Aids activists charge porn king

An Aids activist group filed a workplace safety complaint against Larry Flynt, accusing the porn king of creating an unsafe environment for his stable of sex stars by not requiring they use condoms.

To illustrate its point, the Aids Health Foundation also delivered 100 DVDS of hardcore Flynt films to the state Division of Occupational Safety and Health's Los Angeles office. Only a single scene in one of the films shows a performer using a condom, said AHF spokesman Ged Kenslea.

The films, most with innuendo-laden names, "clearly demonstrate workplace activities highly likely to spread bloodborne pathogens in the workplace," the complaint says. It urges the state agency to order the use of condoms on film sets.

'Unreasonable demand'

Larry Flynt Productions President Michael Klein indicated that is an unreasonable demand, adding porn audiences don't want to watch people using condoms.

"We won't budge when it comes to condomless productions," he said in a statement. "That's what the consumer wants, and we deliver it."

Federal law requires that all porn actors be tested for HIV 30 days before the start of filming, and Klein said Flynt's productions adhere to those standards. He added that none of the company's actors has ever tested positive for HIV.

Group targeting Flynt

AHF President Michael Weinstein said his group targeted Flynt in part because he is arguably the world's most famous and successful pornographer. Hours before filing the complaint, AHF members, clad in bright red shirts, demonstrated outside the plush Beverly Hills skyscraper that is home to Larry Flynt Productions.

Earlier this year, the group brought similar complaints against nine talent agencies it says promote actors willing to have unprotected sex on camera. Cal-OSHA spokeswoman Krisann Chasarik said those complaints prompted an investigation, although she didn't know the status of it.

Depending on the nature of a complaint, Chasarik said, Cal-OSHA can launch a workplace inspection or ask that an employer prove the complaint is groundless.

"Our next step now would be to evaluate the complaint," she said of the filing. - (JOHN ROGERS/Sapa, August 2010)