Every week I encounter another story related to sex toys. And more and more, it seems as if these stories expose certain individuals that want to take our sex toys away from us!
Recently the Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported that in another challenge to overturn Alabama state law, a Federal appellate court ruled in a 2-1 decision to uphold a ban on the sale of sex toys. The court claims that the constitution does not include a right for sexual privacy. (That's right! Maybe we should do it in public! Parks are great.) In addition, they've asserted that if they allow the sale of sex toys, they will eventually have to allow prostitution, obscenity, adult incest, and the like. What? Sounds like a slippery slope to me. What do sex toys have to do with adult incest anyway? And if they're consenting adults, who cares? Then the bit about obscenity -- I suppose they've outlawed cable T.V. I guess these people think that if they don't see it, it doesn't exist. I feel for you guys in Alabama, but then again, sneaking around can add to the fun.
The other thing I read in The Guardian dealt with a sex shop owner in Burleson, Texas. Apparently, some undercover agents posed as a couple and purchased an "obscene device". (There's that word again!) A month later, the shop owner was arrested on the charge of violating the state's obscenity laws. The code defines an obscene device as "a simulated sexual organ or item designed to stimulate the genitals." This is ridiculous, especially considering that the definition of simulated is "made in resemblance or as a substitute for another," and the word obscene means, "Offensive to accepted standards of decency or modesty," or "inciting lustful feelings," according to the American Heritage Dictionary of English. Again, these lawmakers must not watch a lot of TV.
Fortunately for our friend in Texas, Joanne Webb, the charges were dismissed. We can thank nationwide attention and attorney claims that the suit was a waste of time. But I wonder, if they are so concerned with the sale of these obscene devices, why don't they ban them outright like they did in Alabama? Texans, however, found a loophole with selling sex toys as "novelty items". I don't know how this makes a hill of beans difference because the word novelty means, "something new or unusual," or "a small mass produced article, such as a toy or trinket." I guess there's nothing novel about sex.
Don't even get me started on India. Today I read in the Indian tabloid, Indian Express, that parcels imported from outside of the country are routinely inspected. When officials encounter a sex toy, they notify the addressee and request clarification for the item's uses and intent. Of course, after consumers are notified, they never show up to claim what they'd paid for. Can you imagine having to tell some customs person, "Um yes, that's mine, and I intend to use it ways your wife wishes you would!" They'd probably arrest me; sex toys are illegal in India. Sadly, when no one comes (pun intended) they destroy the toys on site. At least that's what they say.
And finally, according to The Decatur Daily, a woman tried to steal a sex toy after filling out a job application at Pleasures, a sex shop in Decatur, Alabama -- of all places. I am utterly confused! Alabama has banned the sale of sex toys, but somehow they're still selling toys? Maybe they've followed suit with the Texans and their loophole? But really, a woman filled out an application, browsed the store, and left. When she left, the anti-theft alarm sounded as she tried to exit the store, so the suspect threw it on the floor and fled! Like the shop owner couldn't track her down! And to top it off, the suspect's mother called the store to offer to pay for the almost stolen items. I guess since selling sex toys in Alabama is supposedly illegal, she decided to steal them instead. I have no idea what this woman was thinking, if, in fact, she was thinking at all.
But like I said, it seems someone, somewhere wants to take our sex toys, for whatever reason. Some invoke the law, and others take matters into their own hands. But in all cases, it's based in stupidity, which means, "the quality or condition of being stupid," and stupid means, "marked by lack a of intelligence or care; foolish; careless." Why aren't there laws prohibiting this?
