Bareback film studio creates contraversy at CLAW

[Squirt]

Cleveland--An example of the rise in profile of the Cleveland Leather Annual Weekend was the presence of Treasure Island Media, a San Francisco adult film studio.

The studio garnered a great deal of attention by videotaping the goings-on at their booth at the Folsom Street Fair a few years ago, but organizers later threatened them with a lawsuit if they ever used the event’s name again.

This year, they not only had a booth in the CLAW vendor mart selling their DVDs, T‑shirts and other garments, they also organized a film shoot. Brad McGuire, a performer who has been in six of their films, worked the booth and attended two parties at Flex Hotel and Spa and the Tool Shed.

Treasure Island is controversial. They specialize in bareback porn, videos where performers do not adhere to the guidelines of safer sex.

McGuire also works as a bartender in Chicago. He performs in videos for some other companies, although a few completely blackball anyone who has been in a bareback video.

McGuire, interestingly, does not argue against that.

“It’s my choice to do it [the bareback films], and it’s their choice not to hire me,” he said.

Bareback porn, which has become increasingly popular over the last ten years, has been greatly stigmatized. During the early years of the AIDS crisis, virtually every porn studio voluntarily began requiring that all of their scenes that include anal sex use condoms, and a few films even used them with oral sex.

After ten to fifteen years of that, however, some producers began making films without condoms again, some of them foreign, others more in the fetish market.

One of the worries opponents of bareback porn have is the “monkey see, monkey do” philosophy--viewers will see people engaging in unsafe sex onscreen, and then do it in their own lives.

McGuire’s friendliness in person belies his onscreen tough-guy demeanor. He likes to believe that his videos for Treasure Island are taken as a fantasy break from real-life safer sex.

“It’s like watching Jackass,” he said, referring to the bone-breaking MTV show. “If someone goes out and does those stunts, they’re stupid, and I like to think our customers aren’t stupid.” FULL STORY

-------------------

I only posted about half of the whole story. It's an interesting read.

Why is bareback sex contraversial and not shoot em up Hollywood films or horror films that show people dying in horrific ways?

[IdolKnights]

Hollywood movies are make-up and props

[Squirt]

Well real life documentaries and news stories show real life death, violence, murder, police chases, etc. Yet there is no outrage that airing that on television will make people do as they see.

Would a "do not try this at home" disclaimer be enough, as it is for Jackass?

[SPACE GLIDER]

Hollywood movies are make-up and props

Sometimes not even that

[gaybucks_chip]

I've seen some bareback producers that seem to genuinely put serious thought into educational shorts at the beginning and/or end of their videos, but most just put up a short text statement, and a few either put nothing at all or something that's so inane as to be insulting to the intelligence.

Do the disclaimers do anything? Maybe.

Does seeing bareback, violence, smoking, drug use, underage drinking, wife beating, or any other socially unacceptable behavior encourage some people to engage in those behaviors? Probably.

Are we ever going to get Hollywood and the producers of content that are socially unacceptable to stop producing objectionable content? Very likely not.

Should we legislate rules to force the termination of objectionable content? Absolutely not.

Remember that MTV started putting disclaimers up for Beavis and Butthead's stupidity (long before Jackass), and they weren't even real people... and that was no doubt in response to complaints.

I just wish/hope that some day people will stop purchasing content (including hollywood movies) containing socially unacceptable behavior, and therefore encourage studios to stop producing it. Unlikely, but I can still hope for it

[A_DeAngelo]

so what else is new with TI?

hello! its 2007... hasn't anyone in Cleveland heard about sero-sorting yet? and why hasn't the dept of public health followed in the steps of the SF dept of health... re: making statistics know about the "positive" effects of sero-sorting....

and for the record, we don't "shoot in public" - its a private thing with us...

[Squirt]

I'm torn with this issue

On one hand I feel very strongly that consenting adults can do whatever the hell they want to do and that everyone has the right to do with their body whatever they like.

On the other hand I know that media and entertainment do impact people in many ways, one of which is setting social norms and trends.

Looking at porn we know that PSA's are NOT what we want to see when we're in the mood to get off, that's like seeing a video of a woman giving birth before sex, total downer.

Is there a way that bareback companies can give a donation to an AIDS awareness program and make that statement before a video without bringing a downer on the video and at the same time helping raise public awareness about unsafe sex?

note: I've never filmed bareback sex, or two guys getting it on for that matter, but I think it's important for bareback production companies, and the Gay community, to find a balance that compliments both aspects of the Gay lifestyle without demonizing eachother. Your thoughts?

[procam]

I'm torn with this issue

On one hand I feel very strongly that consenting adults can do whatever the hell they want to do and that everyone has the right to do with their body whatever they like.

On the other hand I know that media and entertainment do impact people in many ways, one of which is setting social norms and trends.

Looking at porn we know that PSA's are NOT what we want to see when we're in the mood to get off, that's like seeing a video of a woman giving birth before sex, total downer.

Is there a way that bareback companies can give a donation to an AIDS awareness program and make that statement before a video without bringing a downer on the video and at the same time helping raise public awareness about unsafe sex?

note: I've never filmed bareback sex, or two guys getting it on for that matter, but I think it's important for bareback production companies, and the Gay community, to find a balance that compliments both aspects of the Gay lifestyle without demonizing eachother. Your thoughts?

One of the hosting companies I own used to donate all of our setup fees to an aids charity ~ until we were publicly exposed for hosting porn sites and they returned our check and asked that we remove their name from our hosting company website ~

Some of the charities are so damn political and anti porn that I dont think that will help if they came down on me like that just for hosting porn sites surely they would face the same issue and worse just cause they deal in unprotected sexual activity ~

I agree with the above post its every adults right / choice to do what they want -- just cause I catch a glimpse of a preacher on tv on sunday doesnt mean i will stop working porn sites buy a bible and go to church any more than if I see Donmike on gaytv as a chubby chaser ~ doesnt mean Im gonna start chasing chubby dudes ~ silly they think just cause someone sees something they dont have sense enough to make a "Right choice" for their lives.

[Sana Chan]

In reguards to the "monkey-see/monkey-do" aspect of it, I'm wondering if that applies to a certain age group. Older more mature people generally realize that what is one the TV is not something you should go off and do unless you have all the facts. When I see an action such as repelling, white-water rafting, etc, I check it out as make sure I'm physically able to do the action without serious injury. I'm not under the illusion that nothing can hurt me and I can't die.

We studied the "violence on TV causes Violence in kids" in my psychology class and I noticed something. Kids were allowed to play in a room with a big inflatable clown. Kids didn't bother clown. Then kids were shown a video of some guy beating the shit out of the clown. When let back in the room, the kids beat the shit out of the clown.

I didn't see one adult tell the kids this was just a pretend video or enter the room to stop the kids. By not stopping a behavior that is caused by observance, a child learns that what he see's is something he can do. Much like a kid who puts on a superman costume and jumps off the roof. If the parents don't tell him its just pretend, they will try it.

Warnings at the beginning of videos I think are ignored most of time now because of the whole "DON'T COPY THIS!" shit every video has. But maybe something more in the opening credits would be more appropriate. However I wonder if people watching porn don't just fast forward to the real action and ignore everything else.

[XXXWriterDude]

All I want to say is: I want to sleep with Brad McGuire!!!!

[JamesXR]

Why is it that gay bareback porn is a special case where adults are treated like children? Politicians have raved about violent movies and video games over their feared effects on kids, and some rating systems have been put in place that are very often ignored. Straight porn has no massive stigma against condom-free porn either, and straight people aren't exactly immune to HIV.
I'm just wondering why the anti-barebacking movement achieved such massive success where so many other movements failed. Is there any hard evidence that people emulate unsafe behavior or at least behavior presented as unsafe that they see in porn, or did this movement arise simply based off of the belief in the "monkey see, monkey do" effect.
Perhaps it's just because porn producers are excessively responsible members of the community, and using condoms doesn't hurt porn as much as nonviolence would hurt video games. Perhaps it's also because the community had a lot more people actually dying than those other movements, and it is a much more cohesive community than America at large.
It's actually an admirable movement in the fact that it has made safe sex the rule and barebacking the exception. The fact that someone has to look for bareback porn to find bareback porn is a stunning victory for the movement. Isn't is accepted that barebacking is riskier and accepted that companies that produce it take more precautions. What more can the anti-barebacking movement hope to achieve. Complete annihilation seems unreasonable, unrealistic, and I can't see it actually increasing the incidence of unsafe sex. Perhaps this is a movement that has achieved its mission but doesn't know how to stop fighting. It seems that all that energy could be funneled into a cause with better returns.

[DonMike]

just cause I catch a glimpse of a preacher on tv on sunday doesnt mean i will stop working porn sites buy a bible and go to church any more than if I see Donmike on gaytv as a chubby chaser ~ doesnt mean Im gonna start chasing chubby dudes

Um... okay. LOL! :cheekymonkey:


I think the issue about barebacking is that in a lot of ways the porn that includes it can often be seen as glorifying it and making it attractive as something that the viewer might want to try. People don't always mimic behavior seen in the media but when a guy is getting off on a type of porn that he's really into he's much more susceptible to ideas. I don't bareback, personally, but I think it is each person's right to do with their bodies as they please, and I think that companies that produce bareback porn should be allowed. On the other hand I do think that there should be more effort into the promotion of safe sex and the risks that exist in barebacking. The problem that I see is that young men see hot hunky porn stars having unprotected sex and they've got sexy bodies and appear perfectly healthy, so the idea that one can have unprotected sex and never have to worry about getting sick is the message that they perceive. I don't think that safe sex messages at the beginning of bareback porn (or any porn for that matter) does any good, but it couldn't hurt. I think a good idea would be to have a short film featuring some of the hot guys in the movie talking about the risks of bareback sex.

Simply saying "say not to unsafe sex" doesn't work anymore. The discussion has to include things like sero-sorting, the risks of hiv infection, living with hiv, the dangers of mixing two strains of the virus, and more. It's not a matter of yes and no anymore, it's a matter of being informed about the risks before you decide if you should take them anymore. I don't think it will make bareback porn less sexy, I think it would simply help the viewer decide if they want to use the video as fantasy fodder or instructional.

[gaybucks_chip]

Why is it that gay bareback porn is a special case where adults are treated like children?

Chi chi put it well when she talks about the the kid in Boise who is gay and coming out and doesn't have anyone to talk to, but finds a video online and makes the assumption that what he sees in the video is what the "norm" is.

Straight kids get sex education that talks about condom use, but in a lot of programs, the focus is on pregnancy prevention rather than STI protection. Many school sex ed programs say little to nothing about gay sex, and there is no question that people emulate behaviors they see. (Plenty of studies in the scientific literature that validate that statement.)

The fact that someone has to look for bareback porn to find bareback porn is a stunning victory for the movement.

That was true in 1996. Sadly, it's not true today. Particularly in twink porn, a significant portion, if not the majority of material produced, is bareback.

Isn't is accepted that barebacking is riskier and accepted that companies that produce it take more precautions.

I wish it were true that the companies that produce it take more precautions. There are some notable exceptions to the rule, such as Tony and Cam who post here, but from the models we've spoken to who have worked for various bareback producers, many of them don't even test the models; they rely on the word of the model that they've been tested. Those that do generally test only for HIV and not for other STIs that are difficult to treat. And worst of all, many of the studios that shoot bareback minimize the risks when discussing with the models, essentially "talking them into" barebacking.

If a model is *fully* informed without any minimization of the risks, truly understands the risks and what the consequences are, and then makes the decision to bareback, that is his choice. Unfortunately, that is often not the case, at least with the procedures described by models working with many of the twink producers out there.

Perhaps this is a movement that has achieved its mission but doesn't know how to stop fighting.

I wish that were the case. Unfortunately, since we have been in the adult industry, the number of producers shooting bareback has dramatically *increased*, not decreased. The percentage especially of twink content that is bareback is much, much higher than it was five years ago.

This is hardly a war that has been won.

[JamesXR]

Thanks Chip,
Clearly I do not have a clear perspective. The porn producers I've been exposed to, many on GWW, would appear to be a more responsible sample of the industry.
While it may not be as successful as I had thought, I am still impressed with the community's cohesiveness and ability to act on the issue in a positive way.

Would it be impractical to create a regulatory agency that certifies movies and sites as sexually responsible, kind of like organic food? The emphasis could be moved from barebacking to practices that put models at risk. You could give a company an official seal and a letter grade based on their condom use and testing. An A+ site would test for multiple diseases ahead of time and use condoms. A simple survey of former models would be all you'd need to determine a company's practices. You could finance it with member dues. If you got webmasters and consumers to stop promoting or purchasing irresponsible porn you could use market pressure to enforce responsible practices without harming responsible bareback producers. You could create the MPAA of gay porn. That's just a thought I'd like to put out there for anyone who might want to pick it up.

[gaybucks_chip]

Thanks Chip,

Would it be impractical to create a regulatory agency that certifies movies and sites as sexually responsible, kind of like organic food? The emphasis could be moved from barebacking to practices that put models at risk. You could give a company an official seal and a letter grade based on their condom use and testing.

AJ and I had actually discussed a similar idea a few months ago, and AJ talked to Chi Chi about it. She wasn't very hot on the idea, but I could see it as being a positive thing that could definitely have an effect.

We haven't done anything with our exterior packaging, but we made a minor change in our end credits on the DVD we just sent to manufacturing, adding a statement at the end of the production credits to the effect that "to ensure the safety of our models, all models were tested for STIs prior to production, and condoms and safer sex methods were used in all scenes in this video." Idea being that perhaps if the *buyers* are encouraged to think about the safety of the models, perhaps they will start choosing more safe titles when they buy.

That isn't to say that bareback as a niche doesn't have a place. I think that the product that people like Tony and Cam produce is a different product designed to appeal to a specific market segment. It just shouldn't (in my opinion) become the norm, and particularly not in twink porn, where the models are frequently young enough and impressionable enough to be talked into doing something without truly realizing the risks.

The sad thing is... twink producers seem to think they *need* to produce bareback in order to sell product, but this simply isn't true. Our distributor tells us that our *back catalog* product (some of which is 2+ years old) is outselling the majority of their new releases, and one of our recently re-released titles that is close to 3 years old is among the top twink titles for our distributor right now. It has everything to do with the quality of the title and not whether or not it is bareback.

I would have to discuss with AJ, but I think we would be in favor of some sort of "best practices" certification, and I do think that it could have an impact.