Per Gene Ross Rant:
"California Labor Section 1700.35. No talent agency shall knowingly permit any persons of bad character, prostitutes, gamblers, intoxicated persons, or procurers to frequent, or be employed in, the place of business of the talent agency."
Whorebot's Analysis on this:
So as long as the porn whores that hook are not employed by or frequent a "talent agency" - everything is on the up-and-up. It doesn't say they can't be "represented" by the agency so long as they don't "frequent" it (I guess they must get their checks by mail).
So the Agency owners are exempt too? As long as their employees are clean? Or is an Owner a de-facto employee under the law?
And I suppose the only reasonable way an Agency Owner would know a person is a prostitute, pimp, or gambler is if they had a criminal record of it. Maybe in a civil trial/proceeding, a plaintiff could somehow prove you knew something about that person.
Note also that the law does not actually prohibit an AGENCY from BEING A PIMP!
But bad character? How in the fuck do you judge that? I would just start with the assumption that they all have bad character.
And finally, none of this applies to the studios - so they can pretty much employ the scum of the earth if they want (and some say they do).
Someone with a lot of time and dried out lube on their hands should make a ranked list of the porn whores that openly hook on Eros. Remember when it used to be a big secret as to which ones hooked? Now you can pretty much assume they all do for a certain price - which has dropped lately along with the rest of the industry - damn internet anyway!
_________________________
‘Harder!’ she begged, ‘Harder!! Tell me what you think of Chomsky!’
Previous Topic
Index
