Although the goal of preventing the spread of sexually transmitted diseases is noble, Proposition 60 fails in doing so altogether.
The proposition would require California’s pornographic film industry to mandate condom use in filming. In addition to condom use, the proposition would also require adult film producers to cover the costs of sexually transmitted infection testing, vaccination and examinations for actors.
However, attempts at promoting safer adult film industry standards unfortunately turn the goal on its head, and could actually make the industry a less safe and less regulated environment for actors.
Proposition 60’s stipulations would only serve to burden adult film actors and producers alike. The excessively restrictive regulations threaten to drive the industry underground, or out of California’s jurisdiction altogether. If this were to happen, adult film actors would not have the protections California regulations afford them, further marginalizing an already ill-treated part of the American public.
Proposition 60 is nothing more than a legislative redundancy, as the actors are already subjected to biweekly STI testing, the results of which are verified before the filming of any scene.
As if that is not enough, the proposition allows any state resident to sue those who have violated the proposition, allowing them to potentially hold actors liable. For actors, who have every reason to not have their names known due to the stigma attached to filming pornography, this proposition can be very dangerous.
In California, the adult film industry functions at the most reasonable amount of regulation possible. There’s a very good reason why many adult film actors, whom the proposition “protects,” have opposed this measure – and the same is true for why this board does not endorse Proposition 60.
Click the banner to read more election endorsements and analysis.