California's gender neutral mandate
There ought not be a law
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 1084 this weekend — it’s a bill designed to order large retailers to designate a “gender-neutral section” or area for some toys and childcare items.
People wonder why some Americans don’t trust the government mandates for vaccines and masks. But then you see a bill like this enacted, and you realize that Newsom and like-minded Democrats believe that they have every right to order businesses and constituents to conduct their business like anti-binary liberals. If you believe in the girls and boys sections, they’re going to pass laws that make your submit to their politics.
The California Legislative Counsel wrote this about the law:
Existing law, the Unruh Civil Rights Act, specifies that all persons within the jurisdiction of the state are free and equal, and no matter their sex, race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sexual orientation, citizenship, primary language, or immigration status, are entitled to the full and equal accommodations, advantages, facilities, privileges, or services in all business establishments of every kind.
The penalty for noncompliance is up to $250 for a first violation and $500 for a subsequent violations.
The law does not prohibit girls sections and boys sections, but you just know that with the passage of AB 1084, a bill to ban girls and boys sections is inevitable.
“The new law, which takes effect in 2024, says that retail stores with 500 or more employees must sell some toys and childcare products outside of areas specifically labeled by gender. Retailers can continue to offer other toys and childcare goods in traditional boys and girls sections if they choose to,” the Los Angeles Times reported.
An earlier version of the bill required large retailers to sell clothing in their gender-neutral sections. The bill initially would have required large retailers to sell “gender-neutral” clothes.
“As much as I’d like to say this is a bold proposal, Target already did this in 2015,” Democratic Assemblyman Evan Low, the bill’s author, told KQED.
Yes, but that was Target’s decision. AB 1084 is anti-choice. AB 1084 is coercion.
Here’s a fun fact: There’s no law that prevents parents from shopping for their girls in the boys section or for boys in the girls section.
Callers into KQED recalled how they have shopped in the other gender’s section, but it was difficult for them to do so.
“I wish it was that simple,” Lisa Kenney, CEO of Reimagine Gender, told KQED as she discussed how boys and girls sections are harmful to children’s mental health.
“These constructions of gender harm every child,” Kenney offered — which this former tom boy does not believe is accurate.
File this one under: Don’t they have anything better to do? Think: the homeless crisis. The less urgent the need, the more likely Sacramento is to pass a law about it.
Debra J. Saunders is a fellow at the Discovery Institute’s Chapman Center for Citizen Leadership. Contact her at dsaunders@discovery.org.
Sign up below for alerts for future posts.
Note: I noticed a missing word and rewrote this sentence which had read, “If you believe in the girls and boys sections, they’re going to pass laws that make your submit to their politics.”
Based on our walk around Market and Van Ness in SF yesterday, the definitely have something better to do. Rats and human feces on the street, people lying across the sidewalk, marijuana fumes wafting out of the passing cars, buying and selling drugs in doorways, Walgreens and CVS shelves bare from shoplifters, broken glass from car break-ins.
So perhaps they should be reversing the laws they've passed over the past few years that decriminalized all of that.