Posted on 03/02/2020 12:27:26 PM PST by lowbridge
A new bill in the California state assembly would ban stores from separating their toys, clothing and childcare items into boys’ and girls’ sections and would fine them $1,000 if they did so.
The bill, sponsored by Democratic Assemblymember Evan Low (Silicon Valley), says each “retail department store shall maintain one, undivided area of its sales floor where, if it sells toys, all toys, regardless of whether a particular item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys, shall be displayed.”
The bill, AB2826, includes similar language for clothing and “childcare articles” such as pacifiers. It would apply only to retail chains with 500 or more employees, with each violation costing $1,000.
A legislative counsel’s digest accompanying the bill makes clear its intent.
“This bill would require a retail department store … to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where, if it sells childcare articles, children’s clothing, or toys, all childcare items, all clothing for children, or all toys, regardless of whether a particular item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys, shall be displayed,” the digest says.
The goal is to have a “gender-neutral” retail department, the bill says.
A press release from Low’s office said children should not feel “stigmatized for wearing a dinosaur shirt or playing with a Barbie doll.” Separating toys and clothes by gender “makes it more difficult for the consumer to compare products,” the release added. It also “incorrectly implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate,” the press release said.
“I was inspired to introduce this bill after 8-year-old Britten asked, ‘Why should a store tell me what a girl’s shirt or toy is?’” Low said.
The bill would “help children express themselves freely and without bias,” he added.
“We need to let kids be kids,”
(Excerpt) Read more at christianheadlines.com ...
Yep. Divide 192 by 120 (total number of CA legislators). Sounds about right.
WOW
Because an 8 year old asked a dumb question?
I bet 8 year olds are not their primary customers.
When 8 year olds start doing all of the buying, then they MIGHT listen to 8 year olds.
This is RIDICULOUS.
So then , while this is targeted at children’s items, will this extend to the women’s department and men’s department in stores? Will it eventually be illegal to have racks of dresses in a separate section? Will women’s dresses have to be interspersed with men’s shirts?
And why is California spending time on such nonsense in the first place?
“I was inspired to introduce this bill after 8-year-old Britten asked, ‘Why should a store tell me what a girl’s shirt or toy is?’”
BS.
No 8 year old would use this phrasing.
And if we want to go down this road, what right does a handful of legislative dictators have to tell a private merchant what a girl’s shirt or toy is? They are going to have to make that determination if they want to fine a store. Who are they to make that determination?
Morons
“...8-year-old Britten asked, ‘Why should a store tell me what a girl’s shirt or toy is?’”
Yes, and there is no reason to separate the infants’/babies products from those that are designed for mature folks.
It is also offensive to sort items by size, because some people might have their feelings hurt. A huge open area with all merchandise just randomly displayed would work best, IMHO.
/s :)
Stores are arranged for marketing and convenience of the shopper, I’d think this social justice genius should ask parents and stop taking legislative advice from children.
2 Tim 4:3-4 is not about secular culture. Paul was talking about the state of the church. THAT is the scary part.
No, the goal is control freakery.
2 Timothy 3:1-8 King James Version (KJV)
3 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts,
7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
King James Version (KJV)
Public Domain
Being ‘progressive’ has become a reliable indicator of retarded mental and emotional development.
This is what happens when you let the LGBTQs run the government.
—
For those on this thread who have posted the word “insanity”... I disagree. This is NOT insanity.
This is a step towards absolute power.
It is quite sane indeed. Very, very, very, very evil. But quite sane.
Grappling with the Big Issues of the day, I see.
The madness only grows.
All this because they hate “male and female He created them”.
They are denying human nature.
Obviously they want to make it a felony to sell pink and blue pacifiers.
No, the distinction male/female isn’t some patriarchal plot to take over the world. It’s nature.
Further, if you don't have boy and girl clothes departments, you're still going to have to divide things up according to type of clothes and sizes. It doesn't matter what you call it. Unless they pass a law that requires all clothes to be ‘mixed up’ with no rational ‘sections’ (e.g. dresses, pants, shirts, leggings, etc.), and no sections according to size, it won't matter if it's labelled girls or boys. It will become immediately apparent....
“Male and female created he them;” Genesis 5.2
Now human retailers are denying God’s human distinctions?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.