I would like to wish everyone here at GG & J a Happy Thanksgiving!
Now on to the matter at hand.....
1) An end to extreme hardcore content.
I have several objections to this but I think the biggest question would be who exactly defines what is "extreme"? There is no way that we should allow censorship to take place as I don't think anyone should have the right to judge what should be acceptable sexual conduct between two consenting adults. Anyone who thinks that could put an end to extreme content and sex is clearly wrong and but trying to limit even more what acts could be considered acceptable we would only be seeding the growth of a new underground market for material that would no longer be considered legal. Keep in mind that today film producers really don't need distributors and with VOD and IPTV technology producers of 'extreme" content can produce material and distribute it directly to buyers who are interested in such material.
When people get around to thinking about making changes to the adult industry they should really take a good look at how some of these ideas will really change what may be considered a "problem"....Do we draw the line at anal sex being too taboo? maybe interracial or gay sex. Censorship will only lead to more censorship and will not solve any of the so-called "problems' associated with the adult industry.
2) IV drug testing to discourage use of performers that are on IV drugs.
Are we only going to test people for drugs which may be taken intravenously? In all seriousness most drugs that could be taken intravenously can also be administered into the human body by other means with the same effect so I really have to wonder if this idea has much more to do with the generally negative feelings that most people have towards IV drug use as compared to really trying to do something to help protect the industry. IV use is of course always brought up when HIV/AIDS comes up but with the exception of the dangers involved with the sharing of used needles is an IV drug user any more at risk of contracting and spreading HIV or any other disease than an 18 (or better yet 21) year old performer who uses recreational drugs and engages in reckless sexual behavior.
If you're going to test people for drugs then test them for all controlled substances regardless of how those drugs may have been administered into the body....Don't take the politician route and use "hot topics" such as IV drug use to make things to the outside world seem like something is being done and things are changing when nothing really has. If you want to rid the adult industry of drug use then pot heads and coke whores have to get thrown out with the IV drug users but people need to keep in mind that drug use isn't an adult industry problem it's just a problem and people from past presidents to the cop patrolling your neighborhood may have a drug problem but the last thing anyone will hear of is the mandatory testing of everyone on Capitol Hill for controlled substances and the abuse of prescription medication.
3) A 21-and-over age limit for performers that do hardcore.
I really think a lot of these suggestions are more about PERCEPTION than reality....
If we all agree to use 21 and older performers we could say to the government that we are doing our best to try and protect young people but on the other hand are we really making a difference? Now we would have 18 thru 20 year olds who are interested in the financial gains available by working in the adult industry simply making their living as hookers as compared to being adult film performers. We haven't really solved anything and the fact of the matter is that when it's all said and done the Adult Entertainment Industry as a whole would still be looked at as a problem. Take the current 2257 legislation which honestly does very little to stop the production and distribution of child pornography and only serves to place an unneeded burden on producers and create a security/privacy issue for performers.
We really should not stoop to use political tactics in order to somehow change the governments view of the adult industry since we all know that such tactics really have no positive effects when it comes to solving the problem and only serve to make it look like the government or in this case AMERA is actually making a difference. At age 18 you can drive a car, go to war and die, or have an abortion and so for us to say that a person at age 18 is competent to make these decisions but not make a decision on how they would like to make their living is absolute nonsense. The age of consent in most states ranges from 16 to 18 and so the US/State government has made a decision that those individuals are capable of making rational decisions about having sex and they are also considered "adults" at that age but are they are not capable of making job decisions
4) Cutting ties with the escort business by not allowing escorts to perform in front of the camera.
I had to laugh a bit when I read this....regardless of what anyone may think the line between prostitution and being an adult performer is very thin. Although prostitution is illegal in most states having someone on hand to video tape the events for a "theatrical production" voids that illegality but for the most part the acts performed by the parties involved remain the same. We all know that a great number of adult performers make a considerable portion of the income from activities such as escorting....The real problem here lies is that for us to self censor and say that a performer can not work as an escort implies that all escorts are doing something illegal or immoral like having sex for money and that somehow just seems like the pot calling the kettle black.
5) Not using foreign talent unless they have legitimate papers to work in the US.
This may be the only thing here that makes sense but then again isn't it against the law to hire undocumented workers to begin with?
The last thing I really think any of us need are more rules out there to stack on top of the existing rules which are already in place. If the government wants to start enforcing this rule then let them feel free to do so but I really don't think this is an issue that needs to be addressed.
6) Working with the government to legislate a "porn tax" similar to alcohol and gambling taxes.
Although many have expressed that they feel that a "porn" or "sin" tax as it is often referred to would add a bit of legitimacy to the adult industry I really find this to be bullshit. First of the concept as a whole does nothing but put porn in a negative light...A porn or sin tax pretty much suggests that there is something a bit wrong with what we do but that the government will tolerate it as long as they get a cut of the pie and that is not something I can agree with. Is this a tax or the beginning of legalized extortion of the adult industry?
I would also like to know exactly where would this money go? Would this money go to fund anti-adult agencies so that we can help fund our very own demise or would the money go the the states or feds so that they can use the funds to pay more political bribes and fund more unneeded and unwarranted "military action" in foreign countries. I'm not a smoker but consider the ever rising tax being applied to cigarettes....All this has truly done in raise the cost of cigarettes to the consumer while bringing in more money for the government without doing mush to stop people from smoking or helping those who make be suffering from smoking related illness.
Mack Diesel
FLESH MERCHANT
"What's Your Pleasure?"
www.FleshMerchant.com