If you’re disenchanted because both Harry Potter and Casey Anthony are now over and all your cliffhangers are ended, take heart: There’s always “How will the Florida legislature define sex?” as something to which you can look forward.

Florida legislators have been squeamish about the subject of sex to the point where their failure to adequately define it in legalese has lead to a serious legal discrepancy, as Todd Ruger of the Sarasota Herald-Tribune points out:

“In 1997, Florida legislators made it a felony for an HIV-infected person to have "sexual intercourse" without informing the partner of their infected status, adding the virus to a list of established STDs like gonorrhea, chlamydia and syphilis.

“But Florida statutes specifically define sexual intercourse only as vaginal sex between a man and a woman … Last month, the court of appeal overturned a Bradenton woman's conviction for exposing her female partner to HIV because the sexual acts were between two women. The law ‘does not apply to her actions,’ the 2nd District Court of Appeal said.”

If the law is to include acts other than penis-vagina intercourse, Florida lawmakers will have to change the statute, and as Ruger notes, Florida lawmakers have been proven squeamish about sexual specifics: Earlier this year, they chastised Rep. Scott Randolph for using the word “uterus” on the House floor. Ruger writes that Brian Whitfield, an advocate for HIV health, says the current law should be abolished because it dissuades people from getting tested: if you don’t know you have HIV, you can’t knowingly pass it on.

Prediction: Within the next year, Sex Feed will report on Florida legislation regarding the pee pee and the woo-woo. Nothing to look forward to, indeed.