Fridae

Chi Chi LaRue, porn director
If you have even a passing fascination with gay porn, chances are you've heard of Chi Chi LaRue. The famed director has filmed "hundreds" of X-rated movies, "lot of good ones, lot of bad," but there's one thing you won't see in a Chi Chi LaRue video: anal sex without a condom. In fact, you won't even see an oral cum shot, says the director, best known for the multiple award-winning Echoes, as well as Idol Country, Shock and the Link series of videos. We caught up with Chi Chi recently to discuss the barebacking phenomenon, her self-proclaimed position as the "queen of sleaze" and the ongoing debate between artistic freedom and public health.

Q: Why do you think barebacking videos have sprung up as a new niche market in the last two years?

A: Any time that people are willing to give the public something different, they're going to scoop it up-whether it's cum shots in the mouth or barebacking or whatever. But the question remains as to whether or not it's right. I feel personally that it's wrong. I've been called a "Condom Nazi" and all kinds of things because I won't have barebacking in my videos.

Q: How would you respond to your critics?

A: Honestly, I can't stand any criticism. If one person on a chat forum says I make a bad movie, it affects me, even if there are 100 who say the movie was great.

Q: Is the production of barebacking videos simply about personal expression and freedom of speech, or do you view it as a public health issue as well?

A: People who make barebacking films, I don't take away their right to make them. They have a freedom of speech and expression, but I'm personally not going to show barebacking or oral cum shots, because I think there is a responsibility as a filmmaker to do what's safe.

Most of the time, I am the queen of sleaze. If there are perverted, nasty things you're not supposed to do, I do it. But I can't responsibly show barebacking to a young guy in the Midwest who uses adult videos as a guide or encyclopedia to sex. Because then you have some young kid who worships and emulates porn stars watching an unsafe sex video and thinking it's okay to do it. Look at the way people worship Eminem and preach hate. Or these girls who worship Britney; I love it, but, of course, they look at it and want to do it and be it themselves. People take on what's in the public eye.

I'm not stupid or blind. I know unsafe sex goes on in bathhouses and sex clubs, but I try to portray something I feel is just as hot. My videos will get you off. A condom doesn't lessen the hotness.

Q: Do you think we'll see bigger companies follow the barebacking trend?

A: No one in the mainstream adult [gay] business is going to do it. I don't think we'll see it anyway; I hope they don't. There are all these little companies coming up and doing these videos because people want it. They're doing barebacking, watersports, scat. They'd do bestiality if they could get away with it. Everyone wants to see the craziest thing they can see-at no risk to them-with the remote control in hand. And I admit, the dirtier the video, I love it. But when it comes to barebacking, I have friends who purchase these videos, but I won't watch them. I can't be a hypocrite like that, as someone who's such a strong advocate against it.

---

Q: What, if any, responsibility do you have to the performers in your videos? Are any precautions taken against the risk of HIV transmission?

A: It's all what you call safer sex; unless everything is wrapped in cellophane and nothing touches, it's only safer sex. On my set, no one has to do anything they don't want to do, but it's their responsibility to check things out with their eyes before they put it in their mouth. It's like picking candy off the ground: Look at it for hair and then pop it in. Everyone has to be clean on my set, have a clean butt hole, take a shower. There are always risks in rimming and sucking without a condom. And of course, if I see something amiss, if something looks strange, I put a stop to the scene. I've had to do it. Some actors have had to leave the set and go to the doctor before I continue to let them work. I do what I can. But I strongly feel -- and I have said this forever -- if everyone had sex on porn sets exclusively, no one would get anything. I've been directing for 12 years, and I've never had anyone come back and tell me, 'I got something on your set.'

Q: Is there anything else about this issue that you'd like to discuss?

A: Everybody should take care of themselves responsibly. Watch my movies for hot sex with guys wearing condoms. And if you choose to have unsafe sex, you have to live with the consequences. Just hopefully, there won't be any.

Opposing point-of-view
Paul Morris, porn producer
You can guess a lot about Treasure Island Media's X-rated videos just from the titles: Raw Shots, Swallow, Animals and Bones for Cumpuppy, Indeed, these videos feature scenes of men fucking without condoms and taking semen in their mouths. According to Treasure Island's Paul Morris, who began as a pornographer when he was just a kid by drawing and photographing neighborhood boys showing off their penises, portraying honesty in sex is more important than portraying "safety." Morris recently shared with GayHealth the reasons he produces barebacking videos and responded to the critics who call his films irresponsible.

Q: Why do you think barebacking videos have sprung up as a new niche market in the last two years?

A: Because sex is too important for lies.

Q: What is your response to critics who say that producing and distributing barebacking videos is harmful and encourages unsafe sex among the gay population?

A: The best purpose of pornography is the honest documentation of sexual practice. Since sex is and always will be at the heart of a developing gay culture, honesty and accuracy in sex media are especially important. A culture or a social group becomes vulnerable if its internecine media fail to tell the truth. Ultimately, I have to privilege the dichotomy of "honest/dishonest" over "safe/unsafe."

Q: Is the production of barebacking videos simply about personal expression and freedom of speech, or do you view it as a public health issue as well?

A: I'm not sure that I can agree with such a clean and simple differentiation between "public health" and "personal expression". They're complexly intertwined. Again, the basic issue is honesty. I don't see how the "public health" of gay men can be good if the realities and practices that define us are presented through the filter of a politically determined bias. Calling for porn to censor itself according to the dictates of any agenda -- political, medical or otherwise -- is as ill-advised as requiring that art or higher education be constrained by a political or moral agenda. What scares people is that porn really does have a documentary basis: the men in the video are really doing this, and this, in turn, is what other men are really doing. But this just makes honesty and accuracy even more important.

---

Q: Is there anything else about your company or about this issue that you'd like to discuss or that you think is relevant to this story?

A: Professionally, the job of a pornographer is to assist in the development and maintenance of the sexual culture in which he lives and works. I take this responsibility seriously. As I've said in other interviews and articles, being a pornographer is a great honor. I don't believe it's right to lie, and I don't believe it's culturally productive to create porn videos that are fairy tales, showing behaviors that have nothing to do with the sex that I see around me every day. There are utopian pornographers out there, but I'm not one of them.

I'd also like to dispel the myth that there's a massive amount of money to be made in producing maverick porn. There's a much larger and far more lucrative market for mainstream and politically correct gay porn: Playing by the rules always pays more. The pornographer I'm most often compared to, Christopher Rage, died poor. And then there's the tendency of certain kinds of religious and political groups to initiate legal action against maverick porn. I'm not getting rich, but my attorney is. And I've had two death threats so far. Men I've spoken with have actually told me that they're afraid to buy my videos because they're not sure it's legal. And of course, the videos are completely legal, but these men are caught in a state of fear. In itself, that's sad. What does it say about the health of a group or a social minority if its members are afraid that depictions of their core behaviors are illegal?

Editorial Note by Dr. Stephen Goldstone
Clearly, these two influential gay pornographers, Chi Chi LaRue and Paul Morris, have opposing views about barebacking in porn. While they are certainly entitled to their views, I feel it is my duty -- as GayHealth.com's medical director -- to weigh in with my own thoughts on the subject.

I am strongly opposed to barebacking in porn. When people watch porn movies, they are not watching for documentary purposes, but for entertainment. If Morris thinks he is making a documentary, then his films should be presented as such. I think LaRue is exactly right in saying some people may use gay porn as a rule book by which to have sex. If a viewer sees a hot star having unprotected sex, the viewer is liable to follow the example to disastrous consequences. I am not saying that all sex must incorporate condoms (for example, in the case of two HIV negative men in a monogamous relationship), but each situation must be examined and the risk must be calculated.

Paul Morris feels it his duty to document barebacking because, he says, this is the type of sex gay men have. But that's not necessarily true -- gay men do have safer-sex. And sex doesn't have to be unsafe to be hot.

It is also my opinion that Morris has a responsibility to the gay community to portray healthy and safer sex. HIV is once again on the rise, and people are having problems soaking in the safer sex message -- we don't need Morris encouraging men to seroconvert. If he wants to show unsafe sex in his films, perhaps he should frame his stories in the context of two men who are both HIV negative and in a monogamous relationship.