The growing trend of gay porn studios switching to produce content without condoms has become so prevalent, major pro-condom studios have started to jump on the so-called bareback bandwagon.
In the most shocking (read: not shocking at all) announcement since staunch condom advocate Michael Lucas released his first bareback film and subsequently outed the HIV statuses of his performers, gay porn conglomerate Falcon Studios has announced that the recently released film “California Dreamin 1” features “digitally removed condoms.”
Falcon writes about the content of their latest production: “Steamy fantasies come to life when Tony Dimarco’s vision of ‘California Dreamin’ 1’ captures - in classic Falcon fashion - what happens when temperatures soar and stunning studs get rock hard, remove their clothing and turn their poolside sexual desires into reality. [...] the stunning cast of ‘California Dreamin’ 1’ deliver chapter and verse in an evocation of primal heat evoked by perfect bodies in the sun. Pass the sun screen and the lube.” The cast of ‘California Dreamin’ 1’ consists of Liam Magnuson, Donnie Dean, Adam Wirthmore, Angel Rock, Lance Luciano, Ray Diaz, Ray Han, and Ryan Rose.
Falcon has long been one of the leading studios for condom advocacy in the gay porn industry. But, regardless of what terribly mistaken advocates will lead you to believe, bareback porn sells better than films that use condoms, this is a fact. The logic behind asking models to wear condoms and then spending a large amount of time removing them in post-production, obviously, is to sell more copies of a film while still being able to coin it as “safe.” “Safe,” here, implying that performers have little risk of transmitting HIV or other STDs while wearing condoms.
Although Falcon also owns and continues to distribute one of the largest collections of “vintage” bareback porn, they sell it under the title “pre-condom.” “California Dreamin’ 1” director Tony Dimarco calls his new film “a throwback to the classic, pre-condom Falcon poolside movies from the 70s and 80s.”
Gay Porn Blog commentator Jay hits the nail on the head, to say the least: “One of the big arguments against bareback porn is that it sends ‘the wrong message’ by glamorizing unsafe sex. So, if viewers are unaware of the digital trick, won’t that message still be sent? Conversely, if we bareback lovers are aware of the digital removal of the condom, the magic will be gone (at least as far as ‘raw’ appeal; the scene might still be hot).
I don’t know exactly which segment of the market they’re trying to please and what they’re trying to accomplish with this silliness: those who love bareback will be automatically turned off by the fact it’s fake; and those naive enough not to notice will probably be hooked on bareback porn which I assume is not Falcon’s intention.”