Let's Talk About Bareback

Apologies for the lack of posts recently.  I'd like to say I'll be back posting regularly, but until I get back on track with various writing commitments, I'm afraid I will probably continue to be a little sporadic with my posting.  Let's begin then with a topic that continues to fascinate me, and which I regard as a key issue concerning contemporary gay identity, and the regulation of identity, bareback sex.

I finally for around to watching the How to Survive a Plague documentary.  I'd been really excited about watching it and found it a very emotionally draining documentary.   That said, I think it would have been a little shorter, and it did seem at times to lack the energy that was suggested in the trailer.  The "plague" moment from Kramer - which seems to dramatic in the trailer - actually sent a shiver down my spine when shown in context.  The descent into chaos, argument, and division will be familiar to anyone involved in gay politics and campaigning. Kramer's eruption, and genuine passion - shown in that context - is all the more powerful and underlines the importance of that unifying voice.  The documentary also helped to clarify in my mind the role of TAG in relation to Act Up!  A post on the Petrelis Files blog in recent days reveals how TAG continue to be a controversial group, and this documentary again helps younger gay men like myself to understand those historical tensions.

The documentary also left me wondering whether in the long run, it was worth it.  The trials that people pushed for, didn't work, and the documentary seemed to suggest that actually we would have got to the same destination whether there had been any intervention by the LGBT community or not.  Potentially incendiary stuff.   On a personal level, the documentary persuaded me to order a HIV home testing kit.   If it does nothing else, but inspire many viewers to do that, I suspect the film-makers will be pleased.

A really interesting post on BuzzFeed also caught my attention.  It's a blog by Kyle Bella who wonders why it's so hard to talk about bareback sex.  After all, we know more and more men who have sex with men, are having that sex without condoms.  Bareback is - I would argue - already normative in gay pornography, and will - if it isn't already - become normative in sexual practice.  We also see HIV rates continuing to rise, creating ever more socio-legal pressure for responses, health-policy responses such as we've seen in LA regarding pornography, and also specific campaigns such as that currently being waged against bareback company Treasure Island Media (albeit a particularly botched effort).

The puzzlement of Bella is - I suspect - shared by some, but I think most people know the reasons.  The trouble is the reasons are inconvenient, both politically and in policy terms.   If for example, we accept that bareback sex feels better - that it is a much more sensory engaging experience, then the arguments of safer sex campaigners over recent years will be seen as being less than completely honest.  It is also an emotionally different experience, and this again is not truly engaged with by many campaigners.

Our continued socio-legal pre-occupation with bareback sex, also furthers any fetishisation of bareback sex, whilst - and I can't emphasis this enough - the failure of large sections of 'our' community to be dropping dead from bareback sex, or popping up on a Friday night in a club looking like hell, dying from AIDS makes any 'HIV is a bad thing' message difficult to deliver.  Not that anyone has been trying to.  Recent years have seen campaigns focus on testing, and HIV campaigners seem more focused on discrimination than health needs (all of which fuels silence about being positive, or knowing if one is positive).

Then we have direct attempts to silence debates around bareback. This has taken the form of attempts to snuff out companies like Treasure Island Media (which I would suggest reflect back the reality of our sexual play) and, as this Queerty story revealed last month, Facebook banning a page about bareback (after it hit 20,000 likes).

Can we all honestly state whether we engage in bareback sex, and why?  I don't think our culture currently allows for that.  If we can't even be honest about our own behaviours, we are not going to get to grips with this subject.

Your Mother Liked It Bareback

Mark S King has written an absolutely brilliant piece on bareback sex.  You can check it out here.  He responds to some of the recent stories about bareback sex and contextualises it in a medical and cultural framework.  I can't recommend it enough.

HIV+ Guys Have Sex...and they Enjoy it...What the Deuce?

It's been a while since I blogged about the ever controversial US bareback porn studio, Treasure Island Media (TIM).  Their latest release -Drunk on Cum 6 - focuses on oral sex, and the consumption of semen.  However, as a bareback studio, they come under (what I find to be) surprising amounts of criticism for these oral scenes.

The Sword blog posted a little blog piece (NSFW - explicit sexual imagery) with a typically bitchy (and funny) little post, introducing the embedded trailer with: 'Don’t worry, you needn’t have seen Drunk On Cum 1, Drunk On Cum 2, Drunk On Cum 3, Drunk On Cum 4, or even Drunk On Cum 5 to understand the plot.'

The film features extensive scenes of oral sex and semen drinking (or 'cum guzzling' to use the parlance), including (going off the trailer) one scene of someone swallowing the semen contents of a glass jar and also semen being drunk from a condom.

The film is familiar ground for the studio, and the title -so studio honcho Paul Morris once told me - are a tribute to the d.o.c (drunk on cum) lust letters between Paul Beckford and Kevin Dax.  Here's the Amazon blurb for that text:

'The first book of its kind to combine true erotic stories with an intimate look into the developing experiences and relationship of one adventurous gay couple. Documenting the real-life e-mail romance of Kevin and Paul, D.O.C. Lust Letters is a shockingly explicit and movingly honest glimpse into the sexual and emotional lives of two gay men. Readers can follow the writers as they cruise the wild California gay scene of the late 1990s - from San Francisco to Los Angeles and everywhere in between - and journey deep inside gay erotic haunts, from underground sex clubs and bathhouses to parks and highway rest stops. Candidly exploring the writers' passion for multiple partners, a memorably diverse cast of characters - from bi pierced punks to buff go-go boys to shy married men - populates this unapologetic paean to a world weary of safe sex.'

It is a rather wonderful book and TIM did for a time sell the book themselves, but don't seem to anymore.  You can however still buy it through various booklets such as Amazon (a good used copy can apparently sell for as little as £6.09 or as much as £335.07).  It does contextualise the use of the film title - and the appropriateness of still using it.

Anyway, on to my main point.  When I read the post on The Sword, it wasn't the blog that surprised me, but rather the comments of readers.  I'm used to blogs and reports objecting to the bareback sex for which TIM is so well known, and I've written on that before.  What astonished me was the reaction to guys engaging in oral sex, and arguably, 'safer' sex.

There are the (understandable) connoisseur conversations about the semen consumption:

Marty says:
January 7, 2013 at 6:34 pm
Am I weird? The coming in the mouth straight from the dick was so freakin hot, but the pouring from the jar and condom made me want to barf (literally) big time, so gross

sxg says:
January 7, 2013 at 7:36 pm
You’re not weird about a guy cumming in another guy’s mouth. That is fucking hot! A shame there are some studios that still don’t allow that. As far as that cup and condom, that just doesn’t look like it’s all cum, which makes it a bit sick. If it was in fact all white creamy cum, then I might have liked it a little.

J2 says:
January 7, 2013 at 8:02 pm

There’s something distasteful about bodily fluids that have gone cold. Obviously you have a mouth full of spit, but if you spat into a container then waited a while for it to go cold, it would be utterly repulsive to put that back into your mouth.

Well, fair enough.  However, the tone then changes in a series of other comments:

Eddie says: 
January 7, 2013 at 8:31 pm 
I think the best sex is the one that makes people happy and satisfied. It’s like a play where you give and receive care. I find quite impossible obtain this in a group sex. When I see a T.I.M. scene like this it’s like a bunch of men ( or even a couple ) trying to dig pleasure for themselves :’ Alone ‘ among all others. Something selfish. The fuck is more a ‘ masturbation ‘. From T.I.M., with all that HIV-bugchaising thing, sex can’t be fun and it is always portrayed as something humiliating, gross dirt, sick, sad, lonesome. They seem to be always searching for the pathetic: Do you remember the last ‘ milking scene ‘ post here? For Treasure Island Media sex is as fun as a sordid shock treatment to cure lust or… a nightmare.  

Say What? says: 
January 8, 2013 at 5:33 pm 
TIM isn’t searching for the pathetic. It has found it and embodies it. 

And:

Slyvon says: 
January 7, 2013 at 8:54 pm 
I know people have a problem with this studio, but I think the stuff Treasure Island puts out is hot! No bullshit, no star drama, just guys who wanna fuck! Usually cock sucking movies gets boring but if its TI I’ll watch it to see what they do next! 

DPS says: January 8, 2013 at 12:45 am 
I know what you mean. The facial wasting is so fuckin sexy. 

Say What? says: 
January 8, 2013 at 5:34 pm 
So are the distended bellies. 

And these series of individual comments: 

Mike says: 
January 7, 2013 at 9:50 pm 
Customers are saying how most of the loads are weak. So a bunch of nastiness with day-old jizz and the fresh jizz is scarce? Pass. MAJOR pass 

half porco says: 
January 8, 2013 at 6:27 pm 
Looks like cum mixed with poo and several HIV strains. Sexy…:s  

Nick says: 
January 8, 2013 at 10:53 pm 
Do you guys think these TIM models compare viral loads on their off time? It’s like a fun little game they play. They’re H-I-V and oh so P-C. 

OK, so it's only a relatively small number of individuals (although a high percentage of those commenting on this story),  but it reveals a fascinating - and worrying - attitude which rejects the TIM men not for what they are doing, but for what they represent.

The men are positioned as HIV+ (some of the studio performers are, some are not - as with other studios), and as such not only unappealing, but clearly who have no business featuring in pornography.

This attitude to HIV models is simply prejudice.  A culture which has largely banished or silenced AIDS death now apparently seeking to banish the visibility of HIV+ having sex.  The visual presentation of those HIV+ men having sex is evidence that such men are having sex - in this case, not even penetrative high-risk sex - and thus, perhaps they haven't quite learnt their lesson.  Perhaps, one diagnosed as HIV+ they should haul their positive arse out of the limelight?

All of which would seem to lend weight to the inclusion of an extra with the film, which features one of the performers - Mark from scene 7 - who apparently talks about his experiences and his status as HIV positive.

The old Ryan Sullivan's Island film/blog (some NSFW) (what happened to Ryan?) featured a number of guys visiting Morris and talking about being positive, and this 'extra' seems to follow in the wake of them - albeit a couple of years later.

Easy to dismiss as just another sequel, the film is on reflection not only a documentation of authentic erotic experiences, but more importantly, the representation of men - including HIV+ men - having sex, being sexual, being aroused, and experiencing pleasure.

Discourses in Disgust

Following on from my previous post about Treasure Island Media's forthcoming film, Slammed, readers may find this post (warning: NSFW) by Director Liam Cole of particular interest.  He challenges the comments made on The Sword blog (quoted in my last post):

'His post contains an image from the SLAMMED trailer, showing a muscular man holding a hypodermic. He must have gone through frame-by-frame to get this. It’s on-screen for less than one-thirtieth of a second and is barely perceptible at normal speed. Probably I should be angry that he’s making un-substantiated accusations about the guys in SLAMMED, but they’re big lads and not easily offended. Personally, I’m just stoked that someone is intrigued enough by my trailer to forensically dissect it. Maybe because I’m a fan of The Conversation and Blow Up (look them up, youngsters).'

Curiouser and curiouser said Alice.  It's certainly the case that the Cole narrative - in response to online speculation - clearly positions the film within the TIM canon and adds important context which was lacking in initial reports.  The only thing left is to watch the film and make our own minds up.   It's released September 5th.

UPDATE - TIM have also now published a response to my original blog post.  The response was emailed to me late last night (BST) and can be read here (warning - the images around the post are NSFW).

Unexplained Discrepancies: The Implementation of the LA Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Ordinance

"we're gonna need a bigger packet..."

I've previously blogged on the hard-line approach of the City of LA to condomless pornography.  They took the extraordinary step of passing the Los Angeles Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act (Ordinance) which you can read here.   It requires any anal or vaginal sex to include the use of condoms.  The Ordinance does not (helpfully) define 'vaginal or anal sex' and thus one could reasonably conclude that it is not merely restricted to a penis.  What of a dildo?  A finger? A fist? Should an esteemed lady of the adult porn film scene be filmed bobbing up and down on a LA City Police cone, is she likely to find herself in bother with some newly appointed 'condom cop'?  Confusingly (someone needs sending to drafting school), a definition is offered of an 'adult film' adn that makes it quite clear that anything can be included:

(1) An "adult film" is defined as any film, video, multimedia or other representation of sexual intercourse in which performers actually engage in oral, vaginal, or anal penetration, including but not limited to penetration by a penis, finger, or inanimate object; oral contact with the anus or genitals of another performer; and/or any other activity that may result in the transmission of blood and/or any other potentially infectious materials as defined in California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5193(b).

Our hypothetical cone is indeed included.

Having passed this ordinance, city officials - as the San Francisco Chronicle reported this week - were then tasked with making the whole thing work.  They've now published a report which you can read in full here.  The report is merely a set of recommendations so it's now for the city mayor to decide whether to follow them (and whether the city can find the dollars to fund the whole thing).

If you search for the full report, you'll probably come to this link - which you'll note defines on page two anal or vaginal sex as penetrative with a penis, and notes that this is the language of the ordinance.  It isn't as I note above.

A clanger has been dropped you might conclude; some calamitous mistake occurred?  Well, move over to the LA office and search the official records and you are presented with a similar report but with some significant differences.  The incorrect assertion about the law has vanished, possibly suggesting that city officials thought the law was more narrowly drafted than it is.  Something rather interesting has occurred here - and I've not seen a single report that notes or explains this discrepancy between the two versions.  An explanation from city officials would surely draw the enthusiastic attentiveness of many who will be affected by this law.

The report makes a number of recommendations, and here are those listed in the LA County website version (which I'm taking as the 'final' 'official' version):

1. Revise the Film Permit Application Section (5) of the Ordinance requires the City to add the following language to all adult film permits: "If this production is an adult film, Permittee must abide by all applicable workplace health and safety regulations, including California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 5193, which mandates barrier protection, including condoms, to shield performers from contact with blood or other potentially infectious material during the production of films."

2. Require Licensed Medical Inspections Issue a Request for Proposals (RFP) seeking to contract with a licensed medical professional to conduct the periodic inspections of adult film productions involving "Activities Carrying Risk  of Transmission of Blood or Infectious Materials." If this recommendation is adopted, more information would need to be gathered to determine City enforcement parameters and the CAO should be directed to report back to the Mayor and Council within 90 days with a draft RFP for further action.


3. Contract with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health If voters in Los Angeles County approve in the Statewide General Election scheduled for November 6,2012, the measure (County Measure) to require adult film producers to obtain a health permit as a condition of producing a film that involves non-simulated sexual intercourse, then the City should adopt the County Measure and put a measure on the Citywide primary election in March of 2013 to reconcile the Ordinance in LAMC Section 12.22.1 with the County Measure to rely exclusively on the County health permit requirements and inspections to ensure the safety of performers in the AFI from the risk of transmission of bloodbome pathogens. If this recommendation is adopted, the City Attorney should be requested to report back with an amending Ordinance to reconcile LAMC Section 12.22.1 with the County Measure. 

4. Develop a Fee Structure Direct the CAO to develop a fee structure to contract for the services identified in Recommendations 2 and/or 3 above, and direct the CAO to report back to the Mayor and Council within 90 days with a draft fee proposal for adult film inspections.

Media sites are repeating an assertion in the SF Chronicle that quotes a reference in the report to a study by the Los Angeles Fire Department indicates that more than 100 condom cops might be needed to adequately enforce the law, at a cost of $1.7 million or more a year.

My reading of the report is less clear.  Any figure is dependant upon what options the city chooses, and also varies dependant upon the rate at which licenses are set (and the number then issued).  There is also a degree of guess work about those films which currently fall through the licensing regime and thus would contribute towards the need for policing to stop such films.  The report makes clear this extends to 'student films' in the largest category - Miscellaneous.  

The films don't need to be for profit and so it's quite conceivable that the new 'condom police' could be sweeping into the homes of couples performing on live chat/broadcast sites or a couple of college guys who uploaded a video of some penetrative hazing.   Don't forget, penetration with a police cone could count - it doesn't need to be a penis but it does make reference to 'sexual intercourse', so perhaps our College jocks are safe for now.  If the English CPS were involved, I'd be less certain.

So, we have a crazy law, an intense policing regime and a State that is already financially broke.  This shambles still has some way to go.

Bring On the Anal, Take off the Condoms...GMFA Porn Survey

Sexual health campaigners GMFA are really making an impact with the latest issue of their magazine.  As Pink News reports,  a survey of over 1,000 gay men by sexual health charity GMFA suggests just under 7 percent believe they were led to having unprotected sex after watching bareback pornography, but more than half thought it led others to do the same. 98 percent of the respondents said they watched porn.

The magazine makes the following summary of their findings:

You lot are a horny bunch.

You LOVE watching anal and oral sex.

Muscle guys turn you on the most.

A good chunk of you like to watch bareback porn but do not think it affects your sex decisions.

But you think younger guys and people with less intelligence copy what they see in porn. l 7% of you say watching bareback porn has led you to taking risks.

Some of you like to put yourself in front of the camera.

And some of you have put this stuff on the internet (links please?).

9% of you have had videos uploaded to the internet without your consent.

You like lots of different porn stars but a lot of you wouldn’t date one.

You wouldn’t care if someone you were dating did porn in the past.

You don’t care if a mate has done porn - and the majority of you would be happy to watch them.

The summary points are a little biased.  A 'good chunk of you like to watch bareback' suggests what? 20%, 30%?  The figure in the study is 95.8% so saying 'almost all' seems a fairer description.

Interestingly, the magazine also made use of bareback voices in the form of porn filmmaker, Liam Cole, of Treasure Island Media who commented that;  “If you can find true pleasure in condoms themselves, and record that honestly, the viewer will recognise that authenticity...but an artificial ‘sexing up’ is only going to fool the most gullible people.” “I don’t believe they need to be ‘sexed up’,” adds English Lads’ Nick Baker. “We just make them part of the scene from putting them on to removing them.”

So Cole prima facie appears to accept a role for condom porn  - as documenting 'authentic' sex.  However, given this kind of sex is rarely seen as 'authentic', it's pretty hard to imagine 'authentic' condom porn, as it pre-supposes pleasure and desire which - for some - is hard to equate with condoms.   Although  - as you would expect - the piece does maintain a safe sex emphasis, it is perhaps the comments of Cole which are most supported by this survey.

FS magazine can be downloaded for free from the GMFA website here.

Are you Clean? Narratives in HIV and Bareback Sex

Someone tweeted a link to this story yesterday (apologies, I can't remember who to credit you) in the Huffington Post, a fascinating piece about the term 'clean' in the context of HIV.  The author - Mark S King - notes how the term is used as part of the HIV conversation, as in: "Are you clean?"  In other words, are you HIV free?

Back in 2011 I posted this video, which brilliantly satirises the DDF narrative which has become common among men seeking to hook up with other men, particularly online.  The question is often asked of men who bareback: "Are you clean?"  as if that amounts to an HIV test.  Say "yes" and you're in, say "I don't know" or "I'm HIV positive but..." and you're typically rejected.  The culture rewards dishonesty and thus embeds an ironic 'don't ask, don't tell' policy into causal sex.

King addresses this issue, the growing involvement of law and also the cultural implication of referring to someone who is HIV+ as being in some way 'unclean'.  It's a brilliant piece well worth a read.

A Very Special Prison Closure

Sad news for San Francisco barebackers and tourists to the city, with the news last month that the sex club Mack Folsom Prison has temporarily shut.

A notice on their website informs patrons that: 'We are moving...Sometimes bad things happen for a reason.  You may not understand or see it at the moment, but later you look at it and realise that it turned out to be a good thing.  So we hope that out bit of bad news leads us to a better Mack Folsom Prison.  On March 10th of this year we lost one of the owners by heart-attack.  Our heads were still spinning when we were notified that the landlord decided to terminate the lease.  Mack Folsom Prison's last day at the current location was May 6, 2012.  We are taking this opportunity to find a new location that we feel would be suitable for us to create a space for men as unique as Mack Folsom Prison is.  We will keep you posted here, and we're looking forward to serving the men of Mack Folsom Prison soon!  The Staff and Management'.

Sad news indeed about one of the owners.  It's easy to think 'so what' but such is the powerful history of San Francisco in terms of identity formation and particularly in the response to HIV/AIDS that the very presence of these clubs serve as a powerful monument to sexual history.  Their existence, and the banishment of saunas, the presence of a venue called Blow Buddies, the geographical positioning of these venues today - far from the tourist strewn Castro - speaks volumes about who 'we' were, who we are, and who we are becoming.

Whilst other venues fussed about whether your shower product could be still be smelt on entering the club (no, really - beware of using Original Source and then visiting Blow Buddies), Mack celebrated uninhibited, sleazy, raw, un-prentious sex.  For many the venue was a cesspool, a venue guaranteed to ensure that you leave with more than you came with.  A free gift for every customer and so forth.  Of course, officially, men subscribed to the safer-sex guidelines which the city requires but it was a venue where drug use, if not the effect of drugs were not unknown and bareback sex was in abundance.

It was a bit tatty, not huge, and the raised platform 'towers' had ladders which you always wondered whether you'd break your neck on.  Yet it's hard to under-estimate the emotional hold that such venues have on guys.

As such, like it or love it, it was a very special venue and it's closure of significance.  You might therefore think that a reopening is a certainty.  You might well be wrong.   Playspace opened last year (video tour below) which you can check out here, adding another sex club venue to the city, and is also placed in the South of Market district.



The website splash screen for Playspace instantly positions the club as a safer-sex/condom venue (which also indicates fucking in contrast to the oral focussed Blow Buddies) yet read their safer sex section and it's far from preachy:

'PLAYSPACE recognizes that sex for men comes in all shapes and forms. We encourage all our clients, patrons and friends to remember that for guys into other guys it’s important to include routine STD/HIV screening every 3-6 months. San Francisco has lots of opportunities and places for free to low cost testing, or ask your own doctor to test you during your regular visits. Many STD’s don’t have any signs or symptoms and can be missed or shared without regular screening.'

Then again, the rules inside the club (which you can see in the more atmospheric video below taken at their opening) has as rule number one 'No bareback sex'.  How far this is practised I'm not sure.  I've not seen the kind of online postings that Mack attracted but nor have I visited this venue myself to evaluate behaviour.  I would be fascinated to see how these two venues - one relatively new, one relatively recently closed, are shaping bareback behaviour in the city of San Francisco and how regulatory safer sex frameworks are playing out in reality (does anyone sense a research grant bid coming on?)



Watched it?  I'm guessing you want to see/know more about Daniel don't you?  You're a predictable lot.  Anyway,  I've also seen an Internet posting that the old Mack venue is now owned by someone else who aims to re-open a new sex club there - although that was meant to open on 1 June and it doesn't appear to have done so. Another spanner to potentially throw in the works.  How I miss San Francisco.

Check out the Mack website here.

A funny thing happened on the way to the orgy...

This blog entitled 'Spunk Bucket in Belfast' sadly stopped being updated back in 2011, but one post in particular - in my humble view - offer a fascinating and rich glimpse into the operation of a bareback orgy at a private party.  There is growing academic literature concerning these events and the web is full of erotic descriptions recording these encounters.  This account however differs in taking you there, conveying the emotion and the backstory as much as the sexual events.   It's probably a little too full of sexual references for some but I do think it's worth reading by anyone interested in understanding not only what takes place at these events, but how these events feel.  One for the archives...

Read the post here.

Jessy Lives!

I have a terrible terrible weakness for Jessy Karson (my Seth Gamble desire was ruined by him going all straight plus he was far too nice).

The retired porn performer is my idea of objectified perfection.  I was therefore particularly interested (interested as in as excited as an overly excited puppy on the puppy equivalent of a truck load of smarties soaked in extra sugar) to learn that he returned to his blog after an absence of a  couple of years and mooted on Facebook and his blog that he is considering a return to porn.

It seems from his Facebook account a bit of a half-hearted desire, and he is quick to bemoan in both forms 'the industry'.  The Canadian performer argues in a post which features him in a Treasure Island Media 'Built to Fuck' t-shirt that:

'After some bad experience with some porn company I've worked with and that I prefer not to mention.... I've came to wonder if I was really enjoying it as much I used too.... Too many porn companies are using models like they were piece I of meet and no consideration ....'

Given he was working at TIM when he had this 'revelation' we can assume that he means them.  His reluctance to name them is just as interesting.  Just what happened for him to go from a TIM exclusive (I think I'm right in stating that he was) to a retired performer?  Back in July 2011 I blogged how he had suddenly become a safer sex/condom advocate after working for the bareback company, Treasure Island Media.  In that context, these latest thoughts from Jessy (perhaps seeing if a company contacts him) are a continuation of a rather bizarre story.

It's also a reminder that whilst most 'gay' porn performers are reduced to being merely a cock, a nondescript sexual appendage, there are those - and Jackson Taylor at TIM is a good contemporary example - who achieve something beyond that.

They achieve the status of fantasy icons.  Symbols of commercial desire.   These are the men who continue to occupy our thoughts.  Their bodies inscribed in the electrical thoughts of other men's brains.  Their moans, groans and ejaculatory moments will be among those images that flash before our eyes as life ultimately leaves us.

Jessy is also a fascinating example of how this fantasy doesn't end with the porn.  We are involved in their lives during and after their porn existence.  The growing propensity of social media encourages us to interact and follow performers during their pornographic career but it also makes it ever easier to continue  following them once they cease to shoot porn movies.

This in turn leads me to wonder if anyone is ever 'done' with porn.  If they were any 'good', their lives will continue to be of interest to fans, bloggers and journalists.  Despite adopting a porn name we will know who they re in reality - as with Jessy/Jeff.  This is perhaps worth keeping in mind for anyone thinking of a career in the porn industry.  If you're good, we'll remember.  If you're bad, you won't be around long enough for anyone to recall you're brief orgasmic presence.

LA Condoms in Porn Ballot Measure

Later today, the  pro-condoms in porn bandwagon moves a little bit forward in the legislative battle.

AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and members of FAIR (‘For Adult Industry Responsibility’), a group that has been shepherding signature gathering and support for a Los Angeles County ballot initiative process, will host a press conference at 10:30 AM Pacific in Los Angeles to announce the collection and filing of over 360,000 signatures of Los Angeles County residents in support of a County of Los Angeles ballot initiative that allows Los Angeles voters to directly weigh in on a measure that would, “…require producers of adult films to obtain a public health permit from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (“the Department”) and pay a permit fee set by the Department in an amount sufficient for necessary enforcement.”

Members of AHF and FAIR launched the County ballot measure drive in early January of this year on the heels of successfully qualifying a similar City of Los Angeles ballot initiative tying distribution of adult film permits to condom use. The groups have until June 5th to gather the signatures needed for the County measure. 232,153 valid signatures of Los Angeles County residents are required to qualify the measure and make the Nov 2012 ballot (a number based on a percentage of total votes cast in the last County-wide election); 255,368 to qualify by the random sample (30 day check). In a precautionary measure, AHF and FAIR have collected and will submit well over that number as a cushion: approximately 360,000 signatures total.

After validation of the signatures by County officials, the measure will go before Los Angeles County voters on the November 2012 ballot—the presidential election ballot. This ordinance will be known as the ‘County of Los Angeles Safer Sex In The Adult Film Industry Act.’ Advocates need to collect over 200,000 signatures of voters by June 5, 2012, and if successful, would place the measure on the November 2012 election—the same ballot as the presidential election.

County of Los Angeles Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act 

The measure would enact an ordinance to add Chapter 11.39, entitled ‘Adult Films,” to Title 11, Health and Safety, of the Los Angeles County Code. 


The purpose of the measure is intended to minimize the spread of sexually transmitted infections by regulating the adult film industry. 


The measure would require producers of adult films to obtain a public health permit from the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (“the Department”) and pay a permit fee set by the Department in an amount sufficient for necessary enforcement. 


The measure would provide for a permitting process that requires application submission and proof of completion of a blood borne pathogen training course, after which a permit shall be issued. 


The measure also requires submission of an exposure control plan. The measure would require use of condoms for all acts of anal or vaginal sex during the production of adult films, as well as the posting of the public health permit and notice to performers regarding condom use. 


The measure would authorize the Department to enforce the provisions of the ordinance, including suspending or revoking the public health permit for violating the ordinance, or any other law, following notice and an opportunity for an administrative review. Prior notice would not be required if any immediate danger to the public and safety is found or reasonably suspected. Violation of the ordinance would be subject to civil fines and/or criminal misdemeanor charges. 

The measure would provide that in the event another ballot measure relating to the permits for the adult film industry appears on the same ballot, that this measure shall prevail if it receives the greater number of affirmative votes, and the competing measure shall be null and void. 


The measure authorizes the Board of Supervisors to amend the chapter by ordinance, passed by a majority vote, in order to further its purposes. The chapter may only be repealed by ordinance adopted by a vote of the electors or by an amendment of the Los Angeles County Charter superseding the ordinance. 


The measure provides that if any part of the ordinance is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, then remaining provisions shall be severable and remain in full force and effect.

HIV+ and Slutdom

Josh of Confessions of a Bareback Sauna Slut (NSFW) 'fame' has published on his blog a video that was previously available via the porn performer Christian Knox.  Josh has regularly talked about his promiscuous sexual behaviour, that this behaviour is bareback (condomless) and most recently, that he is now HIV+ (and continuing to engage in bareback sex).  I would have embedded the video here but there is the occasional (very brief) bit of sexual footage which intercuts this video interview.

The video was filmed in Chariots Sauna in Shoreditch, London in mid-January 2012. They took over a small cubicle in the sauna, and it was filmed on Cristian’s iPhone.  For many it will be the first time they are able to put a voice to the man. He is un-repentant about his behaviour in the past, or his continued bareback sex.  He explains his rationale and his je ne regrette rein philosophy in the course of the video and comes across as comfortable with his status and behaviour.  He also comes across as articulate and (I think this is incredibly significant) likeable.  Likability is important in reaching out to a wider audience, in enabling people to feel comfortable for long enough to 'tune in' to the message that is being presented.  

This presentation is important in putting a face - and now voice - to the increasingly visible identity of the HIV+ barebacker which goes some way to helping wider society get their heads around people who choose a mode of behaviour which puts them at greater health risk, and then having become positive, they become the transmitter to someone else.  This is a form of behaviour that policy-makers and legislators around the world are increasingly concerned with, whilst jurists must grapple with the criminal law implications that arise from this increased policy focus.

Check out the video interview (NSFW) here.

Simi Valley Next in Condom Battle?

A shocked Mrs Aspenstein.  Bob didn't want to be photographed.

The LA Times (which encouraged along the LA condom law) reports that Simi Valley - which neighbours LA - is now contemplating a similar law to prevent an exodus of deprived condom free porn makers setting up in town (the laundry and hotel industry will no-doubt be mourning the potential loss of trade).  Simi Valley seems keen to a dress the enforcement gap which is evident in the LA law.

According to the LA Times, under its proposed law, the city would require producers to hire on-set medical professionals, who would attest to appropriate condom use. At the end of a shoot, the producers would have to send their unedited video to the police department, where employees would scrutinize it — for compliance with Simi Valley Municipal Code Title 5, Chapter 32, as amended. Civilian employees, not officers, would do the heavy lifting, scanning films for possible violations.

So, whilst porn might becoming a rather unpleasant occupation, the role of being one of these new civilians who watches unedited porn all day must surely be an attractive prospect?  Presumably it must be done in pairs to avoid *ahem* distraction so even a continued modest amount of porn activity will require new posts.  Or perhaps staff will be re-deployed?  Mrs Aspenstein works on reception normally but we dragged her in to watch Spunk on My Titties Part 15.  She's such a trooper!  Bob the Janitor was on hand as normal.

Not to mention the medical professionals who may have to shunt operations and surgeries to pop down to the porn shoot (unless they do it full time - will that pay enough?).  "Sorry Mrs Snodgrass, we've bumped your hernia to tomorrow as I've got Cum Explosion 19 at 2pm".

Brave New World? LA Condom Law In Force

Did you notice it?  Yesterday, a new Los Angeles city ordinance (law) come into force requiring porn performers to wear condoms when filming.  The full title of the Act is the: CITY OF LOS ANGELES SAFER SEX IN THE ADULT FILM INDUSTRY ACT.  A PDF of the full act is available from the Office of the LA City Clerk and can be viewed directly here.  I was slightly amused to discover via this ordinance that nudity or sexual activity shouldn't be visible or audible to other members of the public when being filmed, which seems vaguely farcical given the amount of bonking that can be heard in many a hotel room at the best of times. 

The key sections of the Ordinance can be viewed below:

(1) An "adult film" is defined as any film, video, multimedia or other representation of sexual intercourse in which performers actually engage in oral, vaginal, or anal penetration, including but not limited to penetration by a penis, finger, or inanimate object; oral contact with the anus or genitals of another performer; and/or any other activity that may result in the transmission of blood and/or any other potentially infectious materials as defined in California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5193(b).

This seems deliberately designed to encompass all sexual activity but how does that equate to risk?

(2) "Producer of adult film" is defined as any person or entity directly engaged in the creation of adult films.

So stand down horny boyfriend with an iPhone, you should be safe under this provision.  You need to be 'directly' engaged, not indirectly (much dancing on that pin head to come).

(3) "Filmed" and "filming" refer to the recording of any adult film, regardless of media.

So, should you be a horny boyfriend filming with an iPhone deliberately to make an adult film, the phone counts - it doesn't need to be super duper filming technology.  Presumably, it also relates to audio only recording which is intriguing (and another potential exploratory case).

(4) All producers of adult films issued permits under the authority of the City of Los Angeles or the Los Angeles Police Department pursuant to Section 12.22(A)(13) of this Code or any other law authorizing the issuance of permits for commercial filming are required to maintain engineering and work practice controls sufficient to protect employees from exposure to blood and/or any other potentially infectious materials controls consistent with California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5193. Engineering and work practice controls include, but are not limited to: (a) Simulation of sex acts using acting, production and post- production techniques; (b) Ejaculation outside workers' bodies; (c) Provision of and required use of condoms whenever acts of vaginal or anal sex are performed during the production of an adult film; and (d) The provision of condom-safe water-based or silicone-based lubricants to facilitate the use of condoms.

So if the State controlled sex, that's what you'd get  Bye bye Boy Butter.   Interestingly, you don't even have to be having sex, just pretending to have sex evokes the requirements to have a permit.  Yes, the mind does boggle.  It also doesn't require condoms for oral sex - which is interesting.

(5) Any film permit issued under the authority of the City of Los Angeles or the Los Angeles Police Department pursuant to Section 12.22(A)(13) of this Code or any other law authorizing the issuance of permits for commercial filming for the production of an adult film must expressly condition said permit on compliance with subsection (4) of this section. Any such permit shall contain the following language: "Permittee must abide by all applicable workplace health and safety regulations, including California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 5193, which mandates barrier protection, including condoms, to shield performers from contact with blood or other potentially infectious material during the production of films."

(6) The City shall charge, or shall direct any other person or entity contracting with the City to administer the film permitting process, to charge, entertainment industry customers seeking permits for the production of adult films a fee sufficient to allow periodic inspections to ensure compliance with the conditions setforth in Section 12.22.1 (B)(4).

Now, I should say that I am not trained in US law (big big caveat!) but given the wording of the provision, I read California Code of Regulations Title 8, Section 5193.  According to the ordinance, this requires barrier protection (condoms) and is being ignored.  I would welcome some input from US academics/activists on this point as I've had a quick read of the regulations and can't see it.  Where is this requirement?  Moreover, the regulations were quite clearly not intended (I would suggest) to extend so widely as to encompass such activity.  I must be missing something!

The Dogg Goes Walkies

Damon Dogg - formerly of Treasure Island Media (NSFW) - revealed on Twitter at the start of the year that he had left TIM and was branching out into new projects.  He indicated in responses to followers that he had done so 'very willingly' but also that he couldn't talk about why he left and there was never (as far as I can see) an "I'm off" style tweet.  In January, his Flickr stream featured a name page photograph of 'Damon Dogg, Factory Videos' from XBIZLA so we kinda knew where he had moved to.

In fact, I hadn't noticed anything else reporting his departure.  TIM's blog continued to make reference to Dogg as part of promotion for Manfuck Manifesto, the TIM tattoo challenge and the SD/STW promo in New Orleans in February.  None of these posts indicated that he was still part of the company, but nor did they suggest otherwise.  He was clearly part of the TIM narrative.  He has been a high profile figure in front of and behind the camera and his tattoo (see right) will continue to see him as a TIM figure.  It will be interesting to see if it remains, and what the tatt will continue to mean for this particularly notoriously dirty Dogg.

Yesterday, AVN reported on the move and formally indicated he had joined Factory Video Productions (NSFW) following  GP Times reporting the story on Thursday. 

Factory is where Dogg worked previously and even once Damon had made his name with TIM via his 'Damon Blows America' series, Factory included him as part of a compilation of scenes from those past performers who had moved on to be porn 'stars' (not a term TIM would ever use).  Consequently, you can see a young (and much more innocent looking) Dogg in 'First Cum' (NSFW) released by Factory.  So arguably, he's now back where it all began.

The news story (which reads very much like a verbatim press release) states that  Factory Videos is happy to welcome the return of two infamously creative directors. The first, Leif Gobo is apparently a veteran of nearly 20 years of adult video production with companies that span the range of gay porn. Gobo has directed for many big studios, including Falcon and Raging Stallion among many more.

'The notorious Damon Dogg, formerly of Treasure Island Media, began his career in porn with Factory Videos back in 2001. Damon Dogg has since been influential in the direction of reality based gonzo style bareback porn. Plowing down boundaries and previously “untouchable” topics in documenting sleazy man sex, today, Dogg is working with Factory Video producing his new studio Damon Dogg’s Cum Factory. Dogg is also joining the company's travelling production team to assist in finding the sleaziest men in the US.'

Interestingly his notoriety - or rather that associated with TIM - is what helps to add value to his appointment for the company.  Finally, we are told that Factory Videos based in San Francisco, currently has 10 full time employees on staff. Factory has been continuing to grow steadily since starting in 1998. It has a collection of over 350 DVDs, eight commerce web sites and an affiliate program, Dickbank.com.

What could they possibly mean by these 'untouchable' topics?  Dogg's BarebackRT profile (a sort of bareback Gaydar for those not familiar with the site) - which is linked from his current blog - clearly states that he is HIV positive and given he is (as also indicated on his blog) a versatile bottom.  Scenes from his new films, already posted on his blog, indicate that there will be fucking aplenty.  These scenes will clearly position Factory alongside TIM as a company openly producing 'positive' porn.  This is interesting in itself but given the recent LA condom measure law and attempts to extend it across California, it adds to the seeding of bareback and high-profile poz porn bareback studios in the State at a very time when some in the porn industry must be hoping they'll be quiet.

Gay men barebacking on camera is enough to get law-makers in a tizz it seems.  Men barebacking on camera who are HIV positive may just finish some of those law-makers off.   Defibrillators on stand-by!

A number of recently high profile TIM characters have been silent in recent times - Gehno, Ryan Sullivan and of course, Dawson all spring to mind.  Whilst TIM appears to increasingly 'introduce' characters it doesn't quite say goodbye to the same figures (and the above trio may still be working for TIM - certainly RS was the last time I asked but I think Gehno is gone and Dawson 'retired').  On the one hand, you might ask, well why?  Why bother continuing to tell their story, or explain their departure when they re no longer on the pay-roll?

Well, given the way these figures are defined as individuals, there is an understandable desire among fans for knowledge about 'what happened next', and in the case of someone like Dogg, he will always be TIM wherever he is.  I don't know, it's one aspect of the whole porn industry that I sort of understand why it's done, but at same time, I don't quite understand.  Take football (soccer to my American friends), players are celebrated when they join a club, but well-loved players and managers are still respected and celebrated long after moving to other clubs.  Dogg is one of those iconic players at TIM, and as such he'll long be remembered in the same breath as TIM whether he continues to work for them or not.  The fans seem to get that, but I'm not sure TIM - along with the rest of the industry - get that.

Dogg also blogs (NSFW) about his new projects (and various other bits and bobs) here (curiously, Dogg's previous blog has been deleted)

Condom Battles and Orwellian Truth

John Manuel-Andriote is the latest to weigh in on the LA condom law battle.  He uses his article on the Huffington post website to address the issue of depictions of bareback sex in m/m films. he notes: In a 2005 meeting in San Francisco, sponsored by the city's Gay Men's Community Initiative, a group of 70 men discussed sex, including porn videos. They spoke frankly. "Twink barebacking is reprehensible, using kids, paying them to risk their lives," said Titan Media vice president Keith Webb of the growing number of porn movies depicting unprotected anal intercourse. Such films "fetishize internal ejaculation," he said.

'Several of the men pointed to Treasure Island Media's 2004 title Dawson's 20-Load Weekend as an example of irresponsible gay filmmaking for its celebration of what most rational people would deem suicidal behavior. The company's website boasts of a worldwide demand for the movie, tantalizing buyers to pony up $49 with promises of forbidden scenes of a "fresh young man" who "goes from being a barebacking newcomer to a true Power Cumdump as he takes on man after man after man."

'Treasure Island cameraman Nick Stevens defended the movie in the forum. "Our movies are for models to have sex the way they want," he said. "Why should we not film that?"'

OK, so a forum including market competitors to TIM objected to their films.  Err, well they would wouldn't they?  It's also interesting to see that TIM did engage in this debate back in 2005 and the market has meant ever more companies have re-focused to bareback production since.  This all seems to support Stevens and his assertion that it's the way folks - not just models actually - want to have sex, and the kind of sex they wish to bear witness to.

Manual-Andriote uses his piece to assert that 'safe sex is hot sex' (if you need telling something is hot, and you tried it not realising it was hot, it wasn't) and argues that 'endangering other men's lives for the sake of a fantasy has no place in the life of a truly proud gay man or in his erotic entertainment.'

The final statement is crucial in explaining the gulf between the barebackers/reckless risk takers and 'condom Nazis'/community safety activists for it pre-supposes that the films represent 'fantasy' which clearly they do in many respects but perhaps the most authentic element of the film is the bareback sex, the visible ceremonial display of semen strewn bodies and buttocks.  Yes, a film like Dawson's 20-Load Weekend seeks to place on barebacker on a  pedestal - a champion among deviants, but bareback - and TIM - more generally offer up bareback as a depiction of true desire.  If condoms represented true desire, they would arguably be embraced.

If the pro-condom lobby want to succeed in shifting attitudes they must recognise that the safety/fun equation has to shift.  Men used condoms when the risk/harm element outweighed the fun aspect.  In the modern world of HIV/AIDS treatment, that equation was re-calibrated and so too were the condom habits of men.  Draconian laws can not, and will not therefore succeed in truly removing bareback sex.  It will merely serve as an Orwellian attempt to define contemporary condom truth.

Read his full article here.

The Sex(y) Boy and Treasure Island Media

The controversial TIM poster

If you consider yourself the most controversial bareback porn company in the world, how to stay in the news?  How do you remain 'controversial'?  In practical terms this arguably means being ever more outrageous, more shocking and more scandalous.  A remorseless engine of filth and depravity.  Yet, rather like Jaws: The Revenge, there comes a point when things just don't work anymore.  It's a sequel too far.

I'm not sure we're there with Treasure Island Media (TIM) yet - they are a loved brand which continues to operate in the counter-cultural space of bareback sex - but the pressure is undoubtedly there to keep being controversial.

Yet, any such pressure could be ephemeral or indeed, misguided.  As long as legislators and judges keep seeking to use law as a tool to limit, and potentially criminalise bareback sex, TIM will be able to claim the role as counter-cultural icons.  Given the widespread practising of bareback sex within same-sex encounters, they are also able to be 'popular' counter-cultural icons.  A double win.

Moreover, simply being there and being the celebrated stuff of masturbatory sessions across the globe is not, and has never been enough for TIM (NSFW).  I was therefore fascinated to see them seek to associate themselves with another taboo act in recent weeks.  The taboo of taboos.  The big daddy of controversy.  Yes, inter-generation sex.

Legally defined typically as paedophilia when involving children, inter-generational sex remains the social horror of our time.  To label someone as a paedophile is to pronounce them socially and potentially physically dead.  They are transformed into the ultimate evil within society.  Our understanding of paedophilia is increasingly nebulous, encompassing someone who accidentally downloads a paedophile image alongside another who rapes a child.  Whilst we can accept that someone might want to watch The Sopranos and not seek to become a mob boss, Weeds and become a (fairly useless) drug dealer with cute kids or Hung and seek to become a wooden (in every sense) male escort, or indeed, even if we aspire to any of these things, we won't actually do it; we can not contemplate even curiosity around the image of someone under 18 years old.  This is is despite English law finding is acceptable to sleep with someone aged above 16 (shag 'em, just don't take a picture).  It is indeed a curious socio-legal landscape.

The original Edelfelt painting

Yet, despite this, I've been struck by the way in which social media - notable Twitter most recently - has enabled those aged below 18 and indeed, below 16 to express their sexual desires, arrange hook-ups and document their sexual encounters.  Similarly, uncertainty and fears are sometimes expressed.  In short, human beings and their complex sexual awakenings are laid bare.

Into this fascinating cultural maelstrom enters TIM, apparently deliberately seeking to play with the issue of age.

At the start of the month, TIM uploaded a poster on their social media sites promoting a new film release entitled Return to Meat Rack (it's a sequel but hopefully better than Jaws IV).  It depicted two boys playing with boats on a lake or by the sea.  The young boys and the composition evokes innocence, a deliberate counter-point to the function of the poster - promoting a film about men fucking.  To date, the postings on Facebook have resulted in 76 comments from TIM followers and fans with a mix of reactions but many are negative, suggesting that TIM have gone 'too far'.

It's through these comments however that we learn (thanks to one culture vulture fan) that the picture is in fact from Albert Edelfelt and a quick Googling reveals the picture to be dated from around 1885, an oil on canvas production and entitled 'Boys playing on the beach' (Leikkiviä poikia rannalla).  Interestingly, there is a third boy in the original picture (see above) who is edited out of the TIM composition.

An earlier TIM poster depicting a 'child'

None of this is entirely new however. TIM previously published rejected posters from years gone by including one allegedly of a young (rather affluent looking) Paul Morris, aged 8 on a scooter (pictured right).  The slogan - which apparently deliberately evokes inter-generational behaviour - states 'A Better World One Boy at a Time'.  Boy is one of those words that can be taken to mean a male child but which is also used extensively - especially in 'gay' circles - to denote a young male - typically twinkish looking which is to say slim, smooth, well errr, boyish.  A twinkly boy is OK to lust after, whilst a real one isn't.

All of which are broad points I've made before but it is TIM utilising the idea of age and hidden desire as a marketing tool which is fascinating and new.

They apparently believe - and I think they are right - that just as homosexuality, then bareback sex were desires which have had complex social and legal relationships, so too is inter-generational sex.  Put simply, they think that gay men probably quite like boys more than we'd care to admit.  Such is the history of claims that homosexuals were out to 'take your children' that once again a silence is imposed for social and political reasons within the gay community - and the point I accept at the start of this paragraph will be toxic for many.

Jackson Taylor

Yet, leaving that aside, there is the less radical, but perhaps no less controversial idea that children can be sexual beings.  This is the revelation that social media already offers to anyone willing to see it, and raising difficult social and legal questions about consent and contemporary domesticity.

Morris has a Flickr page (NSFW) where he uploads some wonderful images freely available to all those who pass through an age barrier.  What always makes these photos so engaging - at least for me - is the use of captioning.  This allow the viewer to be located in the moment and somehow lends greater power to the image.  Much as when we look at a photo we have taken or were present for, we add an inward dimension to the image - context and emotion  - so too, do these captions add something.  His latest model obsession  -and potentially hit - for the studio is a twenty year old man/boy called Jackson Taylor (pictured left).  Morris has uploaded several pictures of Jackson and he comments under one image: 'I said "I'm thinking of signing you on. What do you think?" He responded "If you get me fucked all the time, I'll sign the contract in blood." If you saw him at the next table in a restaurant you'd think he was the picture of innocence and naivete. But this boy is one of the most voracious sexual predators I've ever met. We signed the contract before he'd even put his clothes back on.'

In this and a number of other comments, Jackson is anchored as a sexual being of today. Seeing Jackson getting fucked in Manfuck Manifesto (see more here, possibly NSFW) viewers of TIM pornography are left in no doubt about that sexual status.  Yet, we also have Morris posting on his photos (under the Jackson image reproduced above) the following fascinating text: 'I asked "How old were you when you started fucking?" He said "I was four. I seduced the 12-year-old twins who lived next door." I responded "Precocious--if it's true." He looked at me like this and said "Believe it or not, but it's true." He's 19 and has an understanding of sex that's truly rare.'

So now Jackson is a sexual being since four, and moreover, a sexual predator since four.  There is no question that he is the abused, or the 'victim'.  Defining him as the predator, and Jackson using the term predator - to denote an encounter with older boys - locate him as the individual with power.

This photo on Morris' Flickr page was uploaded on February 12th but it wouldn't have been a total surprise to TIM fans who might have noticed this post (NSFW) on TIM's Island website (this evolved out of their blog) which appeared on February 8th.  It introduces us to Jackson and his story.  It states:

Born in rural Sicily a scant 19 years ago, JACKSON TAYLOR (born Giuseppe Bontade) began his career as a primo fuckisto at the tender age of four. “I knew what I wanted to do from very early on,” says Mr. TAYLOR. “Our neighbors in Sicily had a pair of twins—they were 12. They gave me my first experience, my prima apertura, my grand opening. The affair lasted nearly a year.” Forced to flee their native village by irate clergy and outraged villagers, Mr. TAYLOR’s family took their precocious son to America, land of the free and willing. “Once we reached the Land of Opportunity, it’s pretty much been a straight-up path to Treasure Island Media for me. Of course it’s been my lifelong dream.” When Mr. TAYLOR approached T.I.M., the welcome was warm. “I know genius when I fuck it,” quipped porn legend PAUL MORRIS. “This boy may be slight of stature, but his bunghole can take anything we give it.” When asked about future dreams, Mr. TAYLOR wrinkled his boyish nose, shrugged coquettishly and said, “I dunno… Donkeys and dogs, maybe! And I like cheerleading.” JACKSON seems to be on a mission to take every load in America. We’re not wasting any time helping him! Watch him getting plowed by Ethan Wolfe in his TIM premiere, MANFUCK MANIFESTO.

So, here we have the 12 year old twins again (yes, incest is subtly hinted at too) and then we move into a blurb that seems to have been written by someone who has spent too long watching bad daytime soaps.  It's hard not to raise an eyebrow or a chuckle at the 'forced to flee' section.  This does of course also serve to cast doubt over the whole story but true or otherwise, TIM are making use of it and as with so many things that TIM do, truth as a fixed permanent concept must be abandoned in favour of a postmodern framework.  In the final section of the Jackson blurb we move into the positioning of Jackson as boyish, with innocence deployed to denote youth.  A sex(y) boy clearly and, his media persona suggests, a slutty one at that.

TIM started 2011 with a determination to push HIV positive porn and that - to my surprise - didn't work out.  This year, they are not stating they re trying to push a new area of controversy but there can be little doubt that like the boys in the Edelfelt picture, they are dipping their toes in the water.  This is one to watch with implications well beyond the world of bareback porn.

Mason Wyler and Bareback Inspiration

HIV+ former (?) porn performer, Mason Wyler has once again caught the attention of this blog with a  tweet yesterday which you can read below.

Mason has wrestled with a career that appeared to go off the rails after being diagnosed as HIV+, a desire to study in Texas, and balance university life with the life of a self-described slut.  This recent tweet suggests that he is either a) conscious of a reaction but curious what his followers think, b) genuinely clueless as to what his reaction 'should' be c) pleased about this and thus sharing among his followers to contribute towards his sexual persona.

Mason has flirted with bareback porn in recent years, and there is still probably a means to make some money that way.  I'd be surprised if he made the move to treasure Island Media given his previous performances which seem very much performances - rather than raunchy sex caught on camera.  Nonetheless, Mason does seem to be revelling in the status as an HIV+ barebacker.  If he does go back into making more porn, that continued status would mark him out as fairly unusual and at a time of Law condom laws, it would also render him a counter-cultural sexual warrior.

LA Bareback Ban Campaign Launches

The battle over mandatory condom usage in LA (see my previous post here) has taken another step, as the Joe.My.God blog explains. The AIDS Healthcare Foundation has launched a petition drive for a ballot measure that would require condom usage in all porn produced in Los Angeles County. The AHF must collect 200,000 signatures by June 5th in order for the item to appear on the November ballot in Los Angeles County.  This is an additional ballot measure to that which city officials have already gone to court over in a bid to block.

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation called on Los Angeles County officials to mandate that adult films follow the same health department permit process required of bathhouses, sex clubs, and tattoo and message parlours. Under the county initiative, adult film producers would file health permits and pay a fee set by the health department that would pay for inspections and enforcement. If passed, the measure would allow the county to collect a $1,000 fine from adult film producers who do not have a valid health permit. In addition, the county could use nurses to provide spot checks on film sets.

Read more on this latest proposed measure here and in the LA Times here. This is shaping up to be a key socio-legal battle of 2012.

Raw Desire, Depicting Bareback Sex and Calling Out Hypocrisy

Long standing readers of this blog will know that I regularly rail against the bareback hypocrisy.  Whether it's celebrities such as Dustan Lance Black being exposed in a sex film engaging in bareback sex whilst telling others to always practise safe sex; porn 'stars' such as Chris Porter talking of his condom only stance, only to be revealed as having tried out for the notorious bareback company, Treasure Island Media - he claimed not to know they were a bareback company even though a video recording of his screen set suggests otherwise; or indeed safe sex advocates spending their day using charity or public funding to extol the virtues of 'safer-sex' whilst loving and engaging in bareback sex in private at night.  All highlight the hypocrisy which further erodes the safer sex message.

Yet now the porn blog, The Sword (owned by Naked Sword but with its own voice), seems to also be getting in the hypocrisy naming and shaming act. It may be my imagination but since the start of the new year, the blog seems to have become much more on the ball in highlighting this issue.

We started gently at the end of last year with an interview with the performer, Connor, from Corbin Fisher, performing in one of their new bareback titles (further evidence of the way the porn market - and sexual reality- is moving) (NSFW story link here)

The Sword said:  'There has been a lot of controversy over the “condomless” scenes from Corbin Fisher. Talk about the testing process and why you feel comfortable performing without the use of condoms.'

C: Our testing process is second to none. I can say for myself, since I’ve been a consistently active performer for over four years now, that I have been tested every 30 days of my life for the last four years. We are tested for basically everything, and the company also regularly has us visit and consult with a doctor prior to shoots. We also always get tested a few days before each shoot to rule out any possibilities. I’d imagine the most sterile, controlled environment anyone my age could have sex in would be our sets because of the strict testing.

TS: So is it fair to say that you prefer going bareback?

C: Put it this way…personally, I don’t like watching any porn with condoms. It just doesn’t do it for me, and I watch a lot of porn! The way I see it, porn is here for fantasy, and to let your hair down and see exactly what you want to see. So, if the danger of contracting a disease has been ruled out to the greatest possible extent, why are we worrying about it? I think I can speak for a lot of people when I say, if I could choose it all the time, porn would be sans condoms.

So, this is a sort of 'managed' shift in position.  All fine and dandy.  Companies that previously resisted bareback now embrace it on economic grounds.  Performers now talk of their desire for bareback but is this just marketing, or a revelation of authentic desire?

On 1 January, they celebrate a new bareback scene from Sean Cody - also now amazingly embracing bareback.  They wrote (NSFW story link here):

'I guess if you’re gonna do something, you might as well go balls to the wall and do it all. Sean Cody’s first bareback scene last week was nothing compared to this one, a three-way in which everyone (Dennis, Calvin, Jordan) fucks each other, Dennis gets double penetrated and then creampied, and everyone swallows cum. Happy new year! I’m glad that Sean Cody dropped the stupid euphemism (“unwrapped”) and is calling this exactly what it is: A bareback three-way starring three of the site’s best models. Unfortunately, that awful, hypocritical disclaimer still plays at the beginning'

Here's that disclaimer:

Although - like the Corbin Fisher interview - there is an emphasis on testing they put the second part in which amounts to a 'don't try this at home' kind of warning.

Next up, The Sword goes on the attack with Cody Cummings and a bareback video of him with a  woman (which they post here - NSFW).  They bitchily comment:

'For the company that has staked its reputation on keeping its performers STD free and the company that famously fired Mason Wyler after he contracted HIV, this is a wild and sexy change of pace! Of course, you can’t blame them for allowing one teensy weensy moment of barebacking to slip in when it’s hot as this, and especially when it’s starring gay porn icon Cody Cummings. Because if anyone should be allowed to skirt the rules, it’s our king, Cody. Plus, there’s the aforementioned fact that Cody is having straight bareback sex, with a woman, and everyone knows that it’s always safer to bareback when it’s with a girl. The Sword salutes Next Door Studios for giving their #1 star Cody Cummings the freedom to perform as he chooses—raw and unprotected. Fingers crossed that he doesn’t catch anything!'

Wow, it's a change of pace for Corbin Fisher, and - I think - a change of pace for Naked Sword too as they start to highlight these changes and continued hypocrisies.

As the 'gay' studios embrace bareback sex, it also creates a headache for long-standing bare backs studios such as Treasure Island Media.  They are featured in the new issue of Desert Knight News (see here - safe link) talking about their 'vision'/'mission' and this is increasingly important rather than simply defining themselves as bareback.  It's nothing new - and the message is one familiar to those who know the company well but they are now clearly putting it out there in a bid to define their niche more closely.  They do not, for example, 'make porn', they don't 'direct guys' (although some scenes suggest this does come in - especially from Liam Cole) but the Morris pure ideology is one of providing a natural habitat in which men can play and be observed.  The arousal comes in witnessing raw 'authentic' desire on display. No hypocrisy from these guys but we'll see who The Sword goes for next...

Revised 21.33 4/1/12