Bill Would Require California Retailers To Have Gender-Neutral Sections; Violators Face Fines

[Elixir]

The tyranny of the do-gooders.

Yeah, how dare they CANCEL the LABELS of which conservotards are so fond?



It's a stupid bill, but a far more stupid objection.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But what will the Australians think?!

 

[ronburgundy]

I've got news for Evan Low: if a little boy is being bullied because he is wearing clothes designed and marketed for little girls, it's not because anybody saw him buy it from the 'girls' section.

Very telling that your first reaction wasn't to condemn the bullying.

IKR? Like, the only explanation I have for someone who brings up bullying and not condemning it is that they approve of the bullying.

I have news for metaphor: if a child is being bullied because they are wearing clothes that their peers say are inappropriate for them, it's not because the clothing is inappropriate; rather, it is because the kids who are bullies were given inappropriate messages about who is allowed to wear what.

Obviously, the clothing is not "inappropriate" in any objective sense, since "appropriate" is a relative value judgment and thus inherently subjective. But teasing and bullying does not require that kids are given "messages about who is allowed to wear what". Something just being empirically associated with one sex more than the other is more than enough for kids who violate the empirical norms to be singled out and teased about it. Kids are pattern recognition machines who quickly notice and attend to the unusual an atypical. And getting rid of labels on store aisles will do little to change the divergence in clothing. Take a bunch of random stuff from boys and girls section throw them all in a pile, and watch as little kids before school age easily sort most things into groups that match the section you pulled it from, and then most of them will reject the clothes in the pile not of their sex even though they never saw the sign or those particular clothes before.

Sex-based toy preferences emerge as young as 9 months, pretty much as soon as the infant has the kind of mobility and motor skills to execute a psychological preference, and prior to the age when it is thought infants can form conceptual knowledge of "boy" and "girl" categories (implying they just like "boy" or "girl" toys without having any notion that they belong to those categories. And this meta-analysis of many studies spanning decades shows the difference is highly reliable and large (a full standard deviation, which is larger than any psychological sex difference I've heard of). They conclude that "Gender differences in toy choice exist and appear to be the product of both innate and social forces", with the latter being evidenced by changes in preferences over time, and the size of the difference varying somewhat in different contexts.

It is non-bullying and non-gender sorting that requires teaching and doesn't come naturally. Which obviously doesn't imply it shouldn't be taught or done, unless one adores the naturalistic fallacy the way conservatives do.

 

[TomC]

The tyranny of the do-gooders.

Yeah, how dare they CANCEL the LABELS of which conservotards are so fond?



It's a stupid bill, but a far more stupid objection.

I don't think that the objection is stupid.

For most of my life, the government required gender-neutral marriages. People weren't allowed to choose. Had to be a male and a female. Because the government could enforce the ideology of the powerful, and they did.

It didn't have any utilitarian value. It was all about powerful people forcing their ideology on the rest of us.

I don't see this version of government enforcement of ideological values as an improvement, in the grand scheme of things. I agree with the goal, but I don't trust the government with that much power or influence.

Tom

 

[blastula]

This seems like it will pass, since the Ds have total legislative control in California. Have the California Democrats run out of things to do? Why should the government tell shops how they must organise their shop floor space?

What makes you think it will pass?

 

[ronburgundy]

The bill was introduced 13 months ago, went nowhere and "died at desk" back in November.

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.


I guess the bigot-blogs notified their minions about this manufactured outrage based upon shoddy non-fact-checked journalism triggered by last week's outrage that conservatives could no longer tell which plastic potato they should have sex with.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The bill was introduced 13 months ago, went nowhere and "died at desk" back in November.

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.


I guess the bigot-blogs notified their minions about this manufactured outrage based upon shoddy non-fact-checked journalism triggered by last week's outrage that conservatives could no longer tell which plastic potato they should have sex with.

So what you are saying is that King Franco is still dead?

 

[ZiprHead]

The bill was introduced 13 months ago, went nowhere and "died at desk" back in November.

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.


I guess the bigot-blogs notified their minions about this manufactured outrage based upon shoddy non-fact-checked journalism triggered by last week's outrage that conservatives could no longer tell which plastic potato they should have sex with.

Is this like when Metaphor poo-pooed the idea that there might be violence over the Biden win?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

The bill was introduced 13 months ago, went nowhere and "died at desk" back in November.

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.


I guess the bigot-blogs notified their minions about this manufactured outrage based upon shoddy non-fact-checked journalism triggered by last week's outrage that conservatives could no longer tell which plastic potato they should have sex with.

Is this like when Metaphor poo-pooed the idea that there might be violence over the Biden win?

Didn't the Red Hats fulfill his prophecy?

 

[TomC]

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.

The CBS report is dated yesterday.

Maybe CBS is the problem?
Tom

 

[Metaphor]

Is there a transgender kid on your lawn again?

I don't have a lawn and I'm not afraid of gender 'nonconformity' in children or adults.

 

[KeepTalking]

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.

The CBS report is dated yesterday.

Maybe CBS is the problem?
Tom

Not really CBS, but a local CBS affiliate. I wonder if they are owned by Sinclair?

ETA: They are actually owned by Viacom.

 

[Metaphor]

I've got news for Evan Low: if a little boy is being bullied because he is wearing clothes designed and marketed for little girls, it's not because anybody saw him buy it from the 'girls' section.

Very telling that your first reaction wasn't to condemn the bullying.

As ever with the people on this board, I set my expectations to 'low' and the behaviour is immediately more appalling.

How on Gospa's green earth do you manage to make that your first response? To make an insinuation that I don't care if gender nonconforming children are bullied for being gender nonconforming.

Well, guess what. As a child that was gender nonconforming, I condemn the bullies (adults and children) who bully children into gender stereotypes.

But since the point evidently missed you (or you missed it), a boy wearing clothes that other children recognise as 'feminine' is the 'triggering event' for bullying. Children don't know what 'section' it allegedly came from.

 

[Metaphor]

IKR? Like, the only explanation I have for someone who brings up bullying and not condemning it is that they approve of the bullying.

Then your mind is extraordinarily narrow. What next? Do I have to condemn cancer if I mention it?

I have news for metaphor: if a child is being bullied because they are wearing clothes that their peers say are inappropriate for them, it's not because the clothing is inappropriate; rather, it is because the kids who are bullies were given inappropriate messages about who is allowed to wear what.

That isn't news to me.

 

[Metaphor]

Big stores can do this easily and small ones if they still even exist, not so much.

In fact, I recall Target did this a few years ago (for their toys only, I think), without being legislatively compelled, and I gently mocked the people who expressed outrage.

 

[Metaphor]

I do not agree with the bill, and I agree with TomC when he said the following:

It still strikes me as state interference in private business for ideological purposes, no utilitarian value. That's not something I support, because I don't have those fascist tendencies.
Tom

I do not agree with the OP in as far as it being likely to pass. I see no likelihood of it passing at all. I don't think it is all that uncommon, however, for State legislators to propose laws like this to appeal to their base. Living in a suburb of St. Louis, I see Missouri lawmakers proposing stupid legislation that is just red meat for their base all the time, and am well aware that there is no chance that the bill will get passed. Do you not get shit like that in Australian politics?

I do not believe, at the Australian federal level, that 'stunt' legislation with no real support is routinely introduced into parliament. At the state level, I honestly couldn't guess.

 

[Metaphor]

This seems like it will pass, since the Ds have total legislative control in California. Have the California Democrats run out of things to do? Why should the government tell shops how they must organise their shop floor space?

What makes you think it will pass?

I looked up the composition of the California government - lower house (59/80 Dem), upper house (30/40 Dem), and governorship.

But I don't live in California and don't know how many 'stunt' bills are introduced in a typical year.

 

[Metaphor]

The bill was introduced 13 months ago, went nowhere and "died at desk" back in November.

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.


I guess the bigot-blogs notified their minions about this manufactured outrage based upon shoddy non-fact-checked journalism triggered by last week's outrage that conservatives could no longer tell which plastic potato they should have sex with.

I found the story newly reported yesterday (my link shows 3 March 2021). So I assumed it was about a recently introduced bill.

But, I've learned a couple of things. cbslocal San Francisco is apparently among the bigot-blogs manufacturing outrage, and ronburgundy has nothing substantive to say on the matter of state-compelled gender neutral shop floors except to mock conservatives.

 

[KeepTalking]

I do not agree with the bill, and I agree with TomC when he said the following:

It still strikes me as state interference in private business for ideological purposes, no utilitarian value. That's not something I support, because I don't have those fascist tendencies.
Tom

I do not agree with the OP in as far as it being likely to pass. I see no likelihood of it passing at all. I don't think it is all that uncommon, however, for State legislators to propose laws like this to appeal to their base. Living in a suburb of St. Louis, I see Missouri lawmakers proposing stupid legislation that is just red meat for their base all the time, and am well aware that there is no chance that the bill will get passed. Do you not get shit like that in Australian politics?

I do not believe, at the Australian federal level, that 'stunt' legislation with no real support is routinely introduced into parliament.

Doesn't happen on the federal level in the US very often either, but we are talking about the State level.

At the state level, I honestly couldn't guess.

Why are you more interested in State level US politics than the state level politics in your own country? I am sure we can find some pretty stupid laws that actually got enacted at the state level in Australia. I mean I would do it right now, but Australian state politics just doesn't interest me.

 

[Metaphor]

The bill was introduced 13 months ago, went nowhere and "died at desk" back in November.

Looks like Metaphor and our other binary warriors got their very macho-male panties in a twist over absolutely nothing, as usual.


I guess the bigot-blogs notified their minions about this manufactured outrage based upon shoddy non-fact-checked journalism triggered by last week's outrage that conservatives could no longer tell which plastic potato they should have sex with.

Is this like when Metaphor poo-pooed the idea that there might be violence over the Biden win?

I poo-pooed the idea that Trump would not leave the White House peacefully. In fact, he did leave peacefully and I was right. He didn't even stay long enough to see the new President sworn in.

EDIT: Also, ZiprHead's post was completely off topic.