|
Ok, now imagine that this background check becomes the standard of the industry.
It seems reasonable to say that you don't any sex offender or violent criminal in the sex industry (because implicitly we associate the information (violent) with (adult industry) )
Of course we dont want that.
Like in the US, you don't want to associate (violent individual) with (guns).
Also reasonable...
You could say, that only people without any significant background problem should work in the industry.
Now imagine, you and your clean background:
- you film
- the girl signs a contract (performed sex scene, you describe all the sexual position that she will do)
- the woman (in your back), starts to drink booze and smoke weed.
- she performs as expected and doesn't seem shy, at all. But she looks theatric, looks much more drunk that she looks when there is no camera.
She mimic what people would associate with drug or alcohol. She says sentence: "oh I am so high", then falls unconscious in the middle of a scene while she can otherwise perfectly stand.
- 3 days after, you get a lawsuit: rape, you drugged her and she couldn't give her consent (she lies as less as possible, so it's better to target the non scrupulous people of the industry first).
- like every players of the industry, every 3 months, you have to comply to a background check.
Oh, but it seems you have a lawsuit.
The feminist group "protect women from the phallocratic industry", reported that you have been sued.
- you are out of business and you are possibly a rapist. Would you work with a possible rapist?
I wouldn't!
What about random drug testing?
|