Safe Bareback Sex?

[gaybucks_chip]

yes, yes, yes - we know all about the fact that tests can not reflect current status however,

we SEROSORT so that our models do not cross mix - pos with pos and neg with neg - its fairly simple that way

Hey, Tony,

Glad to hear that you consider viral load when serosorting HIV+ individuals. I don't claim expertise in the area, and I'm sure you have more knowledge than I about relative viral loads and the risks associated therewith.

However, the whole problem with putting negatives with negatives is you have no way of knowing they are in fact negative because of the latency period. So I don't see how, unless you are doing virus titers on each negative model in addition to standard testing for antibodies, that you're addressing the latency period, and therefore keeping the models safe.

I realize that the majority of your models are older than ours, and therefore, (in theory, at least) better able to make informed decisions about whether or not to participate in barebacking (on or off camera.) I just talk to soooo many people that don't seem to really understand how real the risk of infection is as a result of the latency period. I'm sure that your process includes a proper explanation... I just know a number of, ahem, studios who are more ethically challenged who don't take such precautions.

[gaybucks_chip]

I'm a big fan of RS, and I think what Chris is saying is that using lighting, clear condoms and a few tricks (like clipping off the halo from a condom so you don't see the un-rolled part) the condoms won't be as visible as they are in most porn movies.

They're not going to market them as bareback, they're just going to try to downplay the condom use a bit, but not stop using them.

Although I think condoms are hot, some people find they get in the way and they wish they weren't necessary.. this seems to be a good solution.

If this is true, it's great to hear. We are doing something similar... our first experiment was with the Durex Avanti condoms, which are made of polyurethane rather than latex and are clear. Unfortunately, they were a complete flop. They weren't very stretchy, they were too small for many of our models, and the models hated them. We're looking now into other ways to minimize the distraction of the condoms while still not portraying our materials as bareback.

[basschick]

no one ever talks about this but me, but here goes again...

HIV is not the only STD out there and it is not the only potentially fatal one. hep C is less treatable and at the moment, more often fatal as well as very communicable and less quickly testable.

and people with low T cell counts may not easily be able to fight off syphilis, chlamydia or other stuff. so even if 2 people are positive and have the same strain, if one has another STD, it can still cause the other partner serious problems.

i'm not trying to be the moral compass of the industry. my world has more questions than answers most of the time. but seriously, why is HIV the only STD that gets this much play?

[A_DeAngelo]

HIV is not the only STD out there and it is not the only potentially fatal one. hep C is less treatable and at the moment, more often fatal as well as very communicable and less quickly testable.

yes Patti, and there are also many other hazards that ALL producers face when filming hard core sex videos whether or not their models are wearing condoms - amoebas are only one of our concerns - and there's a lot of ass eating in this industry, as well as fisting which can lead to severe complications

this is why we prefer to use healthy, non-drug or alcohol abusive models who take care of themselves

this business is full of risks - there is no question - we try to minimize risks at all times

[gaybucks_chip]

no one ever talks about this but me, but here goes again...

HIV is not the only STD out there and it is not the only potentially fatal one. hep C is less treatable and at the moment, more often fatal as well as very communicable and less quickly testable.

Actually, there is a quick test for hep-C. It's one of the three infections we test our models for (HIV, syphillis, hep-C.) You just have to be willing to spend the money to test your models. Fortunately, we haven't had any models who have tested positive yet, but I'm sure it will happen eventually.

and people with low T cell counts may not easily be able to fight off syphilis, chlamydia or other stuff. so even if 2 people are positive and have the same strain, if one has another STD, it can still cause the other partner serious problems.

Syphillis, even for a healthy person, is very difficult to treat if not caught early. The bacteria is a spirochete, similar to Lyme disease, which burrows and hides, and many people who suffer from Lyme or syphillis have to take high-dose antibiotics for months. There is also a quick test for syphillis.


i'm not trying to be the moral compass of the industry. my world has more questions than answers most of the time. but seriously, why is HIV the only STD that gets this much play?[/QUOTE]

I think because HIV is most visible and prevalent, though hep-C is growing ever year in new diagnoses.

Ultimately, the models themselves need to take responsibility for their own behavior, and the ones that bareback on camera almost certainly do so in their own lives, where things are considerably less controlled and risks are probably higher.

I do believe that the majority of models probably take risks with barebacking occasionally in their private sex lives. But the good news is, with our models at least, it seems more of them are aware of the risks now than even a year or two ago, and I hear and see more of them paying attention to safe sex practices, asking questions, and choosing more wisely.

I'm not interested in being a moral compass either, but I do think that we, as producers, are in a unique position to be able to influence behavior both of our models and the customers who view our product. How we choose to use that influence is a decision that each producer has to make for him or herself.

[A_DeAngelo]

I'm not interested in being a moral compass either, but I do think that we, as producers, are in a unique position to be able to influence behavior both of our models and the customers who view our product. How we choose to use that influence is a decision that each producer has to make for him or herself.

yes, and we agree a thousand times over, this is why we counsel all of our potential models and turn down a large number of applicants -

we also provide disclaimers on our videos (we even do this with the videos we stream) and we provide references to professionals in the community if there are any concerns or issues our models are having (HIV related or otherwise) -

we're human beings too and we would not be where we are if not for our model pool - I think they care about us too - at least their performances show that they do