Questions related to "disturbing" and "graphic" article

  • Christmas shipping schedule
  • 20% OFF sitewide — Code: ENJOY20

Questions related to "disturbing" and "graphic" article

Woman China Woman China
I was shocked when this article was sent to me and I read it. Graphic? Since when did "vagina" or "insertion" or "female genitalia" become graphic or disturbing?

Yes, it might be disturbing to discuss children safety in the same paragraph as female masturbation, but it is discussing body safety, child safety and the overall well being of women and children. So I don't really figure how this could be considered disturbing?

link
We were able to get a copy of the controversial (and discarded) amendment to state Sen. Sharon Nelson’s (D-34) toxic toys bill.

As we reported in Fizz this morning, state Rep. David Taylor (R-15, Moxee) tried to add an amendment that would have added sex toys to the list of products that couldn’t use toxics known as TRIS.

We asked Nelson what was wrong with Taylor’s amendment—embarrassing as dildos may be to talk about, isn’t women’s safety a legit issue?

Nelson called Taylor’s amendment distracting. “This is a distraction from what I’m trying to do with this bill,” Nelson says, “which is protecting children and babies.” She says Taylor’s amendment is “out of scope” and if he wants to deal with that issue, he should do it with a separate bill.

“I’m dealing with 16 industry lobbyists [against the toxic toys bill] right now,” she says, “and we don’t need this distraction.”

Again, we have a call in to Rep. Taylor.

Nelson also said, “frankly, the language was so graphic that female legislative staffers were having trouble with it.”

Here’s the language:

2SSB 6120 – H COMM AMD ,
By Committee on Environment

On page 2, line 32, after “(b)” insert “”Children’s product” also includes any manual or electronic device or mechanism that is designed to be inserted into the vagina or used to manipulate female genitalia for the purpose of sexual stimulation and that contains a high priority chemical that could harm the normal development of a fetus, cause developmental toxicitv to a fetus, cause Genetic damage to a fetus, or cause reproductive harm to a female.

EFFECT: Specifies that the definition of “children’ s product” also includes-any manual or electronic device or mechanism that is designed to be inserted into the Vagina or used to manipulate external female genitalia for the purpose of sexual stimulation and that contains a high priority chemical that could harm a fetus or cause reproductive harm to a female.
Answers (private voting - your screen name will NOT appear in the results):
Do you feel the paragraphs were "graphic"?
Do you feel the paragraphs were of a disturbing nature?
Do you feel that it's just a silly complaint?
2
Do you think it is about time legislature is passed to protect our safety in toy use?
56
Total votes: 58 (57 voters)
Poll is closed
02/22/2012
  • Buy 1 Toy, Get 1 FREE! Mix and Match
  • Save 50% on Gift Set For Couples!
  • Save 50% on Gift Set For Her!
  • Save 50% on Gift Set For Him!
  • Holiday Clearance – Save 80%
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
All promotions
~LaUr3n~ ~LaUr3n~
It's not graphic, but as worded it does sound like it belongs in a separate bill... but it does belong in a bill.
02/22/2012
Rossie Rossie
It's not graphic to US, but may be a little disturbing to the general public; and like LaUr3n said, it should be a separate bill.
02/22/2012
Cookie Monster Mike Cookie Monster Mike
Quote:
Originally posted by Rossie
It's not graphic to US, but may be a little disturbing to the general public; and like LaUr3n said, it should be a separate bill.
I agree. Far from graphic. I cannot stand when people want to ignore things or cover them up just because it's a little hard for them to swallow. I guess a lot of people do have a hard time facing real life issues and reality itself. I guess where I was raised, there was very little censorship and other things like that (Lived 8 years in Australia). At the time of living in Australia, there were very few things that were censored on TV or the radio, I'm not sure what it is like there now.

I guess my point is, we need people in the Government that can face reality and deal with these types of things. Good to see at least someone is trying to pass this Bill for the sake of safety and health for the children.
02/22/2012
eroticmutt eroticmutt
I cannot believe that they would opt NOT to enforce higher safety standards!!
02/22/2012
Sammi Sammi
I don't think it's graphic, but the wording is weird - I get what they're trying to do, but saying the definition of "children's product" includes sex toys sounds odd. I think they need to change "children's product" to something else that is more encompassing.
02/22/2012
- Kira - - Kira -
Not graphic, but I also agree this should be separate. "Children's product" also includes sex toys? Err..well, my toddler does grab my vibrators sometimes but I wouldn't call it a children's toy... If the bill is designed just to deal with children's toys and toxins in them then it should stay that way. In some ways, I'm tempted to say that government should stay out of toys altogether else they decide to ban them.
02/22/2012
kawigrl kawigrl
well
02/22/2012
bayosgirl bayosgirl
I definitely do think legislature should be passed to protect consumers from harmful ingredients in sex toys, AS WELL AS children's toys. Kind of odd to put them in the same article, though.
02/23/2012
Errant Venture Errant Venture
Maybe they thought the image of a baby being harmed was graphic, rather than the use of the words 'vagina' and 'sexual stimulation'?

And what's embarrassing about talking about dildos?! I shall now chant 'dildo, dildo, dildo!' in the form of the Stiffmeister, whenever says this from now on.
02/24/2012
Lizzy Lizzy
I'm in for higher safety standards
02/24/2012
DreamWolf DreamWolf
SHEESH!!! IT IS RIDICULOUS THAT NOT ONLY OUR FOOD AND WATER ARE POISONED, NOW THAT IT FINALLY GOT ADMITTED OFFICIALLY TOO THAT MANY OF OUR TOYS ARE HARMFUL, THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO DO SHIT ABOUT IT BECAUSE "THERE ARE OTHER, MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES"? SINCE WHEN IS HEALTH NOT AS IMPORTANT AS ANY OTHER BASIC NEEDS FOR AN ACCEPTABLE STANDARD OF LIVING??? ~snarls ruffling her quills!!!
03/01/2012
spineyogurt spineyogurt
I just buy silicone
05/18/2012
P'Gell P'Gell
Do you really want the government to decide which toys are "safe" for you, or for a "fetus" you may or may not be carrying? Looks like just an other way to get into women's lives and try to control us.

I prefer the government stay out of the sex toy business COMPLETELY. By buying safe toys only, we can let the sex toy companies know what we want.

There is NO NEED to involve the government in this. Neither does it belong in a children's toy bill. The wording is a way into trying to wiggle into things like contraception. They want to outlaw things that "go into the vagina if it's dangerous to a fetus." Read that again, it's a way to attempt to outlaw birth control through the back door!

No thanks. I don't want the government "outlawing" birth control devices because they may prevent.... pregnancy.

Read the bill again. It's the Right's way into our bodies. Screw them. I want the Religious Right and the rest of the government to KEEP IT'S LAWS OFF MY BODY.

Read this part of the bill: electronic device or mechanism that is designed to be inserted into the vagina or used to manipulate female genitalia for the purpose of sexual stimulation and that contains a high priority chemical that could harm the normal development of a fetus, cause developmental toxicitv to a fetus, cause Genetic damage to a fetus, or cause reproductive harm to a female That could be an IUD, birth control pill, a sterilization technique, a diaphragm, hell, it could even apply to spermicides and condoms, not to mention it could apply to commonly used abortion devices and drugs.

LOOK at the way the Right tries to sneak into our lives and our bodies. This has nothing to do with "safe sex toys" and everything to do with taking women's rights away.

I wouldn't vote for this bill for ANY reason. Not with the current language.
05/20/2012
Experiment Experiment
While I don't consider a fetus to be a child, a poison to a fetus that is being carried full-term is incredibly damaging to children. They've shown women who used toxic chemicals like these often lead to deformities in infants.
07/28/2012
yummyinmytummy yummyinmytummy
I can't believe we still don't acknowledge vibrators being as commonly used as they are now
08/01/2012
sweetpea12 sweetpea12
Quote:
Originally posted by Woman China
I was shocked when this article was sent to me and I read it. Graphic? Since when did "vagina" or "insertion" or "female genitalia" become graphic or disturbing?

Yes, it might be disturbing to discuss children ...
I think the government should only be worried about the safety of products not our right to have them
10/23/2012
unfulfilled unfulfilled
Not graphic!
10/23/2012
Mikemanz Mikemanz
seems like a really stupid rider attached to a bill that should be passed
11/03/2012
Kenneth Fort Kenneth Fort
Quote:
Originally posted by Woman China
I was shocked when this article was sent to me and I read it. Graphic? Since when did "vagina" or "insertion" or "female genitalia" become graphic or disturbing?

Yes, it might be disturbing to discuss children ...
A lot of people consider those words graphic for... some reason.
11/09/2012
froggygal91 froggygal91
That is not graphic at all.. that is just ridiculous.
12/18/2012
RavenInChains RavenInChains
Terms for body parts are not graphic. And if the bill deals with outline what products those toxins cannot be in, then it should deal with all the products. A second bill is not needed.
12/19/2012
Intrepid Niddering Intrepid Niddering
I don't find it graphic at all. What I do find appalling is that a -woman- is against this being included in the bill. Like, seriously?

As for there needing to be a separate bill, I don't see why it needs to be separate. People piggyback stuff onto other bills. It's just what happens.
12/19/2012
MrWill MrWill
Now remember citizens: Your sex life is wrong. Trying to be safer is wrong. You should abstain from any kind of sexual pleasure to avoid the potential problems.


The American culture and United States government's view on sex, sex education, and sexual liberation is horrid. Seriously... we still teach abstinence.

Teaching abstinence is detestable. It didn't work for alcohol, isn't working for drugs, and won't work for guns.

But we should still just bow to the elected ones.


Did you expect anything less from our valiant leaders?

/rant
12/19/2012
karenm karenm
I wouldn't call it graphic, and it seems weird to talk about in the same place as children's toys. I think it should be addressed though.
03/27/2013
Total posts: 25
Unique posters: 25