Manwin On Board to Help Fund Performer Testing… NICE!

from Thanks Dan 🙂

Manwin to Donate $50K Monthly for APHSS Performer Testing

CANOGA PARK, Calif. — Officials from Manwin and the Free Speech Coalition’s APHSS program said today that they will start up next month a "Performer Subsidy Fund" to subsidize talent testing.

Manwin plans to donate $50,000 monthly to the fund through the rest of the year, according to the plan that will use the FSC’s APHSS database. The FSC would be responsible for reimbursing performers who tested through the database.

The program, unprecedented for the adult entertainment industry, is scheduled to begin Aug. 1 and is available for all adult talent, even if they do not perform in a Manwin production.
The "FSC will set up a separate accounting database that will be used for payment , keeping performer addresses separate from the APHSS database," said the trade group, which noted that checks cut to performers will be mailed in the first week of each month.

Manwin’s role for the Performer Subsidy Fund goes further than the $50,000-a-month donation; the Luxembourg-based adult entertainment conglomerate, which initiated the program, plans to contribute $35,000 for administrative costs through the end of year.

There also are hopes, FSC and Manwin officials said, that other adult content producers will come forward and contribute to the fund.  
The FSC, Manwin and other participating producers could take the program into the next year after an evaluation of the first 90 days in mid December. The FSC plans to utilize Zoomerang to survey performers for analysis.

The fund will have its own bank account and associated accounting database and, according to the project plan, the stakeholders would create an emergency fund from returned checks for first- and second-generation identification and testing in the case of an HIV positive result.
Communications efforts, Manwin and FSC said, would be implemented through email and Twitter to performers, agents and providers on how to sign up for the program. And on Tuesday, the fund’s stakeholders plan on actively seeking out other producers inviting them to contribute to the fund.

Manwin’s latest move into the arena of performer testing is an unparalleled move for the business, and one that shows the muscle power of one of the largest operators of adult properties. It also represents Manwin’s commitment to the adult industry trade group’s efforts with APHSS, which was launched shortly after the former AIM Healthcare Clinic shut down.
Just last month, Manwin — whose portfolio includes Brazzers,  Reality Kings, Digital Playground, Twistys and a slew of adult tube sites as well as licensor of Playboy Premium — said that it would adopt APHSS’ performer testing standards and announced it purchased the Gen Probe Aptima machine for Cutting Edge Testing. The piece of equipment performs the Aptima RNA Qualitive Assay for HIV detection.

Manwin Managing Partner, Fabian Thylmann said: “This Fund was conceptualized to alleviate some of the expenses, and financial burden, performers may be facing due to occupational testing. We’re grateful the FSC agreed to support this project, and hope others in the industry will back it as well.”

FSC Executive Director Diane Duke said that "when Manwin called and told me that they wanted to help all performers by subsidizing the cost of test, we were thrilled."
"They put up the funds and we will implement the program," she said. "The program is open for other producers to contribute as well — the more money that comes in, the more we will be able to send to performers."


  1. Karmafan

    I thought Michael’s analogy was pretty spot on MS. Its kinda comparing apples and oranges but still gets the point across quite well.

  2. Anthony Kennerson

    Uhhh…Mr. South???

    Porn performers are professionals, too…and they generally are capable of assessing the risks of certain scenes before they agree to do them.

    Also, there isn’t planning involved in doing porn scenes?? Really?? You mean, anyone off the street can be recruited and paid to perform porn scenes??

    Oh..and there is a sizable difference between Manwin or Adam & Eve or Digital Playground producing a scene, and someone with their digital camera simply taping themselves fooling around. Would you want the authorities to invade personal, private homes to stop the latter from performing bareback sex??

    And, finally….most performers who don’t rely on condoms insist on one- to two-day clean test results before they even sign on the dotted line. Or, they restrict themselves only to performers they know and trust. I guess that they’re too stupid to protect themselves, too, and need the healing powers of AHF and Cal-OSHA to ruin them??

  3. Michael Whiteacre

    Let me break it down so even an angry, broken-down, self-important, old, jilted hillbilly who despises porn people can understand it — maybe…

    A) A certain JOB exists, meaning someone is willing to pay valuable consideration
    to have a certain job performed. This person is willing to enter a bargain to have it performed, and offers a quid pro quo.

    B) That job has basic, elemental requirements. These requirements are defined by the person offering the position.

    c) There exist persons who want to be paid the consideration that the offeror is offering, and apply for the job.

    D) Some of these applicants are willing to perform the job to the letter, and others wish to only perform part of the job. In other words, they seek to negotiate.

    E) It is then up to the person offering to trade valuable consideration in exchange for the job being performed to decide:

    1) whether he wishes to negotiate AT ALL (he may have a reason, such as his inability to sell the finished product it it diverges from his plan, to demand that the job be performed exactly as he demands); or

    2) which, IF ANY, of those who have applied are offering something else of value which might mitigate the fact that they refuse to perform the job as originally conceived (i.e., the person has sufficient “star” value” as to compensate for their unwillingness to perform certain elements of the job).

    Our hillbilly writes, “If this is the best you can do you might want to consider keeping moot.”

    Umm, I think you mean “mute” not “moot” you moron. LMFAO

    Mike, your assertions and insults prove constantly that “people in porn” weren’t “fucking stupid” when they kicked your ass to the curb many moons ago. Hell, you couldn’t even manage a strip club in fucking Ohio without getting yourself crippled on the job.

    Kiss my ass, you ignorant hick sack of shit.

  4. Michael Whiteacre

    And, incidentally, South’s “hair net” example is, without question, the dumbest analogy I’ve ever read. Kitchen employees wear hair nets not as safety equipment, but to prevent hair, dandruff, head lice, etc. from getting in the customers’ food. It’s protection for the customers, not the worker.

    Health and safety regulations for workplaces are tailored to protect workers from harms incurred on the job — harms that are EXTERNAL to the job, not the job itself. For instance, laws that ban smoking in restaurants and bars are designed to protect food servers and bar staff from smoking-related illness. That’s because a bartender is hired to pour drinks, not to inhale smoke. Inhaling smoke, or being “exposed to” smoke, is not what he or she is being paid to do.

    In the case of porn, for condom-less scenes, the performers are being paid to perform sex for the cameras without condoms. They were not paid only to act but yet are being “exposed to” condom-less sex by evil producers. They are being paid to perform without a condom, just as a stunt person is paid to fall down a flight of steps without a helmet. That stunt person can and should use every single piece of safety equipment possible SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHOT. In no-condom porn, sex without a condom is that shot.

    South also asserts, idiotically, that when a stunt person “takes that fall he is in complete control of the situation…” Really? So, you;re saying there are never accidents or injuries on movie sets, Mike? You can find the numbers of on-set injuries online. There are likely more injuries on mainstream sets in California in a single fiscal quarter than there has ever been in the history of adult movies in California. Stunt people (and others) have DIED making mainstream movies. NO OTHER industry has ever been held to the “zero-risk” standard that these fanatics are seeking to apply to porn production.

  5. Third Axis

    I’ve been drawing that same analogy on these boards since back in ’09, when this debate started up again. One can name just about any other industry where risk to life and limb occurs every single day, with statistics that blow porn’s risk factor out of the water.

    How about, oh say, the construction industry. I’m not even going to cite data because only a fool would disregard the THOUSANDS of instances of crushed/severed limbs; incapacitation and/or slow death from chemicals and other substances present in building materials; injury and death from malfunctioning equipment; stuff falling on your fucking head from high places.

    Or you have the agriculture and myriad food industries. Much of the same risks cited above apply here as well, but add in staph infection and other potentially dangerous and lethal risks, like being gored/stomped/crushed by large animals.

    Then you have the military. Sign on the dotted line, then you die. Even with LOTS of safety equipment at your disposal. But the military loves to advertise itself as some kind of high-tech computer gaming convention where young people can gain valuable work skills. The many thousands of crippled vets would disagree, I think.

    And yes, the motion picture industry. Many injuries occur there every year, but thankfully few deaths. Although actor Vic Morrow didn’t fare so well, nor did the two children, My-Ca Dinh Le (age 7), and Renee Shin-Yi Chen (age 6), who died along with him in an accident while filming on a California location back in 1989. Or Brandon Lee, also killed on location, in North Carolina in 1993. Between those two incidents, you already have more fatalities than in all of porn production history.

    The adult industry is undoubtedly being held to a different standard of risk management, and only because it involves people working in a field that is perceived by our society as being morally wrong.

    That is discrimination, plain and simple.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *