California would ban boys and girls sections at big retailers under proposed law

easyt65

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2015
Messages
69,563
Reaction score
29,299
Points
2,330
I present to you case # 2,445,445,444.5 why the left is evil incarnate.

California’s large retailers would have to do away with boy and girl signage for toys and child care aisles, under a bill being considered by state lawmakers.

Assembly Bill 1084 would require retailers with 500 or more employees “to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where the majority of those items being offered are displayed, regardless of whether an item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys,” according to the Legislative Counsel’s digest of the bill.

The bill would also prohibit the use of signage to indicate whether a particular child care item or toy is for boys or girls. Online retailers with a physical presence in California would be required to label their toy and child care sections in a unisex or gender neutral way.

Liberal Socialist Democrats are a political celebration of mental insanity and stupidity.

They can't tell the difference between a penis and a vagina, can't tell what restroom they should use, seek to make child trafficking and pedophilia accepted, seek to force acceptance of males competing in athletic competitions with women (because growing up these sissies could only beat girls at sports)....

In other nations they would be laughed at, mocked, and by some Muslim nation I would bet - be 'purged' / 'eradicated' (which I am NOT advocating). Still, these insane ideas and ideology should be soundly rejected and the 1 thing these days that needs to be 'cancelled'.
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
24,593
Reaction score
17,602
Points
2,365
I present to you case # 2,445,445,444.5 why the left is evil incarnate.

California’s large retailers would have to do away with boy and girl signage for toys and child care aisles, under a bill being considered by state lawmakers.

Assembly Bill 1084 would require retailers with 500 or more employees “to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where the majority of those items being offered are displayed, regardless of whether an item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys,” according to the Legislative Counsel’s digest of the bill.

The bill would also prohibit the use of signage to indicate whether a particular child care item or toy is for boys or girls. Online retailers with a physical presence in California would be required to label their toy and child care sections in a unisex or gender neutral way.
My son's best friend in his elementary school years always brought his Barbie doll with him for sleepovers. Not a new, jazzy dressed one; she was definitely a well worn item, her hair a mess, all grimy like a Barbie 7 or 8 years old would be.

I never asked.
And for that you want to turn the entire society upsidedown?
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
24,593
Reaction score
17,602
Points
2,365
The asinine California legislature strikes again. They are given so much access to time and money to
indulge their idiocy.
It may take ten years and 3 federal judges to enact it into law even in whacked out california
 

ding

Confront reality
Joined
Oct 25, 2016
Messages
81,020
Reaction score
7,813
Points
1,855
Location
Houston
Oh brother. The new moral majority.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
67,943
Reaction score
18,234
Points
2,220
I present to you case # 2,445,445,444.5 why the left is evil incarnate.

California’s large retailers would have to do away with boy and girl signage for toys and child care aisles, under a bill being considered by state lawmakers.

Assembly Bill 1084 would require retailers with 500 or more employees “to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where the majority of those items being offered are displayed, regardless of whether an item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys,” according to the Legislative Counsel’s digest of the bill.

The bill would also prohibit the use of signage to indicate whether a particular child care item or toy is for boys or girls. Online retailers with a physical presence in California would be required to label their toy and child care sections in a unisex or gender neutral way.
My son's best friend in his elementary school years always brought his Barbie doll with him for sleepovers. Not a new, jazzy dressed one; she was definitely a well worn item, her hair a mess, all grimy like a Barbie 7 or 8 years old would be.

I never asked.
And for that you want to turn the entire society upsidedown?
Reorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
24,593
Reaction score
17,602
Points
2,365
Reorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
I doubt if you’ll see toy guns in the future

but little girls panties next to the boys underwear?

there is no point except to promote sexual confusion
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
67,943
Reaction score
18,234
Points
2,220
Reorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
I doubt if you’ll see toy guns in the future

but little girls panties next to the boys underwear?

there is no point except to promote sexual confusion
Underwear isn't sold in the toy department, and no kid is going to get confused about their sexual identity because Tinkerbell is on the same aisle as GI Joe. Believe me. This is actually an old idea. Making a law out of it is crazy, but my best friend (a girl) had a big ole Tonka steam shovel because she liked that kind of stuff (and had a monster sized sand box) and on Christmas morning when she opened it with squeals of joy, no one thought it was weird. She's a girl still. Married 30 some years, kids, grandkids, wears makeup and everything.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
67,943
Reaction score
18,234
Points
2,220
Reorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
I doubt if you’ll see toy guns in the future

but little girls panties next to the boys underwear?

there is no point except to promote sexual confusion
Toy guns aren't going anywhere, but even if they were gone, it wouldn't work. I wouldn't allow even toy guns in my house when my son was growing up, so he joined the Marines.
LOL
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
24,593
Reaction score
17,602
Points
2,365
Reorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
Read the bill

it isnt limited to toys

This bill would require a retail department store with 500 or more employees that sells childcare items, children’s clothing, or toys, to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where the majority of those items being offered are displayed, regardless of whether an item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys. The bill would prohibit the use of signage within each undivided area indicating that particular items are for either girls or for boys. If a retail department store places a childcare item, an article of children’s clothing, a toy, or anything that could be considered a combination thereof, in an area of its sales floor outside of the undivided areas where the majority of like items are sold, the bill would prohibit the use of any signage with respect to the item that indicates that it is either for girls or for boys.
 

Nostra

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 7, 2019
Messages
24,239
Reaction score
20,001
Points
2,415
If you listen to Libtards, there should be 27 sections.
 

BlackSand

Nobody
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
15,505
Reaction score
5,288
Points
380
Location
Wherever I May Roam

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
67,943
Reaction score
18,234
Points
2,220
I'm not aware of any online retailers that separate toys by gender. Toys are usually just listed in a "toys" section of the site, or they're separated by age, manufacturer or theme/type/genre (board games, video games, etc). For that matter, I'm not aware of any big box stores that label toys by gender either. Take Target or Walmart, for instance. They have toy aisles that are stocked by age group. Most kids toys are already unisex, and while certain toys that are traditionally girls toys are grouped somewhat together (dolls, barbies, princess), the aisle or section is not labeled girl or boy. This is just one more example of busybody lawmakers creating legislation to "fix" a problem that doesn't exist.
I thought maybe it's just because I don't live in a cosmopolitan area, but I was thinking the same thing. I don't actually ever seeing signs for girls and boys except clothing.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
67,943
Reaction score
18,234
Points
2,220
My son's best friend in his elementary school years always brought his Barbie doll with him for sleepovers.
lmao...yikes.
Yeah, and the boy wasn't at all a sissy kid. I'll have to ask my son about it someday.
Of course he wasn't a sissy ... He had a chick with him all the time.
And if he wanted her naked, he just took her clothes off ... :thup:

.
Could have been the boobies action. It would be like him.
 

Papageorgio

The Ultimate Winner
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
49,212
Reaction score
10,111
Points
2,070
Location
PNW
Why don't they do away with men and women's section combine them and the dressing rooms? The only people that would complain would be Republicans, the left would love to share all.
 

Ringtone

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2019
Messages
2,970
Reaction score
876
Points
140
I present to you case # 2,445,445,444.5 why the left is evil incarnate.

California’s large retailers would have to do away with boy and girl signage for toys and child care aisles, under a bill being considered by state lawmakers.

Assembly Bill 1084 would require retailers with 500 or more employees “to maintain undivided areas of its sales floor where the majority of those items being offered are displayed, regardless of whether an item has traditionally been marketed for either girls or for boys,” according to the Legislative Counsel’s digest of the bill.

The bill would also prohibit the use of signage to indicate whether a particular child care item or toy is for boys or girls. Online retailers with a physical presence in California would be required to label their toy and child care sections in a unisex or gender neutral way.
Why would you want govt dictating to companies how to market their products to consumers? And regulating FREE SPEECH rights to describe and print labels and packaging for most effective marketing???

Now if CA wants to promote a certain culture: Why not give TAX BREAKS to companies that choose to meet their labeling or social engineering standards? Nothing wrong with giving tax incentives. But not fair to punish or force companies to comply with social legislation that doesn't have anything to do with public health and safety regulations preventing risks of danger, harm or damage to consumers. Social legislation is subjective and up to individual choice, so this could be rewarded with grants or tax breaks but not punished or coerced by govt mandates.
The government has no business insinuating itself in this wise in any way, shape or form.
 

FA_Q2

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
19,563
Reaction score
3,561
Points
290
Location
Washington State
I'm not aware of any online retailers that separate toys by gender. Toys are usually just listed in a "toys" section of the site, or they're separated by age, manufacturer or theme/type/genre (board games, video games, etc). For that matter, I'm not aware of any big box stores that label toys by gender either. Take Target or Walmart, for instance. They have toy aisles that are stocked by age group. Most kids toys are already unisex, and while certain toys that are traditionally girls toys are grouped somewhat together (dolls, barbies, princess), the aisle or section is not labeled girl or boy. This is just one more example of busybody lawmakers creating legislation to "fix" a problem that doesn't exist.
I thought maybe it's just because I don't live in a cosmopolitan area, but I was thinking the same thing. I don't actually ever seeing signs for girls and boys except clothing.
the actual bill: Bill Text - AB-1084 Gender neutral retail departments.

Because signage is not necessary - the isles are clearly separated. At my Walmart the boys items sit on a blue shelf and the girls on pink shelves. But the point of the law is not eliminating signage - that is not seeing the forest for the trees. You even admit that clothing is clearly marked so the signs do, indeed, exist. Focusing on the existence of signs is nothing more than trying to ignore the elephant in the room.

We all agree that major department stores (and most small ones as well) separate girl and boy cloths, toys and other items by sex. That is simply a hard fact. If anyone wants to pretend otherwise than a conversation is irrelevant, they live in a fantasy land that even large doses of psilocybin will not get us to. For the rest of us, it is clear that this bill is intended to end that practice as much as humanly possible.

The very idea that we need to restructure basic things like shopping that clearly makes the process worse for 99% of people in a failed attempt to make <1% of the population feel more comfortable is beyond asinine in the extreme. It is clearly mental. That a law making body thinks that this is in any shape or form a good idea or even a political bone to throw to people that have never complained about the layout of stores is an indication that the government is not only to fucking large and invasive but that it is fundamentally broken.
 

OldLady

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2015
Messages
67,943
Reaction score
18,234
Points
2,220
I'm not aware of any online retailers that separate toys by gender. Toys are usually just listed in a "toys" section of the site, or they're separated by age, manufacturer or theme/type/genre (board games, video games, etc). For that matter, I'm not aware of any big box stores that label toys by gender either. Take Target or Walmart, for instance. They have toy aisles that are stocked by age group. Most kids toys are already unisex, and while certain toys that are traditionally girls toys are grouped somewhat together (dolls, barbies, princess), the aisle or section is not labeled girl or boy. This is just one more example of busybody lawmakers creating legislation to "fix" a problem that doesn't exist.
I thought maybe it's just because I don't live in a cosmopolitan area, but I was thinking the same thing. I don't actually ever seeing signs for girls and boys except clothing.
the actual bill: Bill Text - AB-1084 Gender neutral retail departments.

Because signage is not necessary - the isles are clearly separated. At my Walmart the boys items sit on a blue shelf and the girls on pink shelves. But the point of the law is not eliminating signage - that is not seeing the forest for the trees. You even admit that clothing is clearly marked so the signs do, indeed, exist. Focusing on the existence of signs is nothing more than trying to ignore the elephant in the room.

We all agree that major department stores (and most small ones as well) separate girl and boy cloths, toys and other items by sex. That is simply a hard fact. If anyone wants to pretend otherwise than a conversation is irrelevant, they live in a fantasy land that even large doses of psilocybin will not get us to. For the rest of us, it is clear that this bill is intended to end that practice as much as humanly possible.

The very idea that we need to restructure basic things like shopping that clearly makes the process worse for 99% of people in a failed attempt to make <1% of the population feel more comfortable is beyond asinine in the extreme. It is clearly mental. That a law making body thinks that this is in any shape or form a good idea or even a political bone to throw to people that have never complained about the layout of stores is an indication that the government is not only to fucking large and invasive but that it is fundamentally broken.
I agree it's a stupid law, and considering that it is copying changes Target made five years ago, I don't think it's going to affect things as much as you think.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top