produce porn. The real enforcement that's needed is **accurate** std tests. There have been cases where porn stars got stds because they were lied to about their partner being std free, or the test was so long ago

Similarly, workplace regulations, the kind henrin seems to abhor, are necessary because an employer like walmart owns the building, won't allow its workers to inspect it to make their own informed decision if they even have such expertise, and cares so little about worker safety it would tell them get back to work and lock the doors as a fire breaks out in the back. In fact, this has happened in its 3rd world centers where such regulations don't exist. But libertarians, who never at any point have had to work in such conditions, seem to jerk off to such tragedies
Click to expand...

So should a construction worker not have to wear a hardhat on the job as long as they understand the risks?
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
So should a construction worker not have to wear a hardhat on the job as long as they understand the risks?
Click to expand...

i doubt they will ever fully understand the risks as the hardhats are in part for the unanticipated, and it is the employer's and department of transportation's right to require such precautions regardless. If the porno company wanted to require its actors to wear condoms, that is their right
 
The fact that they have time to even consider this is proof that our first-world life is pretty damn good. Job is done... Pack 'em up and send 'em home.
 
ecofarm said:
It's not about regulating content, it's about safety. Every industry has safety regulations. Do we say, "hell, factory workers can work in a fire trap because the people involved are responsible for their own life decisions"?
Click to expand...

I would submit that the people behind the proposed regulation have an agenda and it isn't "safety".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom