Protected sex in pornography

It’s like the white whale, seeing a male pornstar wearing a condom during sex.  And no one seems to stop and ask the question of whether or not male porn stars should be forced to wear protection.  It’s an increasingly important question, with the seemingly mainstreaming of pornography and it’s general social acceptability.  Also?  Because many youths rely on it for their sexual education (another cannard all together). 

Tracy Clark-Flory writes a long, thoughtful and surprising post on the question, including an explanation of why condoms on the porn set can lead to increased STDs. Think rubber rash, condom burn and micro-abrasions. 

Afterall, porn “actors” are performing sexual acts hours on end and multiple times throughout shooting.  This isn’t like a normal person’s 15-minutes and cuddle routine. 

Still, there should be policies in place (within the industry) that keeps the reality of safe sexual practices from getting in the way of porn’s intended fantasy.

The best middle ground solution I’ve come across is one suggested by Adult Industry Medical Health Care Foundation founder Sharon Mitchell shortly after the 2004 outbreak: Why not promote a “seal of approval” that advertises a porno’s ethical production values? The gold standard might be requiring rigorous two-week testing and actively defending workers’ right to perform with or without a condom. It would be a disclaimer of sorts — essentially, “no porn stars were harmed in the making of this movie.”

Comments on this entry are closed.