- A girl we could fantasize about not just fucking- but marrying.

You do realize that the personae you see on screen do not actually exist in flesh & blood? That, however badly, the actresses are acting? Even with mainstream Hollywood most fans realize that the girl on the screen is not Jessica Simpson, but someone else Jessica Simpson is portraying.

(you seem to be suggesting that you know Jessica Simpson so well from watching TV that you're convinced she's ideal marriage material, which is amazing to me)

- A girl who doesn't need money

I know of nobody who doesn't need money. I know some who need very little, and some so wealthy the question is irrelevant. However, they all have bills to pay, groceries to buy, etc. Everybody needs some money.

- finding the perfect girl to marry

The perfect partner does not exist. It's all about compromise, deciding what you really need to have, and what you can put up with. You'll never find the perfect by watching TV anyway.

- safe sex

You do realize that the only guaranteed protection against HIV is to avoid HIV+ partners (or abstinence), right? Everything else is just playing the odds.

With condoms, CDC data suggests a 95% success rate. That sounds pretty good until you start doing the math on someone who has 3 contacts per week over six months (or more, perhaps much more). Now things don't look so good. Sure the numbers are better but so far from reasonable they might as well be the same.

My opposition to condom-only porn is because I believe that it would make porn less safe, and that we would see more HIV outbreaks. I believe condoms would displace AIM testing and result in less overall protection.

Thus far I believe that AIM testing and rigorous exclusion of all HIV+ performers as being behind the overall success in HIV prevention in porn since AIM was founded. With bareback porn I would guess most of the performers take testing fairly seriously as do the producers (T.T. Boy aside).

But if condoms are required I suspect people are so bombarded with claims that "condoms prevent HIV" that they'll slip on test demands, and people will be providing non-AIM results, unverifiable results, and fake HIV- results.

People are often a little more cautious when they perceive an element of danger. If they believe condoms eliminate that danger then caution may fly out the window, and a test result (or lack thereof) that is a non-starter today might well be grudgingly accepted since "it'll be OK - we're using condoms".