Adult Film Performers, ‘Yes on 60’ Backers to Counter Lies about Condom Ballot Measure During Anti-Prop 60 Hollywood Protest

PRESS TELECONFERENCE: Monday, October 17^th, 2pm PT

‘Yes on 60’ ballot measure backers to repudiate porn industry’s repeated lies, falsehoods and myths about Proposition 60

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--As a group of anti-Proposition 60 adult film industry protesters stage a march and protest in Hollywood on Monday, October 17^th, from 12 noon until 2pm, a different group: ‘Yes on Prop. 60’ backers—including film performers who became infected with HIV while working in the adult film industry—will host a press teleconference (and by special arrangement, a media availability) to repudiate and refute porn industry lies and myths about Proposition 60, ‘The Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act,’ a November 2016 California statewide ballot measure that will clarify and strengthen existing Cal/OSHA worker safety regulations requiring condom use by adult film performers working anywhere in the state (FAQ on 60).

WHAT & WHEN: Adult Film Performers, ‘Yes on 60’ Backers to Refute Lies & Myths About Condom Ballot Measure at same time as Anti-Prop 60 Hollywood Protest

• PRESS TELECONFERENCE: Monday, 10/17/16, 2:00pm PT
  DIAL IN #: 877-411-9748
  Access Code: 7134323
  
  Also:

• MEDIA AVAILABILITY PRIOR to the TELECONFERENCE (by arrangement: 323-791-5526, Ged Kenslea): Monday, 10/17/16, between 11:00am to 2:00pm, AHF, 6255 Sunset Blvd., Los Angeles CA 90028.

WHO:

• Derrick Burts, former adult industry performer who became HIV-positive while working in the industry
  • Link to Derrick Burts’ ‘Yes on 60’ TV Spot: “California Law Already Requires Condom Use”
• Rick Taylor, ‘Yes on 60’ campaign director (via telephone)
• Other adult performers & ‘Yes on 60’ backers

CONTACTS:

• Ged Kenslea, ‘Yes on 60,’ & AHF Communications, 323-791-5526 cell, [e-mail]
• John Schwada, ‘Yes on 60,’ Communications, MediaFix Associates, 310-709-0056 cell, [e-mail]

The ‘No on 60’ campaign and many of its backers have repeatedly lied about Proposition 60 and what the measure will actually do. The wording from the Secretary of State’s office for Proposition 60 is included at the end of this release and linked here.

Following are ‘Yes on 60’ counterpoints to the lies, falsehoods and myths the ‘No on 60’ campaign promotes:

• Fearmongering about potential adult worker harassment & lawsuits falsely attributed to Prop. 60
  • According to an August 10, 2016 ruling by Sacramento Superior Court Judge Timothy Frawley regarding the “No on Prop 60” arguments over potential lawsuits against performers by the public: “It is misleading to suggest that the Act creates a new private right of action against performers, crew members, or married couples who film in their own homes. Such individuals may be held liable only if they fall within one of the categories of persons potentially subject to liability under the Act: adult film producers (and their agents), distributors (and those who aid and abet them), and talent agents. An adult film performer who acts as an adult film producer may be held liable under the Act, but this does not mean that the ‘performer’ is being held liable in his capacity as a performer. A dentist, nurse, or lawyer who acts as an ‘adult film producer’ may be held liable under the Act, but it would be highly misleading to suggest the Act creates a private right of action against dentists, nurses, or lawyers. The same is true of adult film performers

• Bogus First Amendment/free speech infringement claims about the condom requirement
  • On December 15, 2014, the U.S. Ninth District Court of Appeals upheld Measure B, the 2012 Los Angeles County law (approved by 57% of voters) that requires actors in pornographic films to wear condoms, affirming that the condom requirement does NOT infringe on the First Amendment free speech rights of performers or producers. That lawsuit—Case No. CV-13-00190 DDP (AGI)—was filed with Steve Hirsch’s Vivid Entertainment and California Productions as lead plaintiffs, and named County of Los Angeles, Dr. Jonathan Fielding, Director of the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health and County District Attorney Jackie Lacey as Defendants and sought to block the law primarily on First Amendment challenges. To read the 9^th Circuit Appeals Court’s ruling affirming the constitutionality of the condom requirement in its entirety, click here.
• The porn industry’s unregulated and happenstance HIV/STI screening programs simply CANNOT MEET OSHA-certified worker safety standards and protocols, unlike proven disease prevention methods, such as condoms
  • Performers currently pay for STI/HIV testing out of pocket, which is not only detrimental to the performers, but is also illegal.
  • Not all studios follow 14-day testing; some follow 30-day testing and some don’t test at all (including Kink).
  • Study after study has proven that the industry’s testing scheme does not work. One in four performers testing positive for chlamydia/gonorrhea is not the definition of success.
  • Testing is NOT prevention; it tells you if you may have an infection, but does nothing to prevent one.
• The misconception and repeated lie that PrEP (pre-exposure prophylaxis) could meet state or federal OSHA standards as an OSHA-certifiable worker safety tool for use by adult film performers in lieu of condoms
  • Cal/OSHA already dismissed PrEP as a prevention tool in its evaluation of the FSC’s proposed standard: “. . . adherence to the protocol for using PrEP usually cannot be fully overseen by an employer, and partial adherence reduces protection proportionately. The manufacturer of Truvada further recommends that condoms continue to be used to maximize the effectiveness of the drug.”

In addition, the ‘No’ campaign’s expected challenge to Michael Weinstein to debate the ballot measure with an adult film performer is being declined due to lack of any semblance of a real or professional ‘No on 60’ ballot opposition campaign. Instead, the porn industry and ‘No’ side has seen fit to mount a vituperative and blatantly anti-Semitic opposition smear campaign to the ballot measure, targeting AHF President Michael Weinstein as well as former and current adult industry performers who are backing the ballot measure effort.

Examples of the Porn Industry and the ‘No on 60’ Campaign’s Anti-Semitic Smear Campaign Efforts to Demonize Former & Current Adult Performers Backing Prop. 60 as well as AHF President Michael Weinstein:

Nazi/Hitler Comparison of Michael Weinstein

AVN (Adult Video News), a widely read adult film industry news blog site, has been using a crude drawing of AHF President Michael Weinstein dressed in Nazi apparel for several Prop. 60 articles.

• AVN ARTICLE with WEINSTEIN as NAZI IMAGE: “APAC Petitions Michael Weinstein to Debate Prop. 60” (10/13/16)
• Live article: https://avn.com/business/articles/legal/apac-petitions-michael-weinstein-to-debate-prop-60-694154.html
• Screen grab of same 10/13/16 AVN article.
• WEINSTEIN/NAZI IMAGE: https://www.aidshealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/AVN-propaganda-2016-09-201.jpg
• Twitter post by current FSC Board of Directors member Mo Reese calling Michael a “Condom Nazi”: https://twitter.com/MOXXX/status/265516118792359936
• Twitter post by adult film performer and FSC campaigner Marcelo calling Michael Weinstein and Cameron Adams “Users, Piece of S***, Anti-Porn Nazi Bastards”: https://twitter.com/MarceloSlave/status/601644735258726401
• Twitter post by adult film industry attorney Michael Fattorosi referring to AHF’s advocacy group as “AHF's Condom Nazi Party”: https://twitter.com/pornlaw/status/345275590582091776

Potentially Personal Safety Threat

• From comments posted on Mike South’s blog: “In the 70’s someone (likely a mafia boss) would have paid a contract killer to torture and kill Michael Weinstein and society would have been better off for it.” (Source: http://www.mikesouth.com/mike-south-commentary/deen-responds-to-cal-osha-fines-remember-a-name-here-13249/#comments)

Proposition 60 Ballot Measure Language

Here is the Proposition 60 ballot language as posted on the California Secretary of State’s (SOS) website:

Adult Films. Condoms. Health Requirements. Initiative Statute. Requires performers in adult films to use condoms during filming of sexual intercourse. Requires producers of adult films to pay for performer vaccinations, testing, and medical examinations related to sexually transmitted infections. Requires producers to obtain state health license at beginning of filming and to post condom requirement at film sites. Imposes liability on producers for violations, on certain distributors, on performers if they have a financial interest in the violating film, and on talent agents who knowingly refer performers to noncomplying producers. Permits state, performers, or any state resident to enforce violations. Summary of estimate by Legislative Analyst and Director of Finance of fiscal impact on state and local government: Potentially reduced state and local tax revenue of millions or tens of millions of dollars per year. Likely state costs of a few million dollars annually to administer the law. Possible ongoing net costs or savings for state and local health and human services programs. (15-0004.)

www.voteyesprop60.com

Paid for by Yes on Prop 60, For Adult Industry Responsibility (FAIR) committee, with major funding by AIDS Healthcare Foundation