Bareback dilemna

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Huskyhunks

So Boyfunk,

That means that your models having oral sex, that risk is acceptable to you because there is a risk that one of your boys could have gotten infected in that photoshoot.

---

Actually, to be honest, we've been really looking at the infection rates regarding oral sex. It is a major concern to us... the last I looked, the risk wasn't considered that high, but it seems that it is now being considered higher risk than it was.

We decided a couple months ago to start testing for syphillis, gonorrhea, chlymidia, Hep B in addition to HIV on each model -- since several of those are easily orally transmitted -- and we've never allowed models to eat cum or for models to cum in another model's mouth.

My impression is that the risk of oral transmission is very low if certain precautions are taken (models don't brush teeth close to shooting of scene, no one cums in mouth, you minimize exposure to precum, etc) but nonetheless, it is a risk we're seriously looking at.

There's no question that there's some risk in all cases. Condoms break, some studies show they aren't completely effective. What we are also doing is changing our contracts and disclosures to more fully explain the risks of even the safer sex... but I agree that at a certain point, the model will have to assume at least some risk. And at some point, AJ and I may decide that even that level of risk is too much for us to be comfortable with, at which point we will move into a different industry.

boyfunk - years ago, the maraposa foundation put out ratings for various brands and types of condoms. trojans were quite permeable after a few minutes of hard fucking, and also broke the most according to what i read. condoms like ramses (which seem to be gone) were the least permeable to viruses and the strongest, even though they were not as thick as trojans. the stretchier ones like beyond seven and kimono were that same type of latex.

and i'm sure you know never to use lamb condoms.

anyway, those reports are probably still out there somewhere. if you really want to be careful, finding the least permeable and most durable condoms may help.

just a thought....

Hmmm. So far, I've found an FDA reference to the study (which says it's unreliable) but not the study itself.

I've found the FDA often specializes in Not Invented Here so I'll take some of what they say with a grain of salt... but if anyone has the actual study, it would probably be worth having, certainly better than nothing at all.

OK, so I'm hijacking the thread, but here's the study. Apparently it was good enough to be published in Consumer Reports, which is generally pretty high on scientific rigor, so I'm inclined to think the data is probably pretty good.

http://www.aegis.com/news/lt/1988/LT880613.html

Thanks again to Basschick for the reference.

CONDOM RELIABILITY

Preliminary results on a scale of 0 to 100, based on safety and effectiveness.

Score Brand

98.9 Mentor
91.3 Ramses Non-Lube
91.3 Ramses Sensitol
85.2 Gold Circle Coin
83.7 Gold Circle
83.7 Sheik Elite
81.7 Durex Nuform
80.2 Pleaser
78.7 Ramses Extra
77.3 Embrace Her
77.2 Hot Rubber (1)
76.6 Lifestyles Stimula
75.3 Ramses NuForm
74.8 Excita Extra
74.5 Parrish (2)
71.9 Yamabuki 1 (3)
71.4 Trojan-Enz
71.1 Trojan-Enz Lubricated
70.4 Duo (1)
69.9 Shields (4)
69.9 Trojan Plus
68.4 Zero 0-2000 (3)
68.1 Prime
66.8 Lifestyles Nuda Plus
64.1 Arouse
62.7 Tahiti
60.9 Lifestyles Conture
60.6 Lifestyles Nuda
57.7 Trojan Ribbed Natural
50.9 Trojan Ribbed
21.3 Contracept Plus
(1) Marketed in Europe
(2) Experimental, not for sale
(3) Marketed in Japan
(4) Marketed in Canada

one correction to that list - soon after that list was first compiled, trojan bought mentor, and any of you who are so endowed might have noticed the change in material and quality.

Not too sure if this was posted - I did do a quick scan, but I was actually reading an article the other day Study: Hollywood Doesn't Show Consequences.

For 10 years in my younger days I socilized and worked with gay men. For 10 years I watched men I loved with all my heart pretend there was nothing wrong with giving themselves in the dark corners and back allies of Long Island. For 10 years I begged them to be smart. For 10 years I watched them die one by one, until I couldn't stand it any longer and started my `nilla hetero life in the backwoods of Georgia.

15 years later ..

Very little has changed and I know it never will.

Do I care if 2 HIV+ ppl fuck each other? Nope .. their choice.
Do I buy bareback content? I do and I will until it's no longer legal.

Do I care? I do, but I also know that you cannot force ppl - by laws or PSAs -to make intellegent decisions today, if they couldn't make them 25 years ago.

I know, now that I'm back among gay men that there will be more grief in my future, as I watch some of you die .. slowly and painfully - just like I did 25 years ago.

Madame begs you ...
Wrap that willie!

I received an email from Gay Wide Maters, one of the topics being about bareback sex. So I "tuned in" to see what was being said. I am not surprised by what I have read - or rather I should say, by what I have NOT read.

No matter where these discussion are held - this forum or somewhere else - it is always about gays and what they should do, are expected to do, amd must do regarding sex. When straights have sex, does the guy wear a condom to prevent disease ? No, he goes "in" bareback, and out pops a baby 9 months later. If straights were to stop "barebacking" also, the mushhrooming population rate would drop dramactically - and, oh yes, capitalism would be in for a total collasp.

So, when you guys talk about profits and money and that is the ONLY reason why sex firms with guys barebacking are made, that they are immoral, etc.,etc., you are the kettle calling the pot black.

The bottom line is: straights can do what they want - sex without condoms, but gays cannot - because sex between straights produces babies which keeps the muti-trillion dollar economy world wide going full blast; but guys barebacking together cannot produce babies, and thus do not contribute to money making for the economy. If they, too, could make babies in the process of engaing in bareback sex, the media, the government, the health officials, would never have started the campaign against the so called "unsafe sex" practices (barebacking).

We produce BareBack videos. We only pair up like HIV type with like eg: pos with pos, neg with neg.

Testing is a good policy and we endorse the process however, the acuracy of the tests remains a dilemma and the cost of testing for amoebas and STD's is expensive and time consuming. Do we keep our models in a cage waiting to turn them loose on a set after we receive all the test results?!?!?!?

It is true that Straight companies require tests which gives them the belief that barebacking is ok.

It is also true that Gay companies do not test because they believe that the use of condoms help protect the talent from HIV infection...

Gay companies do however overlook the real posiblity of STD infection by unprotected rimming, cock sucking, etc... this must be an ok practice with them...

Hey Charles,

Looks like you've started a riot here--and I haven't even looked at pages 2-5 of the post! LOL!

Barebacking is one of those topics that EVERYBODY has an opinion about, and it's usually one associated with self-righteousness. People LOVE to get on their high horses and start shouting about RESPONSIBILITY and MORALS and ETHICS, and it becomes much more about their desire to assert their OWN moral codes and ethics instead of actually reviewing the subject from a TRULY responsible POV.

What amazes me about the whole barebacking debate is how angry people get over it. And I think it has a lot more to do with our archaic attitudes surrounding sex than it does anything else. Nobody runs around saying "We can't show smoking in videos!" or "We can't film people bunji jumping anymore!" or "We can't show anymore violence." But as soon as the subject turns to barebacking, suddenly, it's wrong to show it. Why is this? Is it REALLY because we have so much concern for our brothers and sisters that we climb up the ladders of our high horses and start shouting from the rafters, or is it because we want to feel morally superior to the heathens who participate in such "revolting," "disgusting" behavior? Personally, I think it's the latter.

Fact: Bareback entertainment is simply that... entertainment. It is designed to showcase and celebrate a form of sexuality that is taboo and deemed inappropriate, and that is its chief selling point.

Opinion: People are drawn to the fire, and they like to push the envelope. It's exciting. There's something fascinating about watching people ignore the rules and do what they feel comes naturally to them, regardless of societal opinion. It's anarchy of a kind. It's punk rock for porn. Bareback porn gives the proverbial finger to all the politically correct companies who sit around and moralize about "proper sexuality."

Fact: Bareback porn is not for everyone.

Opinion: If you don't want to watch it, don't fucking watch it.

Fact: Bareback porn eroticizes potentially life-threatening behavior.

Opinion: Again, so do cigarette commercials and bunji jumping videos. What's the difference? It's all the same. The only difference is that barebacking is attached to sex. And THAT'S where the true problem lies.

Fact: A lot of young guys growing up are impressionable and can be easily swayed by entertainment.

Opinion: Are we going to take Marilyn Manson CDs off the market and ban Natural Born Killers as well for all those impressionable young teenagers in the world?

Fact: Bareback movies don't encourage barebacking anymore than music or movies promote violence.

Opinion: See above opinion regarding Marilyn Manson and Natural Born Killers. People are turned on and entertained by many things, but it does not mean that they are going to run out and do what they are entertained by. If you think they are, then you're essentially treating people like they are idiots. Give people more credit than that.

Fact: Art imitates life.

Opinion: Barebacking is part of life. For those of us who like seeing it (and I like seeing it), we should be allowed to watch it without judgment.

I think what we need to remember when it comes to this debate is that CONSENSUALITY is the key to a healthy lifestyle. I fucking hate it when people start asking things like "Well, would you film *********** or child porn?" Can we PLEASE, for once, get OVER ourselves for a little bit here and tackle this issue from a practical, RESPONSIBLE point of view and not one tied up in such overwrought drama and morality and hostility toward each other?

Is it possible for people to engage in responsible barebacking sex? Absolutely! When all of the partners are informed about each other's status and are aware of the risks involved, that is absolutely responsible. Do people want to acknowledge this? No. Instead, we want to run around sounding like fucking Republicans and Christian zealots who keep screaming about "The children! The children! We've got to protect the children!" In reality, we just want to control each other, just like the government wants to control porn.

Do we have a responsibility to set forth postive examples for our youth? Well, that depends on you. A lot of people say, "Look, I'm making the entertainment that I want to see, and I'm not here to spread a message." And that's fine. Personally, I would rather see everybody take notice of the messages they are sending out and move forward from there. As I always say, It's NEVER just porn. Every time we film a porn movie, we make a statement about gay male sexuality.

So, what statement should we be making? Personally, I feel we should be making a statement about A) being educated, and B) personal responsibility. We need to make sure that everybody in the community is educated about the potentially harmful risks associated with participating in bareback sex, and make sure that they are armed with the information they need to stay negative.

To me, barebacking films are educational tools. They are also fantasty fulfillment for a lot of guys who would love to bareback, but won't because they don't want to seroconvert. In this way, barebacking films are serving a very important purpose in our community. They allow guys to "participate in the behavior" without actually physically doing it themselves.

How can we shift the balance in barebacking films and making them more responsible? First of all, studios can take a stand and raise the age of performers who wish to perform in them, and not allow any model under the age of 25 to be involved in them. (Personally, I think we should do that for ALL of porn, but it's not for me to say.)

Secondly, we can make sure that before the movie starts, viewers are given the information to stay negative in an entertaining way. PSAs with hot porn stars are a great way to do this. Inform the viewer about what it is he is about to watch (just like they do on TV with "NYPD Blue" and "Law & Order") and then let them make their own choices about whether they want to watch it or not.

Thirdly, we can just not make these movies, but we can acknowledge that there ARE those who wish to see it, and we can simply say, "Personally, it's not for me, but I understand that it's not my place to tell others what they should be turned on by." We need to take all the judgment and the sermonizing and the finger-shaking and the fucking hypocrisy out of this equation and simply let the world turn as it does.

The reality is that we can't stop barebacking movies from being made. The demand for them is too high. Just like we can't stop kids from having sex, but we CAN educate them on having safer sex. Our job is not to tell people WHAT they can watch, but HOW to watch it. THAT is what I think is really important in this topic, and all that other bullshit we keep slinging at each other needs to stop, b/cuz it's just fucking TIRED. Nobody needs to hear it, and nobody WANTS to hear it. Stop being a cliche' for a change and wake up to reality and be a responsible person who is pro-active instead of reactive.

Barebacking porn is NOT the problem. IGNORANCE is. That's where the battle needs to be fought.

And that is just my "humble" two cents.

Sorry if my last post came off as argumentative or angry. I'm not directing my comments at ANYONE here personally. I understand it's a very passionate topic for many, and I, of course, respect those who have lived through the devastation that the AIDS epidemic has caused in our community.

I'm just really tired of hearing people screaming about this topic. It never solves anything, and it's not pro-active. I feel it's incumbent on us to discuss this topic without all the emotional histrionics we like to resort to. If we are truly going to set positive examples for those just coming out, then we need to tackle this issue the same way we would when talking about drunk driving or smoking or teenage pregnancy. And as anyone with a SANE mind knows, screaming at people and saying "This is wrong!" is not the way to get them not to do something. Educating them and telling them they have a choice is the best policy.

It's no different than needle-sharing programs in the big cities and condoms in schools. We have simply got to stop the sermonizing and step up to the plate and be pro-active for a change. If that means you don't film barebacking movies, that's great. Good for you. But don't go around telling everyone one else that they are wrong for A) making them, or B) wanting to see it. Judgment calls are not the way to make change. Education is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XXXWriterDude

Sorry if my last post came off as argumentative or angry. I'm not directing my comments at ANYONE here personally. I understand it's a very passionate topic for many, and I, of course, respect those who have lived through the devastation that the AIDS epidemic has caused in our community.

---

I don't think you have anything to apologize about. You made an excellent point of what you were trying to say and at no time did you point fingers at any one in particular. We seem to agree on many points, and the things you said that I did not agree with at the onset did give me food for thought about my attitudes on the subject. It's funny how we can be so permissive on some things and so indignant about others when they are both more similar than we'd care to admit.

And I have to say, the reason we are so hot and fired about this topic is because we're not affected by the abortion controversy and why should straight people have all the fun? (tongue firmly planted in cheek, thank you very much)

Well, I asked for thought on the subject of filming bareback. Everyone seems to have an opinion. No problem with that. After all, this is a discussion board. I see know reason not to tackle complex issues. Most of us do it every day.

Stating your opinion and damning everyone else, let's just say, this hardly is ever constructive. Shouting louder than your opponent does not make you right. It simply makes you louder.

It's about time there is some serious dialogue on this subject because it does affect everyone, directly, and indirectly. Most of the new porn I'm seeing is all about bareback. Maybe it's time that we self police and opt for some sort of warning label on dvd's and such ?

XXXWriterDude - you never even try to understand other people's points of view- or not in any serious thread i've seen. you decide what our motivations are and group us together, regardless of the fact that we don't all have the same motivations. in NO way were morals a part of my objection.

i have friends who have HIV - it's no fun. it's horrible, and may be fatal, although often it appears that hep C will kill them long before AIDS - which is often also avoidable with condoms. and yes, one of them got it through oral sex. he's never done IV drugs and never fucked (weird, i know). it does happen.

ignorance may cause the problem, but people living - or dying - with HIV, hep C, herpes, and many other uncurable life-threatening diseases is the problem. and it's one we can prevent - not just with education, but using condoms.

basschick, my love, I'm not sure I understand your response. My post was ALL ABOUT trying to understand other peoples' points of views. That was the whole purpose for my post in the first place. Perhaps you missed that part at the end where I said "People make barebacking porn, but it's just not for me."

Again, my post was not directed toward anyone in particular, just to the general population, and I'm not damning anyone. I'm stating my personal viewpoints about the topic, that's all. I'm also pointing out that the majority of the objections to bareback porn seem to have to do with moral objections as opposed to practical ones. I'm simply stating what I observe in the behavior of others when this topic comes up. If you take that personally, it's your perogative to do so, but please don't assert your off-base analysis of my intentions into what I say, because you couldn't be further off the mark if you tried.