While most people have to get dressed for work, adult film star Chanel Preston starts her work shift by getting undressed. However, Proposition 60 may start requiring those in the industry to wear a different kind of uniform.
Prop 60, the Condoms in Pornographic Films Initiative, is up for vote in California this election. The initiative will require porn stars to wear condoms while filming pornographic videos, but Preston and many others in the adult film industry are strongly opposed to the bill.
“While Prop 60 is under the guise of a condom mandate, there’s so much more to it. It doesn’t keep performers more safe like it claims it will,” Preston said. “Most people are unaware of how well our current regulation system works.”
The details of the bill are concerning for everyone in the industry; they include: required condom usage, additional regulations and licensing, funding and a whistle blowing clause. The proposition is opposed by the California Democratic, Republican and Libertarian parties as well as The L.A. Times and a long list of other organizations.
Prop 60 would require adult film producers to pay for performer health costs such as vaccinations, testing and medical exams related to STIs. In addition, it requires producers to post the condom mandate at their filming site and obtain a new state health license every two years
Currently, adult film stars are required to be tested for STDs and STIs every two weeks. The Free Speech Coalition, a business association for pleasure products and the adult entertainment industry, provides a service called Performer Availability Screening Services which updates every performer’s status in a database after they are tested. If a performer tests negative, their profile in the database stays green — if a test comes back positive, the performer is immediately treated and is unable to work until their test comes back negative.
Preston believes the current regulations are more than sufficient to protect the health of performers.
“Prop 60 won’t keep performers more safe like it claims it will,” Preston said. “Most people are unaware of how well our current regulation system works, and even though there are claims that STIs are rampant in our industry, it’s just not true.”
In addition, a condom requirement is seen as more harmful to health than helpful according to Preston. When used for a long period of time, condoms can cause small tears and irritation in the vagina which make women more susceptible to infection. Some popular video scenes such as those with multiple partners would be impossible while wearing condoms, she said.
The Free Speech Coalition also opposes the proposition and the condom mandate because performers should have the freedom to make their own choices regarding their sexual health, according to Mike Stabile, director of communications for the Free Speech Coalition.
“While condoms work for some, they don’t work for all, nor are they always the best solution for preventing STIs or HIV,” Stabile said.
For Adult Industry Responsibility (FAIR) is the main campaign supporting the initiative and has out-raised its opponent 10-to-1 as of Oct. 21. Thanks to its sole contributor, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, FAIR has raised $4.9 million towards getting the proposition passed. Their opposition, the Coalition Against Worker Harassment, has received about $470,000.
There were many attempts at contacting the “Yes on 60” campaign, but none of the e-mails were returned. Michael Weinstein, President of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, wrote an article in The Huffington Post in which he said that one of his concerns is the effect adult films have on public health. The message that unprotected sex in porn sends is that the only kind of desirable sex is unsafe sex, Weinstein said.
However,Weinstein has ignored workers’ requests to speak with him about the proposition, according to Preston.
“He has shamed performers and called us a public health risk, so his motives are clearly not to protect us. Michael Weinstein is a threat to our industry,” Preston said.
Prop 60 legislation also includes a clause that allows anyone, even private citizens, to file a request to Cal/OSHA, the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, against a pornographic film that violates laws set forth by Prop 60. The written request would include a statement explaining how Prop 60 has been violated, and ask for Cal/OSHA to pursue those that violated the law through administrative enforcement or civil action.
If Cal/OSHA fails to respond to the request or sees no violation of Prop 60, the person who sent the initial request may file a civil action lawsuit, according to Prop 60 legislation.
“This type of whistleblowing will leave performers really vulnerable to anti-porn groups, religious organizations and crazed fans that want to hurt them or the industry,” Preston said. “It’ll lead to frivolous lawsuits that could possibly financially ruin performers, because most performers also produce now-a-days.”
Aside from how the industry would be affected by Prop 60 legislation, it will also affect the consumers. Lauren, liberal studies senior, and Colton, environmental management senior, have watched porn both together and separately throughout the three-and-a-half years they’ve dated. They consider it fun and pleasurable, and don’t stigmatize it at all, according to Lauren.
“People are ashamed to explore their own sexuality or even admit to watching porn,” Colton said. “I think seeing condoms in porn might just take some getting used to, but it wouldn’t be less pleasurable.”
In regards to Prop 60, the biggest concern for the pair are the performers’ rights and well-being.
“I think we need to view porn for what it is; it’s an industry, it’s a business, and it needs to protect its workers,” Lauren said. “So I personally like that using condoms would be necessary for that.”
Prop 60 is among 16 other propositions up for vote in California on Nov. 8.
Revision: The last names of the Cal Poly students have been removed because publishing their identities may put them in further jeopardy.