California Lawmakers Want to Make Porn Stars Wear Super Sexy Goggles

Think we just found a new use for Google Glass, though.

  • Share
  • Read Later
YouTube

Sadly not everyone looks as good as James Deen does in goggles

Unless you have a fetish for hazmat suits and science lab equipment, you probably won’t be too excited for the newest draft of California Bill AB 640, which is meant to protect the pornography industry from the spread of sexually transmitted infections.

The bill is currently awaiting approval in the senate, and if passed would require that porn stars wear “personal protective equipment” to “prevent contact of an employee’s eye; skin, mucous membranes, or genitals” from bodily fluids, according to the New York Daily News.

Porn stars shooting in Los Angeles County are already legally required to wear condoms while filming intercourse scenes, but this bill would apply that rule to state-wide production and go one step further by forcing actors to wear protective eyewear. Technically, according to a representative from OSHA who spoke to Salon, porn stars are already supposed to wear protective gear, but the rule is hardly enforced. Instead, these draft guidelines “are an attempt to tailor existing workplace-safety rules relating to blood-borne pathogens specifically to the adult industry.”

Porn advocates are outraged by the draft, with one telling Salon it would “basically criminalize the production of porn” in California. Of course, it’s hard to say whether these guidelines would be more strictly enforced than the current ones on the books, but if so, they could have serious consequences for California’s porn economy. This is all probably great news for Orlando, though.

18 comments
Willx
Willx

Please stop promoting James Deen, known white supremacist and man who get paid to physically assault and gang rape women. James Deen is the godfather or Rape Culture. Why he is considered a Feminist icon ill never know. Its like Jews loving Hitler.

DeweySayenoff
DeweySayenoff

From the bill:

“Employee” means a person who is an employee or independent contractor, regardless of whether the person is shown in the adult film, who, during the production of the adult film, performs sexual intercourse, including oral, vaginal, or anal penetration."

This defines WHO falls under these provisions.  The WHEN is even funnier:

“Adult film” means any commercial film, video, multimedia, or other recorded representation during the production of which performers actually engage in sexual intercourse, including oral, vaginal, or anal penetration."

It's important to note that the the words "during the production" are undefined  (You can read the whole thing, it's not defined).  Most folks would presume it to mean that while filming is happening.  But film production ALSO means "while the film is being made" - which does not necessarily include it actually being filmed.  Until the final shot is taken, a film is considered to be "in production", and from the start of that process to the end of it, it's "in production".  WHETHER ANYONE IS ON SET OR NOT.

The specific wording here indicates that no one who has ANYTHING to do with the film can have sex without the proper gear being provided and  "An employer shall maintain engineering and work practice controls sufficient to protect employees from exposure to blood and any potentially infectious material" (whether at work or not) REGARDLESS OF WHERE THEY ARE OR EVEN IF NOT BEING FILMED, until all actual production work is finished. That means at work or at home and includes the people who are behind the scenes and not considered actors.  It also includes the caterers (an independent contractor), carpenters and anyone else who may have something to do with the film.

Seems to me it's a touch vaguely worded, there, and unconstitutionally wide in the net it casts.  Does it mean they have to wear goggles?  No, of course not.  A condom is all that's really necessary to fulfill the requirement for the most part.  Still, it's possible to have "body fluids" end up in the wrong places depending on what, exactly, is being filmed.  But there's good news

"SEC. 2. The provisions of this act are severable. If any provision of this act or its application is held invalid, that invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application."

That means they can take out that part entirely  (because it would have to be re-written and judges don't re-write, they uphold or strike down) and make this "law" a toothless laughing stock.  Or at least it would make Isador Hall a laughing stock for being a complete moron in trying to turn this badly worded, sure-to-fail-on-litigation piece of tripe into the law of the land.   He should try casting his net a little more thoughtfully.  

The coup-de-gras on this garbage is this provision:

"(j) The Legislature finds and declares that screening for STDs is a critical public health measure and should be employed wherever possible, including the adult film industry."

Technically, that means the porn industry isn't the only one they can potentially hit with this. ANY INDUSTRY, job or place of work, can be mandated to pay for STD screening and all of the other stuff in this bill for any place where employees might be exposed to blood or body fluids - which would include anyplace with people.  It should simply say that it's targeting the adult film industry and be done with it.  But it would be a bit too obvious that this is just one up-tight idiot's crusade to outlaw the porn industry in California.

Based on the vague wording here (probably intended to say, "Gosh, this isn't JUST the porn industry we're targeting.  Really, trust us on this."), this is ANOTHER wide-cast net that needs to be more clearly defined.  What the hell, don't these idiots ever learn ENGLISH COMPREHENSION? This law (if it gets that far) has no chance to pass its first court challenge.

Buzzramdog
Buzzramdog

Move to Las Vegas. OR easy commute for shoots. The advocates are correct, the legislature has nothing to do anymore what with almost zero unemployment, no debt, everyone's kids no longer in gangs, high school drop out rates almost done to nothing, all kids getting high grades, no more drive bys, prisons almost empty. HELL it is a paradise there and that is why they are spending all this time trying to kill a ten billion dollar industry cuz they got nothing else to do.

sacredh
sacredh

Pornography is the first step towards beastiality, incest and Satan worship. Only married couples should have intercourse and then only for the act of procreation. The sins of the flesh have destroyed this nation's moral base and was instrumental in the formation of the democratic party.

JordanWard
JordanWard

Read the bill folks, that's not what it says1

jamesyoung76
jamesyoung76

I'm offended by how idiotic this bill is.

Ironman92
Ironman92

Beat me to the Google Glass punch.  And by beat me, I mean you were faster.

mjkittredge
mjkittredge

This is one of those situations where they will simply pick up and move somewhere else. But LA porn is is old school and fading, now the best stuff comes from anywhere, loaded online, not put on DVD.

MegaCandyMan
MegaCandyMan

@Willx   What are you talking about "White supremacist?!" He's a Jew supremacist.

Willx
Willx

@sacredh The entire porno industry is run by Jews who hate Jesus.

“The only reason that Jews are in pornography is that we think thatChrist sucks." --Al Goldstein, famous pornographer

Buzzramdog
Buzzramdog

@sacredh Religion is nothing more than a dictatorship. Just look at all countries run by religion. You really want to live like that? I don't and since our Constitution is NOT based on religion then please feel free to move there. You will love living in Saudi Arabia, send us postcards and tell us how wonderful it is living under a religious dictatorship. We'll stay here and put up with satan.

bretzeller
bretzeller

@sacredh Religion is the first step toward mass psychosis. Learning the bible in English is the first step toward heresy within the church. All priests eventually rape children because of their prohibition on sex. Numerous other non-sequiitors to follow. Don't forgot slippery slope arguments. Ah heck, let's throw in a 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' and complete the circle.

And let's stand up for the rupublicans already. After all, Jesus wouldn't support the democrats, they preach helping the poor and needy and educating the masses. Republican jesus would have smited them all, while forcing them to go fight wars in his glorious name while crucifying the enemies of the faith.

SusanGate
SusanGate

@mjkittredge CA had a net loss of 73,000 businesses last year alone... the highest loss in the nation.  CA can't afford to lose their money making tax base... and porn in CA is big business.