Quote Originally Posted by gaybucks_chip View Post
I have less objection to "pre condom" videos because, for the most part, the risks to models of having unprotected sex in the 1970s were considerably less than the risks today, and many of the "pre condom" titles were produced before we as a country understood what caused AIDS and how it was transmitted. So I think that one can make a case that selling product produced at a time when models were not put at risk by barebacking might be ethically better than producing a product that does put models at risk.
I am sorry but your WRONG about that. It can takes apprpox. HIV 7 to 10+ years to become AIDS. So that means that it was being passed around all over the 70's in those very same videos that you say models were not put at risk.
The models of today can make a choice, but in the 70,s they could not. and now most of them are gone!!
So its is just wrong for the condom companies to say OH, we did not know so it alright to sell it.
I suppose the makers of Selabrex could say the same thing. Oh, we did not know so the people we hurt along the way is OK.

Todays BB vids put guys at much less risk than "PRE condom" vids did.

No condom sex sends the same message if its a 70's vid or one from today.