Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
And for that you want to turn the entire society upsidedown?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 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.
I never asked.
It may take ten years and 3 federal judges to enact it into law even in whacked out californiaThe asinine California legislature strikes again. They are given so much access to time and money to
indulge their idiocy.
Yeah, and the boy wasn't at all a sissy kid. I'll have to ask my son about it someday.lmao...yikes.My son's best friend in his elementary school years always brought his Barbie doll with him for sleepovers.
Reorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'And for that you want to turn the entire society upsidedown?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 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.
I never asked.
I doubt if you’ll see toy guns in the futureReorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
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.I doubt if you’ll see toy guns in the futureReorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
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.I doubt if you’ll see toy guns in the futureReorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
but little girls panties next to the boys underwear?
there is no point except to promote sexual confusion
Read the billReorganizing the dolls and toy guns in the toy department is 'turning the world upside down?'
Yeah, and the boy wasn't at all a sissy kid. I'll have to ask my son about it someday.lmao...yikes.My son's best friend in his elementary school years always brought his Barbie doll with him for sleepovers.
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.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.
Could have been the boobies action. It would be like him.Yeah, and the boy wasn't at all a sissy kid. I'll have to ask my son about it someday.lmao...yikes.My son's best friend in his elementary school years always brought his Barbie doll with him for sleepovers.
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 ...
.
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???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.
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 actual bill: Bill Text - AB-1084 Gender neutral retail departments.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.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 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.the actual bill: Bill Text - AB-1084 Gender neutral retail departments.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.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.
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.