Page 1 of 18 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 172

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

  1. Top | #1
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    6,932
    Archived
    10,974
    Total Posts
    17,906
    Rep Power
    59

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

    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...rs-face-fines/

    SACRAMENTO (KPIX 5) — Retail stores in California may be required to maintain gender-neutral sections for clothes, toys and childcare articles under a new proposal from a Bay Area lawmaker.
    The bill introduced by Assemblymember Evan Low (D-Campbell) would require retail department stores with 500 or more employees to maintain areas on their sales floor not divided by gender, which he says stigmatizes children who want to wear or play with something marketed for the opposite sex.

    “Rather than having a separate boy’s or girl’s section, let’s just have a kid’s section. And that’s what the conversation is about. Let’s make sure that we remove the kind of stigma, the type of bullying that we still see, especially in this day and age,” Low told KPIX 5.

    In a press statement, Low also said It also incorrectly implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate.
    “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?’” the assemblymember said in the statement. “Her bill will help children express themselves freely and without bias. We need to let kids be kids.”
    Low’s bill, AB 2826, would also fine stores up to $1,000 for violating the policy.


    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.

    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?

  2. Top | #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Ohio, U.S.
    Posts
    62
    Rep Power
    2
    Is there a transgender kid on your lawn again?

  3. Top | #3
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    3,793
    Archived
    20,351
    Total Posts
    24,144
    Rep Power
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    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.

  4. Top | #4
    Contributor Trausti's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northwest
    Posts
    7,920
    Archived
    372
    Total Posts
    8,292
    Rep Power
    66
    The tyranny of the do-gooders.

  5. Top | #5
    Contributor
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Burnsville, MN
    Posts
    5,608
    Archived
    2,911
    Total Posts
    8,519
    Rep Power
    49
    Quote Originally Posted by GenesisNemesis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    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.

  6. Top | #6
    Elder Contributor
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    18,740
    Archived
    41,943
    Total Posts
    60,683
    Rep Power
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post
    https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...rs-face-fines/

    SACRAMENTO (KPIX 5) — Retail stores in California may be required to maintain gender-neutral sections for clothes, toys and childcare articles under a new proposal from a Bay Area lawmaker.
    The bill introduced by Assemblymember Evan Low (D-Campbell) would require retail department stores with 500 or more employees to maintain areas on their sales floor not divided by gender, which he says stigmatizes children who want to wear or play with something marketed for the opposite sex.

    “Rather than having a separate boy’s or girl’s section, let’s just have a kid’s section. And that’s what the conversation is about. Let’s make sure that we remove the kind of stigma, the type of bullying that we still see, especially in this day and age,” Low told KPIX 5.

    In a press statement, Low also said It also incorrectly implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate.
    “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?’” the assemblymember said in the statement. “Her bill will help children express themselves freely and without bias. We need to let kids be kids.”
    [COLOR=#333333][FONT=Lato]Low’s bill, AB 2826, would also fine stores up to $1,000 for violating the policy.[COLOR=#222222][FONT=Verdana]
    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.

    This seems like it will pass, since the Ds have total legislative control in California.
    The Democratic Party is the least disciplined and least likely to have a hive mind. Numerical control of the legislature by a party does not guarantee that any bill introduced by a party member passes.

  7. Top | #7
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    2,499
    Archived
    7,585
    Total Posts
    10,084
    Rep Power
    72
    Is this only for kids’ stuff or will it apply to adult clothing sections too?

  8. Top | #8
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2020
    Location
    Midwestern USA
    Posts
    1,231
    Rep Power
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Jarhyn View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by GenesisNemesis View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Metaphor View Post

    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.
    It's also rather telling that neither you nor @GenesisNemesis; condemned the bullying that the OP described.
    The state forcing retailers to change their store layout to serve an ideological goal is bullying too. Big retailers are extremely sensitive to what works best for their customers. Making the store more confusing because some SJWs think boys should see sparkley sweaters next to the flannel shirts is pretty darned ridiculous and authoritarian.

    Don't get me wrong, I'd prefer that people tended towards sturdy gender-neutral clothes and toys and such. But government's enforcement powers are totally the wrong tool to use.
    Tom

  9. Top | #9
    Contributor repoman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Posts
    7,714
    Archived
    2,280
    Total Posts
    9,994
    Rep Power
    80
    Big stores can do this easily and small ones if they still even exist, not so much.

  10. Top | #10
    Veteran Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley, CA
    Posts
    2,775
    Archived
    4,183
    Total Posts
    6,958
    Rep Power
    74
    Yep. California is one of the worst states in the US to do business in, yet out state government keeps piling on more silly, costly regulations. Companies and residents are fleeing in droves because of all this nonsense and I don't blame them.

    ETA: Just checked, and California is dead last for the last two years. Woo hoo! Go California!!

    https://chiefexecutive.net/2020-best...ates-business/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •