Let’s talk about California ballot initiatives, and by ballot initiatives let’s talk about the one everyone and their cousin is thinking about: Prop 60: Mandatory condom use in adult films. Prop 69 would’ve been more apt, amirite? This proposition is to protect adult performers from contracting STIs.
Yes, people, this is just a statewide-version of LA County’s Measure B, because if government is good for one thing, it’s telling consenting adults performers how to perform, never mind the fact that condom manufacturers didn’t make condoms with adult films in mind. Sure, it looks like a simple in and out procedure, but shooting lasts for quite a good while. Just because you get a 20-minute scene, doesn’t mean the scene was shot in that amount of time. This also doesn’t account for the still shots for video covers and screenshots. During extended shoots, condoms can breach and can chafe the skin. Not to mention the fact that even with condoms, one can still transmit a number of infections.
Not only that, the measure would also create a porn czar. This porn czar would be the same person that wrote the bill, Michael Weinstein, and he would become a state employee whose sole purpose would be to review any porn produced in California for any violations of the law and file lawsuits. It was written as if someone was thought to themselves, “Huh? I already watch porn at work when the boss is not around, how cool would it be if that was actually in my job description? Except for the boss part—I’ll be my own boss.”
California taxpayers and the state have more important things to do than to waste time and money on telling people what they can do when performing their duties within a legal enterprise.
The prop 60 would threaten the privacy of adult performers and webcam models, as well as scare out $9 billion-a-year business.