hiv & porn- it makes a headline
By Dr. Charlie Glickman • Jun 11th, 2009 • Category: BlogThe news outlets are beginning to buzz about a woman in the porn industry who has tested positive for HIV. According to the folks at the Adult Industry Medical Healthcare, her recent partners (both in and outside of the industry) have tested negative and the porn folks are in an employment quarantine for two 14-day testing periods. So that’s as good as it can be and I wish the woman and the people in her life all the best.
But what I find so interesting about this is that, despite the stereotypes that the porn industry is irresponsible about STIs, this is the first publicly confirmed outbreak of HIV within the porn industry since 2004. I think that’s pretty impressive, given how many people we’re talking about here. And it says a lot about AIM Healthcare and Sharon Mitchell, who founded it.
Of course, there are lots of other STIs out there, but according to an article from 2007, “AIM tests about 2,000 people each month, and only 2.8 percent test positive for an STD. That’s well below comparable national rates: In the U.S., about 22 percent of people ages 15 to 24 get an STD each year. (The CDC groups 15- to 19-year-olds and 20- to 24-year-olds. The majority of porn stars are 18 to 24, which overlaps the two age categories.)”
I also think it’s really interesting that lots of people who will panic about chlamydia or talk about a friend with gonnorhea as if they have leprosy will go to work when they have flus, colds, measles, whooping cough, or all sorts of germs that are spread fairly easily. In part, that’s because we have a long history of equating STIs with sin. But when it comes down it is, it’s no different. A virus or a bacteria has gotten into your system.
So why is it newsworthy that someone in porn has tested positive for HIV? Because talking about porn and/or sex gets people to read the news. And because it reinforces the sterotype of the “dirty porn performer” even when it’s only notable for being the first in 5 years.
Dr. Charlie Glickman >> Dr. Charlie Glickman has been working at Good Vibrations since 1996, when he joined the staff at our Berkeley store. Currently, he is our Education Program Manager and (among other things) runs our in-store After Hours workshop program, our Off-Site Sex Education Program, trains our Sex Educator-Sales Associates and writes copy for our website. In 2005, Charlie received his doctorate in Adult Sexuality Education from the Union Institute and University in Cincinnati, Ohio. In addition, he offers classes on sexuality for psychotherapists and workshops on teaching for sex educators.
All posts by Dr. Charlie Glickman
The issue between LA County and AIM is mostly about their practice in terms of reporting and often not following state requirements around reporting and confidentiality.
Also, HIV acquisition and transmission for an adult film actor is considered an OSHA issue because it’s a bloodborne pathogen exposure in the workplace. Straight up. You are comparing HIV and STD transmission rates to the population rates, but the population rarely acquires STDs through standard work practices (if ever). I think you’re making a case for incidental exposure to colds and flus, which happens on a porn set too I’m sure…and totally sucks when people show up to any workplace sick with anything.
Personally, I think treating HIV as an OSHA issue really legitimizes the work of the actors and I would hope that eventually actors and producers would agree.
This is also notable because this has been an ongoing issue between the adult film industry and LA County about workplace safety. This HIV case could have (if transmitted on set) been prevented with the OSHA recommendations. There’s more to it than the sex angle, but I think you’re right that it’s easier to get coverage because of those stereotypes.
[I totally admit I have a chip on my shoulder about Dr. Mitchell since she testified in the Haidl rape case about their being a market for porn about the rape of people who are possibly dead. (http://www.ocweekly.com/2005-07-14/news/haidl-claims-judge-screwed-him/)
*i didn’t mean for this to be so long! thanks for allowing me a small soap box*
Charlie: 2.8%/month is not less than less than 22% annually. Also, according to the article you’ve cited AIM tests for HIV, chlamydia, and gonorrhea. The CDC figures include a much broader spectrum of STDs.
Fair enough. But I still think it’s interesting that despite the stereotypes and the lack of condom use on porn sets, that it makes the news when someone in the industry is infected with HIV.B
And it turns out that I stand corrected. According to the trade magazine Xbiz, there have been 16 previously unpublicized cased of HIV within the porn world since 2004.
http://www.xbiz.com/news/109234
Whether this will prompt the industry or legislators to require condoms on porn sets, as some are proposing or not, it’s still seems to me that one is at much more risk for HIV on the average college campus than on a porn set. (Admittedly, I haven’t looked the exact numbers up, but you get what I’m saying.) And of course, if someone in the porn business becomes infected with HIV, that doesn’t necessarily mean that it happened on set.
I’d be really curious to know what safer sex practices people in porn use when they’re not working. If there are any sexology grad students out there who are looking for a research topic, email me.
The situation is far more complex than Xbiz or LA Times make it out to be. Ernest Greene of AIM Health Care has an extensive post on the topic, here:
http://bppa.blogspot.com/2009/06/latest-hiv-in-porn-panic-rumor-control.html
As for the “16 unpublicized cases”, this isn’t entirely honest reporting on the part of the LA Health department. 4 of the 16 actually have no connection to the porn industry, but simply “civilians” who used AIMH as a testing service (AIMH makes itself available as a commercial testing service for people outside the industry as well). Of the remaining 12, 11 were from the gay porn industry, which has a (mostly) separate talent pool and the exact opposite approach to condoms versus testing (testing is voluntary, condoms are mandatory, and the working assumption is that all talent is potentially HIV+). In the case of the 11 gay industry performers and 1 hetero industry performer, its not clear that the infections took place within the industry. Porn, of course, draws from the larger sexually active population, a certain percentage of which are HIV+.