Quote Originally Posted by hdkbill View Post
Chip,

And you certainly have the right to your opinion. No one would ever attempt to take that away from you. But others, happen to like the scene you described. Guess that's why they make chocolate and vanilla. Everyone has different tastes. Great thing about the freedom in this country is that if you don't like to watch those type of films, you don't have to. You have the absolute right NOT to watch those films. But, would you take away the rights of the guys who do like those type of films simply because you don't like them? That would be the same as me saying, "I'm gay and I don't like straight films, therefore, let's ban all straight films because I don't like them".
As an advocate of the First Amendment, I support the freedom of anyone who wishes to make such films to make them. To take it a step further, many (including me) find much of the violence in Hollywood films to be as disgusting as some of the more gross porn acts portrayed on film... and no doubt some find the content that we produce to be gross or distasteful. So I don't advocate banning such speech.

But (putting on rose colored glasses) I do wish that content producers would perhaps give at least some thought to the impact their content has on society. Violent video games are banned in much of Europe, and Europe has far lower incidence of violence than the US. Coincidence? Maybe. Correlation does not equal causation, so we don't know for sure, but many studies indicate there is a correlation between viewing violence and more violent behavior, and many studies indicate that repeated viewing of any behavior creates a subconscious acceptance of such behavior. In other words, people watch violence (or barebacking, or shitting cum out of your ass) and people eventually get the subconscious programming that it's OK to do that. Again, I would not advocate banning such expression, but it would be really nice if producers would simply realize the impact they have on people's psyches, and perhaps take that into consideration when producing content.

And, how do you know the guy who is doing what you described above, isn't already positive and therefore at no risk of "potentially being infected and risking his life" by becoming HIV positive since he already is?
I don't. But there are many other STIs in addition to HIV, some of which (hep-C, for example) are even more difficult to treat than HIV. And since you've already said you don't do testing, let's turn it around: Are we to assume that your models already have every STI on the planet and therefore can fuck anyone and everyone completely carefree?

Additionally, last I looked at the literature, it was pretty widely accepted among HIV specialists that mixing strains of HIV (reinfecting someone already infected) frequently introduces additional complications making it even more difficult to treat and stabilize them. And someone who is HIV+ but does not have AIDS can certainly be pushed into a more serious condition through reinfection. Many HIV+ people either don't know this, or are in denial about it. If the reinfection risks are clearly explained to the models involved in a shoot, and they make the conscious choice that they still wish to bareback, then it's been disclosed and it's at that point the model's choice... but I would wager that no such conversation takes place.

People have a right to do what they want to do. Studios have a right to film unsafe or risky or offensive content. The main thing I'm in favor of is full, honest disclosure of risks to the people being asked to take them, minimization of risks wherever possible, and that thought be given to the impact that we, as producers, have on our audience.