Thanks for talking about this, hopefully you’re having great conversations on your end.

it’s really difficult to make broad blanket statements about any of this. not that you have, and i really think you do a good job of relating the particular nuance that you engage in both personally and the sorts of discussions that happen with other models you work alongside.

i think that it’s the consideration of safer sex is what’s integral. and that consideration is going to be different depending on the situation and depending on the individual. i kinda think that it’s really about making sure models feel empowered to have their own boundaries be defined and respected is what’s integral. in that case, maybe it’s the expectation – either for against protection in any porn queer or straight – that’s really the problem. it kinda shuts down the agency and freedom of the individual in that case. and that is not hot, imho.

of course that set-up has alot of assumptions in place. knowledge, time, communication all have to be there and sometimes they’re not. perhaps this perspective also comes from my own philosophy rooted in a queer culture that, for both women and men, is typically a lot more sex-positive with an emphasis on these issues of communication and such that are perhaps less available as a resource and a language for straight folks (and it kinda may get carried over into the philosophies of mainstream porn).

one caution that i have, is that in advocating for safer sex there needs to be a consideration of the implication this has on cultural perception about porn and sex work more broadly. i fear anything that may reenforce the misplaced stigma and assumption around porn (and other forms of sex work) that perceives those who are working are more likely to have HIV (and other STIs). factually, this is untrue and its a myth that I have to confront almost every day in my work as a sexual health counsellor. that’s not to say that there’s no risk (cause we can (as has recently been the case) point to the exceptional instance where someone is working and is positive and/or sero-converts) but to turn bodies intrinsically and instinctually into sites of disease (which could be a logical extension of blanket 100% safe sex philosophies) could have some unanticipated impacts. all that said, courtney’s article does raise some really great questions about the discrepancy and false assumptions about risk that frames the current practices in place.

and, as a sexual health counsellor, one technical thing that i never hear talked about is window period issues, particularly with HIV testing. we know now that folks are most likely to spread HIV right after they sero-convert (so before it can be tested). basically that means that a negative HIV test is kinda pointless if someone has significant risk in the 10-12 weeks before the test. personally, i would not take the risk (and it is a risk) if this were the case. again, bringing it back to agency and knowledge, i wonder if other women and men have have this option and information to the full extent that they should.