Okay I read this, and I gotta wonder: if some make-up girl is really giving it up to guys, girls, directors, crew, actors and anyone in between "on a daily basis", why isn't somebody filming her? This make-up girl sounds like a total freak ho, and not some fake Jenna Haze freak ho, but the real deal.

Why doesn't somebody get this chick in front of the camera? Just make sure to wear a condom.


Chlamydia Outbreak Source?

Ron writes: "Rumor has it the recent Chlamydia epidemic is once again originating from a certain bisexual make-up artist, well-known in the XXX industry to be offering all her bodily orifices to cast, crew and directors alike without discrimination on a near-daily basis. Isn't it ironic that the people who work behind the scenes are sometimes more promiscuous than the talent?"



From SimplyJimmyD;

According to an amateur CDC sleuth corresponding with LukeIsBack.com, porn's current chlamydia outbreak--an outbreak the writer claims has reached "epidemic" proportions--can be traced back to a single individual: a porn-set MUA.

(Note: For anyone scratching their heads in mild confusion, CDC stands for the U.S. Dept. of Health's Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and MUA--having nothing to do with captured Viet Nam War vets--is an acronym for Makeup Artist.)

Anyway, I find it interesting that--whenever there's seems to be a health problem amongst porn's talent pool--it's so often claimed that it originates from outside the domestic talent pool-- you know, like Brazilians or Canadians and, this time, MUAs.

The ACDCS (Amateur CDC Sleuth) also lays blame on the aforementioned MUA by citing bisexuality and indiscriminate and wanton "offering (of) all her bodily orifices to cast, crew and directors alike."

Whether or not any of this is true, I have no idea. But I kinda noticed that the ACDCS--who by virtue of his concerned email to Mr. L. Ford must have simply forgotten to mention it-- forgot to mention anything about cast, crew, or directors exercising any form of restraint or responsibility when being offered these allegedly disease-ridden, bi-sexual, bodily orifices. And, I might add cuz the ACDCS added, being offered them on a "near-daily basis."

So here's the deal guys: If you're unsure you should be plowing a certain furrow with your man-plow, maybe you ought to listen to your instincts. And when being offered "bodily orifices" from someone who, word has it, wantonly does so "without discrimination on a near-daily basis," you might consider thinking twice about taking that person up on their offer.

The ACDCS ended his commentary with these insightful words: "Isn't it ironic that the people who work behind the scenes are sometimes more promiscuous than the talent?"

jimmyD sez: Well, yeah... maybe... key word being "sometimes."