California And Prop 60. Mandatory Condoms In Adult Movies? Wiener, Weinstein, & Porn

Californians have a great deal to vote about this November 8th.  Most feel there will be a Clinton landslide for the presidency, BUT STILL GET OUT AND VOTE!  Three other topics besides the presidential race that are getting voter attention in California are in the form of Propositions; Prop 64: Legalizing Marijuana, Prop 63: Ammunition Regulations, Background Checks, Etc., and Prop 60: Mandatory Condom use in Porn.  Let's look at Prop 60 a little closer.

 

 

Is that all clear?  Good.  We understand the issue?  Well, what is said and what appears on the actual ballot itself is often different and confusing.  Click on these images from ballotpedia.org for a larger view of the wording voters will see.

 

 

So should condoms be mandatory for all sexual intercourse / encounters filmed by the porn industry in the state of California? That is for the voters to decide.

There are many opinions out there on those internets, some of them more fun to watch, but this one was one of the more educational ones and Wesley Edwards was cute to watch as he educated us on Prop 60.  It reiterates the verbiage as well as mentioning the pros, cons, proponents, and opponents.

 

 

Often, Propositions take physical form and collect faces and spokespersons along the way.  The battle over Prop 60 was not immune to this occurring. Wesley mentioned one personality in is overview.

 

Supervisor Scott Wiener and leaders in the LGBT and public health communities responded today to a homophobic campaign attack mailer against Wiener by Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF). Weinstein and AHF attacked Wiener for Wiener's vocal opposition to Prop 60 – which requires condoms in adult films – and for Wiener's strong advocacy for pre-exposure prophylaxis or PrEP, a daily pill that nearly eliminates the risk of HIV transmission. Weinstein is a staunch opponent of PrEP, whereas Wiener publicly announced that he is on PrEP, in order to raise awareness and reduce stigma.

Prop 60 – which Michael Weinstein and AHF sponsored and which Wiener opposes – has drawn widespread opposition from the LGBT and health communities and is opposed by both the Democratic and Republican Parties and all seven major California newspapers.

The attack mailer accuses Wiener of being "in the pocket" of the adult film industry based on one contribution he received out of 3,000 contributions. Weinstein's attack on Wiener follows a historic pattern of gay men who run for office being attacked and characterized as sexual perverts. Senator Mark Leno was similarly attacked when he ran for the State Senate in 2008.

"Scott has been tireless in his efforts to keep our community healthy and fearless in the face of deplorable and homophobic attacks by the AHF," said Senator Mark Leno. – scottwiener.com

 

 

In considering Prop 60 from a health perspective, is it a black and white issue?  If so, why do we have "Wiener and leaders in the LGBT and public health communities … against Wiener by Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF)?"

It seems that there is a large amount of history with Weinstein and what would become Prop 60.

In January 2014, the latimes.com opened an article titled, "Michael Weinstein, Leader In AIDS Movement, Has Hard-Charging Style."  It starts:

 

Los Angeles County leaders once thought the world of Michael Weinstein, president of the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.

In a gilt-edged 1992 proclamation that still hangs behind Weinstein's desk, officials declared him "a dynamic and inspirational leader" and "an unrelenting and tireless force in the struggle to stem the tide of HIV infection."

In the years since, however, that relationship has come to resemble a dysfunctional marriage, tied together by finances and need, but strained by lawsuits, acrimony and accusations of improper spending. County leaders, now engaged in a furious legal and ballot-box battle with Weinstein, accuse him of spending his nonprofit's funds on a "personal vendetta" against the county rather than on critical services for people living with HIV and AIDS.

The $2-million campaign to make adult film actors wear condoms may be the issue that has most flustered local officials. They are still embroiled in a struggle over how to enforce it, and question the wisdom of spending so much money on an industry that has seen relatively few transmissions, instead of in communities where AIDS is growing most quickly, notably among gay and bisexual men of color.  – latimes.com

 

In June 24, 2015 an opinion piece was published in hivplusmag.com called "Op-Ed: 10 Worst Offenses of AIDS Healthcare Foundation's Michael Weinstein.

 

In the past 15 years, Weinstein has racked up quite the record of wrongdoings against the collective effort to reduce HIV transmission and stigma. Well known HIV activists Peter Staley, Mark S. King, Eric Paul Leue, Mathew Rodriguez, and Tyler Curry assembled a list of the top 10 worst offenses of AHF by way of Weinstein.

1. Anti-Union Practices

2. Paid Editorials Campaigning Against PrEP

3. Anti-Science AIDS Activism

4. Stigma-Fueled, Anti-PrEP Messaging

5. Overbilling of Federal Funds in Los Angeles County

6. Fear-Based Safe-Sex Campaigns That Further HIV Stigma

7. Intimidating Other Organizations, People, and Practices Who Get In Their Way

8. Financial Leveraging Against Smaller Organizations

9. Forcing Condoms in Porn

10. An Alleged Pattern of Criminal Conspiracy. – hivplusmag.com

 

To read more about those opinions / accusations, read the full pieces at latimes.com and hivplusmag.com.

So when Californians vote for or against Prop 60?

Will they be voting for the health and well being of their porn stars?

Will it be about your personal viewing pleasure?

Will it be a vote against Wiener?

Will it be a vote against Weinstein?

I want to know how Wesley is voting.

 

h/t:  latimes.com, hivplusmag.com, scottwiener.com

What do you think?