Thursday, October 25, 2007

Spawn of Cobra: Young porn actors infected with HIV on bareback shoot UPDATE:


UPDATE Dec 27,2007; We have learned the title of the video released and the cast list; Related Post Breeding Ian Jay

BRITISH BAREBACK VACATION

This is THE film mentioned in Boyz and on the internet, where 3 stars got infected with HIV by one performer who didnt know he was infected.

Studio: Rentboy UK
Director: Adam Bailey
Source: United Kingdom
Language: English
Cast:Will Forbes, John Gadsby, Jon Janes, James Allen, Sam Storm, Brian Morris, Steve Daniels, Carlos Logan


UPDATE Oct 30; This news story out of the UK has been getting a lot of play concurrent with the David Awards controversy over Bareback films. Read all about it here at GayPornTimes David Awards Fight
Chi Chi La Rue Speaks Out

Jason Sechrest and Raging Stallions Chris Ward stepped into the debate on Thursday. Interesting there was VERY LITTLE discussion of the UK HIV test story by the Pro bareback crowd,,any surprise?

Older UPDATE Oct 27; I added a reference article from the LA Times and further personal observations to support my premise that Bryan Kocis was the instigator of BAREBACK
Twink Gay Porn.

I was looking around for a new Blog Post after days of worrying about the fires in San Diego, when I came across this story about another kind of fire. The spreading HIV epidemic in the Bareback porn biz. I am not talking about Treasure Island Media or Hot Desert Knights, videos that purportedly feature mature HIV+ models. I call your attention to the Spawn of Cobra the company's emboldened by the late Bryan Kocis greed and wanton disregard for the health of his young Twink boy's.

Cobra was the first Twink BareBack porn producer, Bryan released his first BB video in early 2002. Sam Dixons Tippo Sesso released Barebacking Across America with Brent Everett & Chase Mackenzie in early 2003. Eurocreme, the Raw series,SEVP all the Euro BB Studios came after Bryan Blazed the trail.

They all followed the lead and the millions in revenue Bryan Kocis was sucking in while filming clueless, naive 18 yo's who he sweet talked into playing Russian Roulette with their lives. Sure HIV is not an automatic death sentence now and most teens & young twentys are having bareback sex, but an 18 yo boy testing POZ has just shaved decades off his life expectancy! Bryan inducing boys on a porn set to have bareback sex, using shoddy or plainly fraudulent testing procedures (the dutch instant Hiv test) to "put them at ease"and then having this 40 year old telling the boys everything is Hunk Dory! This was the height of callous irresponsibility!


Thanks Bryan for BLAZING the trail to a new HIV porn epidemic!

This will be your true and Undying legacy Bryan Kocis! Your contribution to the world of Gay Porn! You made BareBacking Cool and Alluring again, the fact your studio prospered and was not condemned, indeed was tacitly tolerated, meant other greedy irresponsible producers felt emboldened to go Bareback!

The entire Twink bareback "crises" facing the Major studios today can be laid at your feet. And you would be proud of that wouldn't you Bryan? You despised Kevin Clarke and the other responsible Twink Directors who looked out for and cared for their models. Instead you inspired and created an entire movement dedicated to the idea that the Aids epidemic was Over and "done with". This Lie like so many you perpetuated will be your permanent contribution to Gay Porn. Should we be surprised that a man with such a personal self-loathing for himself and all gay youth would ultimately be responsible for laying waste to a generation of young porn models all while filming what he called "The Erotic Essence of Youth"

Too Harsh?

Perhaps but as we have learned this week, to return to the metaphor of the California Brushfire, the smallest spark or ember can start the greatest fire or epidemic. The results are starting to come in, ever increasing rates of HIV (& other STD) infections among young men doing Twink BareBack Porn in the UK,Czech Republic and eastern European nations. An increase of POZ tests have been noted among straight porn producers (who have stringent & mandatory testing unlike Gay Porn) in the US. How soon will we start hearing about POZ tests from the Helix boys (Hot Studs) the only other major American producer of BB Twink Porn?

When will someone in this business show some responsibility and demand Mandatory industry wide testing for ALL gay porn studios. The Majors are responsible with THEIR models but if they pressured the Distributors like Motti Green at Marina Pacific to STOP distribution of BareBack Twink Porn they would be Showing some Real Cajones!

Look Gay Porn is a Business, you want to make money, if this invasion of cheaply produced EuroPorn continues to stream into the country the Majors , the Raging Stallions, The Titans, The Falcons even Chi Chi WILL BE FORCED to film BareBack porn EXCLUSIVELY!

Indeed Euro BB titles are already half the DVD market in this country.

So will GayPorn be able to survive producing nothing but BareBack Porn?

Yes until a major new epidemic spreads thru young bareback models, resulting in UNWANTED & UNWELCOME Media and then POLITICAL attention to the problem!

And How do Politicians Solve Porn Problems?

Badly look at COPA,DCMA,2257, etc

If we have a new epidemic fostered and abetted by the Gay Porn biz you will ALL be responsible for whatever comes down on your heads!

You have been warned, see below and read the Future of Gay Porn!

Direct Link from Boyz in the Know/UK

Three young male actors, aged 18, 21 and 26,
were infected with HIV while making a British
bareback gay porn film last month. The boys
were performing alongside a 26 year old actor who
had tested negative several weeks before production,
but it later transpired that he was HIV positive at the
time of filming.

Boyz has learned that only three days after shooting
had finished, the actor undertook a routine monthly
HIV test, only to discover that the result was positive.
He then alerted the DVD company’s director, who
rushed his other young stars to hospital to undergo a
rarely used 48-hour HIV test which it is claimed can
detect HIV within hours of infection, by looking for the
virus’ DNA. All three co-stars were then informed that
their tests were also positive.

One of the actors, Jay*, 21,
told Boyz: ‘On all the shoots we
do everything: suck, kiss, rim,
fuck. I’m passive but he didn’t
cum inside me - that never happens
in porn, it’s all face and
mouth. It must’ve been from his pre-cum inside me.’

It appears that the guy who infected his co-stars
didn’t allow for the so-called ‘window period’ – a three
month wait before a standard HIV antibody test, used
in most clinics in London, will provide an accurate
result.

Many pornstars use the standard test to certify
that they’re HIV negative, allowing them a ticket to
ride bareback in films which are a rapidly growing
part of the gay DVD market.

However, Jay’s experience highlights the
problems related to this kind of testing for bareback
porn actors. Since his young stars were infected, the
director of the DVD company is now ensuring that all
his actors are checked every month for HIV using the
48-hour test at an NHS GUM clinic on the outskirts of
London. Each test is charged at £18.50. This is paid
for by the film company as the hospital has refused to
waive the cost of such frequent testing.

A senior nurse at the clinic, told us that providing
the test ‘does not condone unsafe sex’ but that the
hospital was responding to ‘a unique situation’. He
said: ‘We acknowledge that [bareback porn] happens
and we have to respond to that to do whatever we can
to minimise risks to people.’

Yet the Department of Health’s guidelines still
recommend using the traditional three-month test
because of its proven reliability. One doctor told us
that the 48-hour test has given many false positive
results and still requires the standard antibody test for
confirmation. Nonetheless, the dilemma for bareback
performers remains.

‘I do wish my company was using the quick test
before my shoot but they didn’t know about it’, said
Jay. Even his director was angry, adding, ‘If we’d have
known about it we’d have chased it up and made sure
we used it’.

But Alan Smith, an HIV
consultant at St Mary’s Hospital,
Paddington, described the 48-hour
tests as ‘novel’ and said, ‘Whilst
they may show infection earlier
than the conventional tests, the
best way to use them isn’t yet clear’.

Another HIV doctor who declined to be named
admitted that tests with shorter window periods would
be the best way for anyone who works in bareback
porn to reduce the risks. However he stressed that
such activity is never completely danger-free, regardless
of testing.

As long as bareback movies continue to be made
there needs to be further research into the success
rate of the 48-hour test. The standard 3-month antibody
test is clearly of little use to porn actors wanting
to prove their negative status.

But whatever the controversy
over such tests, nothing can change the fact
that three young men who performed in a bareback
sex movie are now counting the cost to their lives.
Jay’s bareback DVD will be out before Christmas.
Unsuspecting viewers won’t be aware that they’re actually
watching the young performers being infected
with HIV.
* Names have been changed to protect identity

Finally Blake Mason one of the best producers of Gay Subscription and CONDOM Porn made this entry in his diary in July. One of Masons models 18 yo Leo M tested positive in March and this was announced at the end of filming with model Lucas Marshall.

Enough..., 25/07/07

Diary entry No. 103

Imagine a world where respect and honesty for others came first. Then, dream of a world where people didn’t exploit one another and throw them out with the trash when things go embarrassingly wrong. Hell, why not consider the fact that your actions and choices actually affect people in a way you had no idea they could?

There’s a clue to the right. A simple piece of latex can mean a bright, happy, unaffected future for the guys you want to watch having fun. Without it, well, those same guys who make your lives more “satisfying” end up with a very different future. But unlike you, I know them, and I feel the impact.

I, like so many people I know right now, want to SCREAM about the blatant exploitation of guys who want to entertain you on film. There are some major sites who seemingly have no idea about just how these films are made, or the false promises that are given to the models and I just can’t let that continue any longer.

Anyone who promotes bareback sites without knowing exactly how those films are produced needs to ask themselves the question “have I made money from somebody’s misfortune”? Commercial suicide for me perhaps, but soon, there will be a website for all affected models to relay their own stories. It will have a prominent link on my site simply because this is a tale that has to be told.

Let’s face it, I make a decent living without having to resort to filming bareback sex. However, it seems that bareback sex outsells condom sex 10 to 1. I guess some people are just a little greedy without, perhaps, fully understanding the implications of their actions.

Mason

UPDATE;
LA Times news article April 2004 and some personal observations about what happened in April 2004 and the missed opportunity by the Gay porn studios,,which they are paying for now.

Some related story's out of Chicago.
Keithboykin.com
Bejatta

41 comments:

elmysterio said...

As you may already know I have done a couple of posts on this subject on my blog. I was there for the first outbreak and I lost more friends than I would care to mention.

This whole idea of bareback porn is just a bit disturbing to me and I have stated that on several blogs. what is really sad is that it is geting more pervassive and there sems to be no regard at all for the models.

Testing is not mandatory and it is not reliable either. Your post is harsh but that is what needs to be said for it to hit home with those who do not see this as problematic.

Cobra video was one of the first to start shooting bareback porn and now it is going to go down in history for it.

Kevin Clarke said...

Dewayne, Thanks for showing this story for all to see. This is the very Russian Roulette Bryan Kocis played with every young man he shot. They, and their health, were secondary to his need for money. Almost every week I hear a story of an 18 or 19 YO that tests positive and it just breaks my heart. There is s special place in hell for the people who are sending our young men to the slaughter for dollars and I hope they all rot there.

Geoff Harvard said...

Part of the irony is that the only erotic moments in any of the Cobra videos did not involve penetration of any kind. For instance, the really hot moments between the two Brents are the teasing and foreplay. When Kocis's models spent 30 minutes going the standard four ways, it's a bore. Bryan Kocis made it look like getting his models to ejaculate was the 13th Labor of Hercules. If I had to fuck some of his homely models for pay, it would take all day for me to get off, too. In "Fuck Me Raw," two of the models are cute right off the bat (Brent and Cameron, although Cameron could stand to tighten up a bit), and two kind of grow on you with over the tedious 30 minute scene (freckle boy and sunburst tatoo on the soulderblades boy). The other half of the cast are totally unappealing. How is that supposed to be erotic? Just looking at a photograph of Robert Wagner makes mine shrivel up and hide behind my pelvic bones as if on a winter midwatch in the Arctic Ocean. Kocis was an utterly incompetent photographer as well, having no idea how to light a scene or even in many instances how to pull focus. When he does get his camera in focus, what we see in disgusting detail is razor burn, pimples, and stubble on flabby, white thighs and taints. The cum shots appear to be fake somehow, like they're palming a vile of Elmer's glue. I had more volume as a twelve year old. I guess out of 300 million people in America, the number of people in the twink category who are willing to commit sodomy on camera for the amount of money Kocis was offering is pretty slim, and Kocis couldn't be too particular about body aesthetics. Eastern Europe has a competitive advantage for now, because there are more desperate young men there. BTW I refuse to support this business directly. I bought my pirated German copy of FMR for $11.50 on eBay.

partiallyhydrogenatedoil said...

I have an unrelated question. Who the hell is running Brent Corrigan's old website and why is it turning into something that is most probably a rip off to new subscribers?

Thanks.

n.c. said...

I think it kind of reflects sexual behavior in general. Since you mention Czech (bb) porn, speaking about the situation in the Czech Republic, there’s been a decreasing awareness of HIV risks among young people. Until very recently, it was practically a non-issue here, as the HIV rate has been very low (total number of people infected with HIV/AIDS being about 1000 which is 0,01 % of total population) . But this relatively favorable situation is now rapidly changing because young people don’t feel any need to protect themselves. They don't use condoms anymore. You might have heard about the recent scandal in Czech straight porn – the results of STD testing were falsified by a testing laboratory which led to a small syphilis epidemic in the porn industry. Immediately, a question of more rigorous regulation regarding HIV/and other STD testing in the porn industry has been raised. There have also been some speculations about complete ban on bareback porn (straight and gay).

I don’t want to defend anyone who exploits young people (on the contrary) but it’s good to mention that despite the general opinion in the U.S. (at least as it seems to be) it’s not so black and white (greedy and reckless porn producers v. poor and desperate young boys who would do anything for money – it’s simply not true.) FYI - the Czech Republic, ironically, has the lowest rate of people facing poverty in the EU (the same could be said about child poverty rate). However, that is largely due to not so dramatic income differences which is, to a certain extent, a residue of socialism (and egalitarianism is still quite persistent). Anyway, the country is not at all (as) poverty-stricken as some people in the U.S. might think...

Actually, there are several reasons why the (gay) porn industry in the C.R. is growing so fast. Firstly, Czechs are quite liberal about their sexuality. Thus it’s not a big deal if someone appears in porn (even straight men in gay porn). Czech porn industry is not strictly regulated because of general moral indifference with respect to porn. And finally, it’s easy money – working in porn in the C.R. isn’t, generally (!), about poor kids who are not able to support themselves, it’s a way how to earn some money with (relatively) little effort. AFAIK Czech young porn actors are usually college students (rarely younger) - children from middleclass families who are not willing to work for minimum wage to cover their extra expenses. Just to make things clear.

I'm sorry, my English isn’t good but I hope you understand :-)

Geoff Harvard said...

My understanding is that BrentCorriganOnline was and is operated by LSG Media LLC. The majority partner is Lee Bergeron, a San Diego "businessman." BCO's membership operation was disrupted when Bryan Kocis filed a lawsuit against Sean. By the time the lawsuit was settled, Sean and Grant were at odds with Lee and walked away from the operation. Apparently there is some residual original content that was put up recently. Obviously, there will be no more, and I rate the members operation to be a scheme to defraud.

er said...

Dewayne,

What I think is that what is lacking is a true sense of duty to protect by government. We have that duty on the roadways. There are many laws and regulations about how we are supposed to travel on them. There is concerted effort to enforce those laws. There is little regard to creating and enforcing laws in the pornography industry. When our so called leaders do propose laws and sometimes intact them, they are not adequate and are weakly enforced.

The downtrodden and those who are with them in this industry must unite and make their voices heard. For what ever reason they chose to pursue their work they deserve to be treated with as much respect and regulation by government as those who travel on our highways.

The most important aspect of these regulations should of course be health and safety. It seems to me that it would be a much simpler task than the tremendous effort used to try to see to our safety on the road. There are many fewer people involved. The events are not continuous. However, no one in government seems to care.

I think this state of affairs is all about stupid religious beliefs about morality. When religious leaders state their conviction that because you are immoral you deserve to die, and political leaders go along with that insane idea, then no progress for humanity is possible.

How it might be possible to force people away from their archaic thinking is beyond my poor mind to conjecture. I do know that if there is not a way found to do this, not just about pornography but about many issues we face as a species, then there is no hope for us.

Ernie

Anonymous said...

you presented no proof that Bryan's work resulted in any actor getting HIV, just an assumption that because they were bareback, they are now positive.

just a wild assumption.

Albert said...

Anon at 10:01, please try actually reading Dewayne's post. At no point does he suggest, infer or allude to any Cobra actor having contracted any disease whatsoever. His argument is that Bryan was a leader in the promotion of bareback sex. Because of that lead, others followed. Because of that trend, at least three young actors are now HIV+. That is a tragedy. Like it or not, agree or not, bareback porn will remain a legacy of the Kocis family name.

Bob said...

My concern is more about the "clueless" young men who are apparently "forced" to appear in bareback porn.

Where are they supposed to learn about the dangers of bareback sex? Surely not in school! The Bible-thumpers in our government don't allow discussion of sexual reality in any public education setting. Sadly, the gay community has not stepped up in any significant way (or loudly enough) to educate the gay youth in the USA.

Others will raise the issue of "personal responsibility", and the nebulous idea that 18 year old boys are adults, and will make their own choices, good or bad. Either the concept of an 18 year old boy being an adult is flawed, or human nature and GREED on the part of the young men is in play here.

Finally, as others have said, it's also the rampant drug use by performers that results in a lot of poor choices being made. Getting quick cash to buy their drugs trumps safety every time.

Obviously, it's a complex issue, but I don't think it's wise, or fair, to lump ALL the blame on porn studios or producers. There's enough blame to go around.

Rob said...

Anonymous @ 10:01 am 27 Oct.--

Let's see young male models doing bareback porn, a form of promiscuous sex, and you can't figure out how these guys became infected? Now that is stupid with a capital S and that stands for Shit for brains. Yeah Bryan Kocis opened the front door to Hell on Earth for the young male models who turned to him and to this business to make ends meet financially. The said thing is those young men did what all adults have said they can do--trust the adult, the adult will not mislead, misinform, or harm you. After all, the films produced are available over the counter.

I agree with the blogger who said there should in effect be an Adult Screen Actor's Guild of America. May be with union representation, the performers will be seriously listened to. Some of these performers are better educated and informed than the producers, directors, cameramen, and investors who exploit them for as many dead presidents as can be amassed in their individual bank accounts.

The industry needs to reform itself.

bill96815 said...

Many of us old timers watched dozens of our lovers, friends, acquaintances and tricks die of AIDS before we learned the cause. It is still incurable. Now that we know the cause, there is absolutely no excuse for bareback sex, and there is no excuse for anyone to buy bareback sex vids. Do not support these criminals by buying their vids. Even the thought of bareback makes me cry.

rawTOP said...

Studies have shown that the chances of infection when you bottom (bareback) for a poz guy are, on average, about 1 in 50. For two guys to be infected at the same exact time would then be 1 in 2,500.

That's just hard for me to believe. Sure the poz guy's viral load was through the roof since he had just converted, but he didn't cum in their ass. Precum just isn't that infectious...

Has there been any independent verification of this story? Everything I read on it just quotes the original report verbatim with no questions.

I'm not saying anything about bareback twink porn in general - just about this one case... It seems fishy to me and everyone seems to be accepting "what they read on the Internet" as gospel truth...

dandy boy said...

Come on! All of us know that this business is a mafia, and mafia guys doesn't care of anybody. They only want money. Government has to do something about health aspects of young gay actors that enter in the industry and all the health aspects in all the industry.

Kevin Clarke said...

Rawtop, your attitude is bizarre. You use those numbers as if they mean anything. It does not surprise me that you find it hard to believe, anyone who with a straight face say your chances are only 1 in 50 is beyond comprehension to me. From young guys I talk to they engage in bareback sex as a rule not an exception. Many don't bother to ask the status of their partner(s) and then believe them whatever they say. I am not sure what planet a 1-50 risk is acceptable but by your logic no one is getting HIV because the risk is acceptable.. So then we do not have to be concerned. Not to mention the HIV positive assholes that lie about their status and deliberately try and infect... This is all insane and trying to justify this behavior with those statistics is beyond bizarre it is part of the problem.

bill96815 said...

Kevin, it isn't merely part of the problem. It is THE problem. Where is Larry Kramer now that we need him more than ever?

Rawtop is clearly neither a doctor nor a statistician. (Rawtop, here's a hint: your attempt at multiplying the odds is incorrect. These odds aren't multiplicative; they're additive. That's how we got the epidemic in the first place. If the spread of a virus were multiplicative as you displayed them, this viral epidemic would have petered out instead of grown. The only two known ways to prevent the spread of this virus: sex with rubbers or no sex.

rawTOP said...

Bill96815 - The odds aren't additive, they're multiplicative, just as I originally said. Additive is for events in a series (e.g. if you flip a coin 10 times what are the odds of having 3 heads). The odds of two events occurring simultaneously are multiplicative.

You are right about the spread of HIV being additive, but wrong in your comments about me. I wasn't saying anything about the spread of HIV - just the chances of two guys getting pozzed at the same exact time.

BTW, I was wrong in what I said originally... The odds aren't 1 in 50, they're 1 in 100 (Varghese et al., Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases, Jan 2002).

Your also wrong in saying using rubbers "prevents" HIV. It only reduces the chance of getting HIV about 90% (same source as above). In other words 10 fucks with condoms = 1 fuck without a condom.

Get your facts right before you start judging people...

maskedtruth said...

rawtop: You still did your maths wrong. The porn stars had sex *way* more than just once. I'm pretty sure they had multiple takes of most scenes too.

If I remember correctly, facials has some probability of infections as well.

Also, different studies provides different figures in term of the probability of anal sex infection. The one I've read recently states a 1/3 to 1/10 probability. I'm not saying yours is wrong, I'm just saying maybe the numbers aren't to be trusted yet.

rawTOP said...

maskedtruth - Even with multiple takes it doesn't add up and is still impossible.

Your comment about facial leading to infection shows you really have no clue what you're talking about. HIV dies quickly outside the body. We've known that for decades now...

The study my comments were based on is by researchers at the CDC who compiled data from all the known studies out there. Most of the data is based on the experiences of he vaccine trial network - so it would be based on 10s of thousands (if not 100s of thousands) of sexual encounters. To my knowledge there isn't a more authoritative study out there.

bill96815 said...

I can't believe grown men are debating the odds. The only relevant point is that all of the no-condom odds are too high. Unsheathed sex is more dangerous than sex wearing a condom.

maskedtruth said...

Actually, the HIV virus can survive outside the body for a long period of time provided that they are contained in something moist, like semen or blood. Of course, semen is one of those substances which dries up quickly, but not quickly enough to prevent infections if exposed to an open cut.

HIV is also fragile in a way where almost any chemical or other pathogens can kill it. But in this context, I doubt the semen came in contact with anything like that.

But, I will admit that I probably have remembered the whole facial thing wrong. Unless the porn stars have micro-lesions on their faces, or the semen got into the eyes, the probability is as good as nil.

Again, could you have confused between the probability of asymptomatic and primary infection phases? I do know that the asymptomatic phase have a lower probability, like 1/100 to 1/30. But I'm pretty sure during the primary infection phase, the probability is the highest - 1/10 to 1/3.

bill: Of course I'm all for safe sex and recognise its importance. Right now we're just trying to determine if it was probable that two porn stars got infected at the same time by the same person. I say it is, he says it isn't.

rawTOP said...

bill - You say no condom sex is too risky. That's a fine statement to make for yourself, but who gave you the authority to police my behavior? We're a minority, we should understand the importance that the majority should not dictate personal behavior for a minority.

What if I said all butt sex was too risky? It's a fair statement - let's make it illegal. Oh, that's right - we used to have those laws and worked hard to repeal them... But maybe we should put them back in place... The point is - people should draw the line of OK / too risky for themselves.

maskedtruth - You're so desperate to be right you'll make up facts. I've cited my source. You need to cite a respectable, scientific source or just shut up...

maskedtruth said...

Why do you have to be so rude? I've tried so hard to be polite.

I assume you're only asking citations for the probability thing, not the survival of HIV outside the body, since it's pretty common knowledge that the virus survives in semen at least long enough till it lands on the skin (semen doesn't dry up THAT fast).

Jacquez JA, Koopman JS, Simon CP, et al. Role of the primary infection in epidemics of HIV infection in gay cohorts. J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr 1994;7(11):1169-84

That scientific journal (research done in the University of Michigan) claims the probability of HIV infection during primary infection is as high as 1/3 to 1/10.

DeGruttola V, Seage GR III, Mayer KH, Horsburgh CR.
Infectiousness of HIV between male homosexual partners. J Clin Epidemiol 1989;42(9):849-56.

That one (really old research done in Harvard School of Public Health) claims the probability of HIV infection during asymptomatic phase is 1/200 to 1/30.

Please don't make me cite again, because I never remember where I read these journals and I never liked PubMed's search engine.

Ernie said...

I want to “revise and extend” my previous (months old) comment.
(10/26/2007 08:56:00 PM)

Though a health based governmental regulation of the porn industry would, in my opinion, be beneficial, it would certainly be much better if the industry did it itself. I have concern that those who seek to return to a very sexually repressed society can use this (HIV – Gay Bareback Porn – Irresponsibility) situation as a launch pad to get their wishes. I am well aware that any involvement by government can backfire because of the homophobic and sexually ignorant society we live in.

A union or guild for pornographic performers is a good idea but unless the industry can be persuaded that it would be beneficial for it to allow, there is no chance that such a Guild or Association could gain a foothold. There would just be too many who would be willing to work outside it. Certainly, the HIV issue would be the preeminent reason for the industry to consider some sort of working relationship with a Guild of Pornographic Performers.

My thought about bareback performances is that what is shown could just as easily be shown with the use of protection for the performers. If it’s a good video and the performers are into it and are attractively shown, the use of condoms is not in anyway distracting to the enjoyment of the viewer. If it’s not a good video then hyping the bareback aspect is basically a con. Many of these bareback works display a great performance but they could have been just as good if the performers used condoms.

As to the arguments expressed previously about the chances of infection, I think they are basically irrelevant. It is an unquestionable fact that performers have been infected with HIV (and other STDs) due to their work. Does anyone think that lowering the risk of infection is not a good idea?

Fact is, if you want to do pornography, you think you are good looking, you want to have fun, you hope it will be a great adventure, you dream that it might be the start of a great carrier, you’ll make some money and maybe even afterward look on it with PRIDE, why should you have to worry that the people you are dealing with really have no concern about your health or future?

The best way that I know of to assuage any performers concern is to make unprotected sex in any pornographic video a thing of the past and make testing and records of the tests regular and available to the performers until medical science has improved enough to make it unnecessary.

rawTOP said...

The models used in straight porn just won't work in gay porn. In straight bareback porn the assumption is the performers are HIV-, in gay bareback porn the assumption is that they're HIV+. Different circumstances call for different solutions.

I've been a HIV- top who fucked a HIV+ bottom in a Treasure Island Media video. Without going into detail I'm satisfied with how it was handled.

But if anyone start saying poz guys or neg guys can't participate in bareback porn you're going to hear a firestorm of criticism. Any neg guy who participates in bareback anything needs to know there's a risk. Anything less is silly on their part. Testing attempts to pretend there's no riak.

Paul Morris has put it far more eloquently than I ever will, but one of bareback porn's appeals is that it's "real". For some participants (like me) that means real risk. To pretend there's no risk will lessen the appeal.

In other words, nothing will really work - the important thing is that the participants go into it with their eyes open and know what they're doing is risky...

maskedtruth said...

And to think that I used to be naive enough to believe that people actually care about the future of the human race.

Doesn't matter that the more HIV infections there are in this world the more it'll mutate into a different strain which the current drug cocktail can't help. One day it'll mutate into something stronger and more infectious which will kill billions, but it doesn't matter, because what matters is that you felt good about it.

I know it's your choice, obviously. Doesn't mean I have to approve it.

Ernie said...

OK RawTOP,

Evil Kinevil risks his life on a useless and trivial stunt. He breaks some bones and bruises some internal organs. He heals up a bit and then does it again. More damage to be healed. But he doesn’t damage another in his endeavor. It’s his thing and if he wants to then no one should stop him.

But there is a great deal of difference between EK and what you stand for. We are talking about infectious disease. PERIOD! You and others who engage in this kind of activity are endangering not just your lives but the lives of many others. Others who may have never even heard of you or even have any knowledge of the porn industry. Many who have trust in there partner and believe that they are safe. Unknowingly they have sexual intercourse with some one who has had intercourse with some one who has had intercourse with….

It’s not the problem of the pornography business that people engage in unprotected sex but it is definitely their responsibility to set an example.

It is everyone’s responsibility as caring humans to want to protect their fellow humans from a deadly disease.

As far as assumptions, well, assume makes an ASS of U and ME!

Let’s try to be scientific and not assume things based on unsubstantiated beliefs.

rawTOP said...

This is getting really tiring...

maskedtruth - The more lethal the strain of HIV the faster it kills its host, the less chance it has to get passed on to other people (and vice versa). This means as time goes on HIV is, on average, getting (and will continue to get) less lethal, not more lethal. Re-infection is extremely rare despite the fact that there are guys who get hundreds of loads of anonymous poz cum in their ass every year.

Ernie - There are many, many forms of risk we take in every day life that could affect others. If you think you don't take those types of risks you're kidding yourself.

Everyone knows being a bareback bottom puts you at the greatest risk of HIV infection. If the guys getting fucked bareback in the video thought being HIV+ was unacceptable they shouldn't have been getting fucked raw.

With the exception of stealth breeding, the person who becomes HIV positive does it to themselves by taking risk. There's a thread on bnskin which asked asked the question "do you know who pozzed you?" Probably 75% said they pozzed themselves - not that they were bug chasers, but they took the risk for one reason or another.

Barebacking is not going away, neither is bareback porn. And there are those of us who are neg who will continue to bareback. Get used to it...

Ernie said...

When you find out you're HIV+ ??
Oh, your sure that will never happen.
But if it ever did, think how tiring that would be.

rawTOP said...

I know I'm taking risks and I'm OK with the level of risk I take - do you understand how much risk you take each day just living your everyday life? Do you understand that "safe sex" isn't safe? So what if some of the risk I take comes from a sexual activity... That doesn't make it inherently wrong.

I've known I have a very mild form of cancer for 20+ years now. I've faced the prospect of my death a few times now and as a result I know how I want to live my life. Who in the hell are you to judge me or tell me how to live my life?

maskedtruth said...

I have a counter argument, but to tell you the truth, I don't think we should continue (which I trust is probably the only thing that we both agree on).

We both know that nothing you say is gonna make me approve what you're doing, and nothing I say is gonna make you stop barebacking. So instead of going back and forth like this forever and becoming more and more bitter, I say we call it quits.

Important thing is, we know where each other stand, and why we do/say the things we do/say.

p.s. Sorry about your cancer. But if you must know, I still disapprove what you're doing. :P

Ernie said...

This is my final statement about this issue here.

Risk vs. Benefit is what everyone has to decide for themselves. But it is not just a decision that should be based solely on the individual. “No Man is an Island.”

I don’t want to tell anyone how to live their life. But I think that the lack of concern about unsafe sexual practices by some in pornography is disturbing. Saying that there is no such thing as safe sex is just wrong. Certainly, there is safety in monogamous relations begun by uninfected individuals. From that ideal of safety, the risks increase. Making excuses for unsafe behavior, when safety can be easily enhanced, by saying that the safety measures do not insure complete safety seems to be sophistry to me. When I get in a car I put on the safety belt. I probably won’t be involved in an accident. If I am involved in an accident the belt may not save me. I am reasonably certain that if an accident occurs and I do not have the belt on, that I will be much worse off for it.

rawTOP said...

"Certainly, there is safety in monogamous relations begun by uninfected individuals."

LOL... You don't want to know how many guys in committed "monogamous" relationships have gotten my cum in their ass...

DewayneinSD said...

Ernie I think you sum up nicely here.

What makes this a hot button issue, gay men's right to have sex was not even decriminalized until a Supreme court decision THIS CENTURY!

As gay men we have taken the attitude our sexuality is an expression of our personal freedom.

So naturally any attempt to proscribe behavior is considered suspect!

But Freedom requires responsibility!

My main concern here with this post is simply the how,why & where BB Twink porn is produced.

I am not really concerned with T.I.M,SX or H.D.K. since almost everyone agrees the videos are filmed using older more aware models.

Twink Porn is very different, most 18 yo's think they are indestructible and will easily believe what line of bullshit an unethical producer feeds them.

Great discussion guys.

What you guys may not be aware of is this Post according to Stat Counter is the most viewed on this Blog with over 12,000 unique visitors and climbing.

There is a lot of interest in this story and the discussion.

Also the labels didn't hurt,,
HIV,,Young Porn Actors,,infected with HIV on bareback shoot,, and Cobra. Everyone one of those grabs attention and draws people in to the post and what its about.

bill96815 said...

rawTOP, I didn't say anything about "legal" or "illegal." I said bareback sex is risky. Too risky and unnecessarily risky.

I didn't say anything about policing your behavior. I said bareback sex is risky. Too risky and unnecessarily risky.

Seeking equal rights for a minority has nothing to do with risking someone's life. Being in the minority or majority has nothing to do with risking someone else's life.

Fact: In some places, infecting someone with HIV is illegal under certain circumstances.

My opinion: In all places, it is immoral to infect someone knowingly, irrespective of whether it's legal or illegal.

My most humble opinion: Unprotected butt sex is immoral, given there is always some, however small, danger of a false negative test or a test administered before infection and given that condoms are readily and inexpensively available. I didn't say butt sex was immoral, I said unprotected butt sex.

Anyone is of course free to disagree with any or all of my opinions or any or all of my morals, but the right to disagree does not bestow the right to risk someone else's life.

Most people today who bottom for a bareback top would probably stop doing it if they could relive the 1980s I lived and see the dozens of my friends, acquaintances, bottoms and tops who died, and see first-hand how they died.

My hope: If just one of those bareback bottoms sees this blog, maybe he will quit receiving bareback. Just one is better than none. Two would be better than one.

As a minority, we will be more likely to get majority equal rights if we all live longer.

rawTOP said...

bill96815 - Having grown up in a fundamentalist environment with pastors who thought they were the ultimate authority on "morality" - I've seen where your argument goes and it's not pretty.

You can't say someone is free to disagree and then say they're immoral for doing so. It's a small step from that to outlawing gay sex completely for innocuous reasons like "public safety" - we've been there and done that.

The point is you make decisions for your life, I make them for mine and that's the end of it. No judgments - just tolerance for difference. That's the only thing that works.

On another note related to the original post - they're now saying that 1 in 5 kids in the EU doesn't know they can get HIV from unprotected sex and those who do know are often too embarrassed to go out and buy condoms...

While I'm a fierce advocate for personal freedom, I'm also a big advocate of good education. It's one thing to chose to be risky it's another one to be risky through stupidity or ignorance...

While I still would criticize much of what has been said about British Bareback Vacation, it does appear there are some "issues" with Eastern European bareback porn which should be dealt with through education.

Anonymous said...

HIV is a disease of low self esteem. People with high self esteem don't put their health at risk because they value their lives. Also, people of self esteem don't need to go 'bareback' to achieve intimacy because they will already have far more intimacy in their relationships than random hookups will ever give. Finally, people who are in touch with their instincts and know how to detect character flaws very early on will not have to worry about cheating partners.

The cause of HIV infection is not evil pornographers, lack of education or any other problem that government bureaucrats can promise to solve. The real problem is bad, corrupt parents and schools which often completely cripple the developing child's self esteem and natural curiosity to learn. Not to mention the brain numbing, inefficient, completely unnatural system that people call 'schooling'. In this society, people are kept as childlike as possible, often into their mid 20's. The idea of 'childhood' didn't exist until little over 100 years ago - if we lived in a society where individual responsibility replaced government/school/parental 'dependance' then maybe we could have teenagers actually being more mature, responsible, confident in themselves and more careful with their behaviors. You don't get 18 year olds that feel indestructible unless they were sheltered too much by society.

Anonymous said...

In the future, i imagine 2 classes of gay people emerging: those with high self esteem (almost all uninfected) and those with low self esteem (high rates of infection). I also imagine these 2 groups not intermixing when it comes to sex.

Duda_Brazil said...

It is important to remember that oral sex also transmit HIV ... In most films is what happens! Think about it!

katchaya said...

The comments disturb me so much because they show a lack of basic biological knowledge about how one is infected.
You don't get infected because someone cums in your ass. You get infected though the mixing of bodily fluids through microscopic skin tears that occur during the friction that occurs during any kind of sex be it oral or anal(or even vaginal, how do you think hetero couples get it ?). If you have gingivitis, and your gums are swollen, you can get infected through oral contact.
The amount of denial and misinformation out there is astounding.
I also agree wholeheartedly with the idea of low and high self esteem effecting how some people care for themselves.

Anonymous said...

Ok there are some people that have posted coments, about gettign hiv, like the looser raw top. He is saying the risk is low of gettign hiv from percum, well that is total bullshit and, he dose not really know what he is tlaking about, look at his name raw top yah really smart these days, and for the porn stars that got hiv, well first your making a porn movie so not vary classy, and you are barebacking yah you going to get hiv so dont cry about it.
You bareback any one dotn cry if you become poz DONT BAREBACK

Post a Comment