Quote:
Originally Posted by billywatson
Can't compare the two IMO. In the gay community, HIV has been an issue for almost 30 years now. Shooting bareback in gay porn means a backlash from the gay consumer. That's a fact; in addition, I spoke with a gay producer a few years back when I was still green to all this, and he told me "there would be no gay porn if the performers had to test."
I agree 100% that we should be using condoms in straight movies, btw.
|
Testing is a lot more common these days. Many studios use the same 20 minute oral swab that the free clinics use. 99.9% accuracy with that 0.1% usually being false positives ... but I'd rather have a false positive than being a false negative.
I prefer using the free clinic for the same swab and making a $35 donation which covers their cost plus a few dollars. They'd be more than happy to do it for free though.
Then you can sero match, which means HIV+ actors can still perform, but only with other HIV+ actors -- and still with condoms so that in case they have different strands they do not re-infect.
Indeed, there is a backlash against bareback videos ... overall. It still has its fans though. Most of my consumer friends like bareback videos because they're forced to use condoms in everyday life and it's a way to enjoy it without putting themselves at risk. Of course, the models are still at risk.
HIV isn't all models have to worry about. Hepatitis makes life a real bitch and sometimes kill.
All can be avoided with condoms.