Prop 60, Condoms in Porn Films 


Oct 5, 2016 (San Diego) it is well known that the state is one of the leading producers of porn films. While CAL OSHA requires the use of condoms during sex, it does not enforce it’s use. Moreover, in November of 2012 Los Angeles passed measure B which requires wearing condoms while on set. This is important in the prevention of sexually transmitted diseases.

The initiative reads:

Widespread transmission of sexually transmitted infections associated with making adult films in California has been documented by one or more county departments of public health. All workers in the adult film industry deserve to go to work and not become ill…The adult film industry places profits above worker safety and actively prevents and discourages the use of certain essential safer sex methods

It also states that currently testing and medical costs are borne out by performers.
You can find the full initiative here

It will require the studios to comply with the law, including the use of condoms. It will also require enforcement of the law.

This is supported by the California Peace and Feedom Party, as well as the Santa Monica Democratic Club. It is also supported by the following groups:

  • AIDS Healthcare Foundation[10]
  • American Sexual Health Association
  • California State Association of Occupational Health Nurses
  • California Communities United Institute
  • Beyond AIDS
  • California Academy of Preventive Medicine
  • Southern California Coalition of Occupational Healthy and Safety

According to Ballotpedia supporters make the following arguments:

The proposition would hold pornographers accountable for work safety and health, specifically by closing loopholes and improving enforcement of existing law.

The proposition would only hold adult film producers, director, and agents accountable, not adult performers.

The proposition would reduce the risk of sexually transmitted diseases for adult performers and the larger community.

The proposition would save taxpayer money in that taxpayers would have to pay for less treatments for sexually transmitted diseases and other related diseases.

The No on 62 is supported by among others the Democratic, Libertarians and Republican parties. The following are also listed

  • Harvey Milk LGBT Democratic Club[16]
  • Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club
  • San Francisco Democratic Party
  • Los Angeles County Democratic Party[17]
  • San Mateo County Democrats
  • San Francisco Young Democrats
  • Los Angeles County Young Democrats
  • Organizations
  • Free Speech Coalition[14]
  • Valley Industry & Commerce Association (VICA)
  • Courage Campaign[18]
  • Equality California
  • Transgender Law Center
  • AIDS Project Los Angeles
  • Los Angeles LGBT Center
  • San Francisco AIDS Foundation
  • San Francisco Medical Society
  • Adult Performer Advocacy Committee (APAC)
  • Friends Committee on National Legislation
  • Espler Project, Inc.
  • St. James Infirmary
  • SWOP USA
  • Desiree Alliance
  • Woodhull Freedom Foundation

The arguments against it are as follows:

The proposition language is poorly drafted.

The proposition would lead to many lawsuits that could threaten the safety of adult performers.

The proposition would violate worker privacy.

The proposition would instate the proponent as a state employee who would review pornographic films for infractions, and only legislators would be able to vote the proponent out of the position if necessary.

The proposition would cost taxpayers millions of dollars unnecessarily.



Categories: Uncategorized

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: