• Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 days ago

    I don’t know how to make a quote line but this one stood out to me and made me laugh.

    “Parents do not consent to their children being exposed to obscene devices while shopping for toothpaste.”

    What stores sell toothpaste next to adult toys?

    • criticon@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 days ago

      My Walmart has them next to the pharmacy, 2 or 3 aisles away from the toothpaste

      Meijer has them on the same aisle as the deodorant

        • Barowinger @lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          10 days ago

          Well, it may lead them to satan. As you know, only pure people go to heaven. So don’t even think about sex. And if you do, then better whip yourself until you forget about it or you pass out.

    • Barowinger @lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      Funny how they use the word “consent” here that is usually used by progressive people to advocate for safe sex. This is surely done on purpose. To make it sound like seeing dildos in the store is something close to sexual harassment.

      Funnily enough, they frame it as sexual harassment against the adults. As in “now I have to explain my child about sex toys”. And completely ignore the children’s perspective. If there was any risk in seeing sex toys, the children would be much more prone to getting “damaged”, as they are children. But since when do “conservatives” even care about the health and safety of children?

      The parents should be very well able to deal with seeing sex toys. They are adults after all.

      The children will not care about just seeing the sex toys. The biggest risk is that the parents scare them with a bad explanation, and then when they get older they will be scared of sex or think they need to do some things they don’t want to.

      • fadingembers@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 days ago

        Conservatives have no qualm engaging in behaviors that they criticize in others. If they think something will let them get their way they will use it, regardless of double standards or hypocrisy.

    • No1@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 days ago

      What stores sell toothpaste next to adult toys?

      I get why they would ban that. Texans might think toothpaste was lube for the dildo.

        • shottymcb@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 days ago

          My local walmart has a whole aisle, locked in a glass case. You have to go ask an employee to get your dildo for you.

          • SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 days ago

            Oh god, at that point you might as well just go to a sex shop. At least those employees deal with absolutely nothing else and are totally non-judgy about it…

  • Darkassassin07@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    10 days ago

    Yes. Texas bans the possession of or promoting use of more than six dildos.

    It does make exceptions for people who have the multiples of the device for medical and law enforcement purposes.

    Lmao. Police officers can legally use an array of didos for ‘law enforcement’.

    You’ll be arrested if you cheer them on for it tho…

    BUT if you can prove it’s medically necessary; you’re welcome to have a cornucopia of rubber cocks.

    • Letstakealook@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      10 days ago

      I think the DOJ needs to investigate how exactly the police in Texas have been using dildos in the performance of their duties…

  • Gort@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    10 days ago

    Is there a shortage of dildos in Texas that they need such laws to stop hoarding?

  • lightnsfw@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    10 days ago

    *trying to buy salad ingredients for the family cookout*

    The cashier: sorry state prevents us from selling more than 5 cucumbers at a time.

  • azimir@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    10 days ago

    The One Star State is at it again. “Freedom” there is not really a thing since the government obviously owns the citizens.

  • VinnyDaCat@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    10 days ago

    Snorted and almost choked on my coffee when I scrolled past this.

    The worst part about this is that I’d rather Republicans waste time with pointless legislation such as this rather than something damaging that they could actually enforce.

  • ᴇᴍᴘᴇʀᴏʀ 帝@feddit.ukM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Besides banning the sale of sex toys, the Texas Obscenity Statute also specified the number of “obscene devices”—for example, dildos—a person could own: six. The number was not chosen at random, but rather because lawmakers assumed that people who owned more than six obscene devices that were identical or similar had the intent to distribute them.

    Theoretically, it should be possible to have more than six obscene devices without by guilty of intending to supply them - cock ring, butt plug, fleshlight, dildo, strap-on, inflatable sheep, Ben Wa balls, nipple clamps and penis cage. All have different uses, all without intending to supply.

    If supply was the concern (although I don’t know why), perhaps criminalise that not the bottom drawer of my bedside table.

    • antlion@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 days ago

      Ah so it’s basically like with drugs. Once you have more than a personal amount it’s possession with intent to distribute.

    • Ogmios@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      10 days ago

      If supply was the concern (although I don’t kmoe why)

      There is no crime in America greater than unapproved economic activity.

      Ironic, since unrestricted economic activity is the foundation of Adam Smith’s capitalism.

  • x0x7@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    edit-2
    10 days ago

    Neo-puritanism needs to die. I’m getting excited because I think humanity is just generally getting fed up with control. We’re done with this shit.

    At least none of these people should be violent. They can have their views. But law is always violent. So it has no business being an extension of anyone’s sexual views. If you violently impose your sexual perspective on others you are as good as a rapist in my book.

    • vonbaronhans@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 days ago

      So I know what you mean and I agree, but there are plenty of sexual things that we would want outlawed because of our sexual perspective. Things like rape, sexual assault, pedophilia, etc etc.

      The difference between our sexual perspectives and theirs is that we draw the line at harm or lack of consent, they draw the line at disgust.

    • CileTheSane@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      10 days ago

      I’m getting excited because I think humanity is just generally getting fed up with control.

      Only 33% of the US voting population actually voted against Trump who ran on a platform of control. You might be putting too much faith in the general population.