Re: The Safer Sex law in Calf
Posted: November 23rd, 2016, 11:01 am
I thought this was a really nicely worded letter to the LA times by our friend Eric John. I wonder if they will print it? I wanted to share it with you guys.
Dear Mr. Ng, and also Mr. Skelton and Mr. Myers-
Good evening.
My name is Eric John, I have been a performer, producer/director, photographer, and company owner in the adult industry in Los Angeles since 2004. (Prior to that I was an executive at the Boeing Company, and my degree is a BS and half an MS from MIT in Aeronautical & Astonautical Engineering.)
I am writing in regards to “Porn industry poised for L.A. return”. The comments I have also relate to an article by Mr. Skelton prior to the election where he was considering a No vote on Prop 60. I previous wrote regarding Mr. Myers voter summary on the Propositions.
I am active in both the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee (APAC) as a performer and the Free Speech Coalition (FSC) as a company owner. I have cc’d several members of both organizations on this email.
First, Mr. Ng, thank you for a generally positive and generally non-biased and non-stigmatized article. It is always good to see the industry get coverage similar to any other legal industry. One does dream of the day when the “film industry” in Los Angeles includes the ENTIRE film industry, both mainstream and adult, equally in all articles; nonetheless, all coverage of the nature of your article is a step in the right direction.
The biggest issue with regards to truthfulness and facts has to do with this section:
“The porn industry wants to be treated as a normal business industry, “ said Dawn Hawkins, executive director of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. “But they aren’t taking care of the people working for them. They’re pushing lies that they’re taking care of these performers when we hear again and again they are being used and abused.”
Hawkins and others note that the risks are real. In 2010, Derrick Burts, a porn actor, announced that he had contracted HIV, a rare act of public disclosure that sent waves of fear through the industry. In recent months, Burts has been a vocal supporter of Proposition 60, filming PSAs in favor of the proposition.
Most seriously, this section, and a similar section in Mr. Skelton’s earlier piece, perpetuates a flat-out falsehood that has been propagated knowingly by both Mr. Burts and Mr. Weinstein of AHF. Specifically, Mr. Burts did NOT get HIV from porn or on set. This is not a theory, it is a fact.
The testing program which the industry has established identified when Mr. Burts was exposed to HIV, and industry-wide production was voluntarily and immediately shut down until all performers that had contact with Mr. Burts on set were tested multiple times. (For further safety, anyone in contact with the people Mr. Burts was in contact with, and so on, also were tested.) Not only did no other performer that Mr. Burks worked with test positive, the entire performer pool was retested prior to anyone returning to work.
It is therefore IMPOSSIBLE that Mr. Burts contracted HIV while on set, as NO ONE he worked with has it. Period.
Mr. Burts contracted HIV from a “civilian” (as we term non-industry people). Civilians are the danger to US, the performer population. Civilians are the untested, uncontrolled population - and we rightfully fear exposure to people OUTSIDE the industry.
The last case of on set exposure to HIV was all the way back in 2004 - an incredible safety record given the number of potential exposures daily. It proves the industry-designed and industry-implemented testing program and protocols work.
Mr. Burts and Mr. Weinstein both know these facts yet intentionally and maliciously allow it to be ambiguous so that a lay-person reading about it assumes that Mr. Burts contracted HIV on set or in any way related to the fact that he was in porn. This is both unethical and a heinously calculated move to push the agenda of Mr. Weinstein.
Which certainly isn’t about performer safety - which is why myself and the vast majority of my fellow performers have spoken up clearly and coherently against his efforts.
Ms. Hawkins, who I haven’t had the pleasure of meeting, is clearly not spending any time around the great people at the companies I work for or the performers that I know - because “we hear again and again they are being used and abused” - NO. We barely ever hear that except from some disgruntled former industry members who usually have a bad time in the industry due to their own personal problems, often related to their own substance abuse issues - which the industry is absolutely against. No one in the industry wants people working who have substance abuse problems, any more than Hollywood wanted Robert Downey Jr. when he was having his. It’s bad business and bad humanity.
The industry is by and large composed of very professional companies and very professional performers. Especially the Los Angeles-based centralized portion of the industry, which can effectively and easily do a large amount of self-regulation due to colocation.
Lastly, though the main problem with Prop 60 was not, as you pointed out, condoms per se, I want to address some misconceptions about condoms. This is a topic I am very familiar with, because since one of those “sporadic” OSHA enforcements in 2013, my company uses condoms.
The vast majority of female performers absolutely can’t stand using them. This stems from something that “civilians” don’t consider when imagining condom use in porn. Porn sex is professional-level athletic ability in the same way that NBA basketball is different than shooting around in your yard. It’s longer, it’s more complicated, it’s a show not just a private activity, ….. it’s completely non-comparable. Condoms were not designed for this environment, they were designed to protect “civilians” in normal (short) sexual encounters. When used for long periods, they cause often cause vaginal dryness and vaginal tearing, counter-intuitively causing more risk, more discomfort, and in fact, sometimes making it difficult for female performers to work several days or scenes in a row, affecting their income.
The ultimate answer to OSHA 5193 is that the professional industry should have a tailored appropriate plan reflective that it’s professional performers in a professional environment for entertainment purposes - much in the same way we allow boxing, the NFL, Cirque de Soleil, and any number of activities by trained professional athletes and performers for entertainment purposes in an appropriate environment.
Porn performers are professional performers working in a professional environment in a legal business that is good for Los Angeles and California.
Please consider these points, and at the very least, make absolutely sure that the facts are truthful when discussing the very serious claim that HIV was transmitted on a set in the industry. Which is has NOT been since 2004.
Newspapers are threatened in these times and the jobs of reporters like you are even more important to our society. As your “fake news” editorial referenced, things presented as facts that are in fact NOT facts is a growing problem as the media diversifies.
Let’s make sure the Los Angeles times ensures that facts are facts.
I would be pleased to discuss these topics and any others with any of you at any time.
Very best regards-
Eric John
Eric John
CEO, Erotique Entertainment Inc.
EricJohn@ErotiqueEntertainment.com
Even if they don't print it, please give him props on his letter, well done!
Dear Mr. Ng, and also Mr. Skelton and Mr. Myers-
Good evening.
My name is Eric John, I have been a performer, producer/director, photographer, and company owner in the adult industry in Los Angeles since 2004. (Prior to that I was an executive at the Boeing Company, and my degree is a BS and half an MS from MIT in Aeronautical & Astonautical Engineering.)
I am writing in regards to “Porn industry poised for L.A. return”. The comments I have also relate to an article by Mr. Skelton prior to the election where he was considering a No vote on Prop 60. I previous wrote regarding Mr. Myers voter summary on the Propositions.
I am active in both the Adult Performer Advocacy Committee (APAC) as a performer and the Free Speech Coalition (FSC) as a company owner. I have cc’d several members of both organizations on this email.
First, Mr. Ng, thank you for a generally positive and generally non-biased and non-stigmatized article. It is always good to see the industry get coverage similar to any other legal industry. One does dream of the day when the “film industry” in Los Angeles includes the ENTIRE film industry, both mainstream and adult, equally in all articles; nonetheless, all coverage of the nature of your article is a step in the right direction.
The biggest issue with regards to truthfulness and facts has to do with this section:
“The porn industry wants to be treated as a normal business industry, “ said Dawn Hawkins, executive director of the National Center on Sexual Exploitation. “But they aren’t taking care of the people working for them. They’re pushing lies that they’re taking care of these performers when we hear again and again they are being used and abused.”
Hawkins and others note that the risks are real. In 2010, Derrick Burts, a porn actor, announced that he had contracted HIV, a rare act of public disclosure that sent waves of fear through the industry. In recent months, Burts has been a vocal supporter of Proposition 60, filming PSAs in favor of the proposition.
Most seriously, this section, and a similar section in Mr. Skelton’s earlier piece, perpetuates a flat-out falsehood that has been propagated knowingly by both Mr. Burts and Mr. Weinstein of AHF. Specifically, Mr. Burts did NOT get HIV from porn or on set. This is not a theory, it is a fact.
The testing program which the industry has established identified when Mr. Burts was exposed to HIV, and industry-wide production was voluntarily and immediately shut down until all performers that had contact with Mr. Burts on set were tested multiple times. (For further safety, anyone in contact with the people Mr. Burts was in contact with, and so on, also were tested.) Not only did no other performer that Mr. Burks worked with test positive, the entire performer pool was retested prior to anyone returning to work.
It is therefore IMPOSSIBLE that Mr. Burts contracted HIV while on set, as NO ONE he worked with has it. Period.
Mr. Burts contracted HIV from a “civilian” (as we term non-industry people). Civilians are the danger to US, the performer population. Civilians are the untested, uncontrolled population - and we rightfully fear exposure to people OUTSIDE the industry.
The last case of on set exposure to HIV was all the way back in 2004 - an incredible safety record given the number of potential exposures daily. It proves the industry-designed and industry-implemented testing program and protocols work.
Mr. Burts and Mr. Weinstein both know these facts yet intentionally and maliciously allow it to be ambiguous so that a lay-person reading about it assumes that Mr. Burts contracted HIV on set or in any way related to the fact that he was in porn. This is both unethical and a heinously calculated move to push the agenda of Mr. Weinstein.
Which certainly isn’t about performer safety - which is why myself and the vast majority of my fellow performers have spoken up clearly and coherently against his efforts.
Ms. Hawkins, who I haven’t had the pleasure of meeting, is clearly not spending any time around the great people at the companies I work for or the performers that I know - because “we hear again and again they are being used and abused” - NO. We barely ever hear that except from some disgruntled former industry members who usually have a bad time in the industry due to their own personal problems, often related to their own substance abuse issues - which the industry is absolutely against. No one in the industry wants people working who have substance abuse problems, any more than Hollywood wanted Robert Downey Jr. when he was having his. It’s bad business and bad humanity.
The industry is by and large composed of very professional companies and very professional performers. Especially the Los Angeles-based centralized portion of the industry, which can effectively and easily do a large amount of self-regulation due to colocation.
Lastly, though the main problem with Prop 60 was not, as you pointed out, condoms per se, I want to address some misconceptions about condoms. This is a topic I am very familiar with, because since one of those “sporadic” OSHA enforcements in 2013, my company uses condoms.
The vast majority of female performers absolutely can’t stand using them. This stems from something that “civilians” don’t consider when imagining condom use in porn. Porn sex is professional-level athletic ability in the same way that NBA basketball is different than shooting around in your yard. It’s longer, it’s more complicated, it’s a show not just a private activity, ….. it’s completely non-comparable. Condoms were not designed for this environment, they were designed to protect “civilians” in normal (short) sexual encounters. When used for long periods, they cause often cause vaginal dryness and vaginal tearing, counter-intuitively causing more risk, more discomfort, and in fact, sometimes making it difficult for female performers to work several days or scenes in a row, affecting their income.
The ultimate answer to OSHA 5193 is that the professional industry should have a tailored appropriate plan reflective that it’s professional performers in a professional environment for entertainment purposes - much in the same way we allow boxing, the NFL, Cirque de Soleil, and any number of activities by trained professional athletes and performers for entertainment purposes in an appropriate environment.
Porn performers are professional performers working in a professional environment in a legal business that is good for Los Angeles and California.
Please consider these points, and at the very least, make absolutely sure that the facts are truthful when discussing the very serious claim that HIV was transmitted on a set in the industry. Which is has NOT been since 2004.
Newspapers are threatened in these times and the jobs of reporters like you are even more important to our society. As your “fake news” editorial referenced, things presented as facts that are in fact NOT facts is a growing problem as the media diversifies.
Let’s make sure the Los Angeles times ensures that facts are facts.
I would be pleased to discuss these topics and any others with any of you at any time.
Very best regards-
Eric John
Eric John
CEO, Erotique Entertainment Inc.
EricJohn@ErotiqueEntertainment.com
Even if they don't print it, please give him props on his letter, well done!