For Legal Massaging Purposes Only
If state Rep. Ralph Davenport has his way, South Carolina will join Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas in banning the sale of sex toys. According to A.P., the Spartanburg County Republican's bill "would make it a felony to sell devices used primarily for sexual stimulation." Cucumbers, presumably, would still be legal, while the Rascal Video Eddie Stone Cock would be right out. But what about those dual-use "personal massagers"? Micah Daigle at DARE Generation proposes an Office of National Dildo Control Policy to help sort such matters out.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Ok, seriously. What is wrong with these people? Is it some sort of pathology? Were they toilet trained at gunpoint? Do they suffer from Mencken's definition of puritanism (the fear that someone, somewhere is having a good time)?
What is going on with these uberprudes?
So would the head of this office be the dildo czar? I'm sure they'll be applying for that job in droves.
Dildo Czar? I don't think Ron Jeremy is doing anything.
There were times in my early teens that my right hand would have been in serious danger of being banned.
I always assumed that the Lawrence vs Texas ruling established a right to sex privacy.
Since I'm more in favor of federalism, I could care less what other states do. And I think they should have the right to be as quaint as they want to be. But it just seems like this is a matter waiting to be overruled. Especially since it applies to hetro couples, which would also invoke Griswold v. Connecticut.
It's stupid and annoying to live in a state where one can't buy a dildo...but there is the internet, so it's not that big a concern.
I think he's worried that somewhere, his wife is having a good time.
Seriously, Number 6? I think that control of people's bodies is the first and foremost goal of any oppressive government. So the state says what drugs you can and cannot put in your body, and the state makes laws so that it's harder (no pun intended) for lonely people to have orgasms, and the state also makes laws so that it's harder for couples to have non-procreative sex.
Besides, if people buy the idea that it's good for the government to control intimate things that can't possibly affect others, it becomes a LOT easier for the government to sell the idea that it gets to control other aspects of your life as well.
Besides since they've taken down the flag, and got rid of the minibottles, SC's looking for a new way to re-affirm its collective crazy. They just didn't realize that TX/GA/AL had beaten them to the crazy punch on this one.
It's stupid and annoying to live in a state where one can't buy a dildo...but there is the internet, so it's not that big a concern.
I am willing to bet money that it is only a matter of time before either these laws also cover possession of sex toys, rather than just the purchase, or else we'll see a case where somebody owning such a device is arrested because he or she cannot PROVE that it was bought in another state.
Where y'all see oppression, I see opportunity. Ladies, accept no illegal mechanical substitutes. Call me, Fred Garvin, Male Prostitute.
Something else occurs to me (and I'm not being snarky here, though it may sound like I am): I think that extreme sexual frustration has quite a bit to do with why so many young men in the Middle East are willing to become suicide bombers; it's hard for people to think straight when they're that frustrated. So maybe that has something to do with these states that try so hard to regulate sex: get your constituency too horny to think straight, and they're more likely to buy dumbass ideas like "gay marriage is the biggest threat facing America today" or "the failure of the drug war just proves we haven't been fighting it hard enough."
"I think he's worried that somewhere, his wife is having a good time."
Or anybody else who might be having a good time. Talk about people who need to get lives of thier own. I'm tired of these people who conflate "morality" with government repression of voluntary behavior between consenting adults.
The legislator who wrote the dildo ban also wants to pay foreign governments to take away America's drug users and do whatever they want with them. Check it out: http://daregeneration.blogspot.com/2006/04/somethings-rotten-in-state-of-south.html
"Lucy?s Love Shop employee Wanda Gillespie said she was flabbergasted that South Carolina?s Legislature is considering outlawing sex toys. But banning the sale of sex toys is actually quite common in some Southern states."
Wanda Gillespie????
Hey Nick, any relation?
"I think that extreme sexual frustration has quite a bit to do with why so many young men in the Middle East are willing to become suicide bombers; it's hard for people to think straight when they're that frustrated."
All right, Dr. Freud.
Actually, a lack of military hardware to fight a well armed military occupation is why you have suicide bombers in Iraq and in the Occupied Terroritories.
The Algerian resistance to the French occupation of their country used bombs placed in baby carriages. When a resistance leader was criticized for their tactics against the French and the harm they were causing the civilian population, he replied that they would gladly trade in their baby carriages for half the French air force in Algeria.
Want to end suicide bombings in Iraq and the Occupied Terroritories without ending the occupations of those countries? Then give Palestians half the Israeli air force and half of the Israeli's armored vehicles. Ditto for the Iraqis. Then there would be a realistic chance of having a fair fight between two opposing military forces in those countries. What you have in Iraq and the Occupied Territories are basically unarmed populations fighting the best armed militaries in the world. People fighting a military occupation are going to use what they have to fight with.
Rick-
Or we could just give them some weed and cheetos and see if they calm down.
Rick, the terrorists in Iraq are overwhelmingly targeting Iraqis, not the "military occupiers."
Actually, a lack of military hardware to fight a well armed military occupation is why you have suicide bombers in Iraq and in the Occupied Terroritories.
Actually, I was thinking more of Mohammed Atta and his 18 buddies who started this whole mess. Read all those insane woman-hating diatribes Atta wrote concerning how he wanted his funeral conducted, and then tell me with a straight face that this was a man with a healthy view of sex. Read the Saudi Arabian view of womanhood and sexuality and tell me these guys don't need to get laid.
Or hell--just tell me that I'm wrong, and that situations of extreme horniness are actually the best times to commit acts of clear-thinking rationalism.
Jennifer - Rick's comments aside (which I actually give a little credence to), I think you're right on.
I was just having this discussion with friends the other day. They aren't allowed to see women, let alone get to have a little hanky-panky with them...that would make me do some crazy shit, too.
Jennifer, wasn't there a Seinfeld episode where George became a genius when he gave up sex? Sounds like proof to me.
Being from South Carolina, this calls to mind a statement once made by a local columnist (whose name I unfortunately forget) in the Columbia free weekly Free Times. It was "South Carolina: our headlines are your punchlines."
Jennifer-I sort of agree with you, but I think the origin of the problem is the people, not the government. Remember that everything a politician does is done to ensure re-election or expand their personal sphere of power. In other words, they wouldn't be pushing this silliness if they didn't know that it would play with the rubes at home. It's a people problem, not just a government problem.
Of course, it could be that South Carlolina is in more dire need of a blow job than any state in history. (Apologies to Robin Williams.)
Rick, I think Jennifer was talking more about the motivation behind the method of suicide bombings than the why that particular method was chosen.
So maybe that has something to do with these states that try so hard to regulate sex: get your constituency too horny to think straight, and they're more likely to buy dumbass ideas
Or... it has to do with the fact that an unusually high percentage (relative to other areas of the US) of the population of these states shares the same, conservative religion.
I sort of agree with you, but I think the origin of the problem is the people, not the government
But what MAKES these people so furious at the notion of sex? The more I hear someone ranting against sex, the more I'm sure that person hasn't experienced it himself.
I suggest that the women here deny their boyfriends conjugal access. Measure their aggression levels during this anti-hedonic period, then report to the group. Oh, I suppose a measure of aggression levels during a period of full conjugal access would be necessary for comparison purposes. Please pay particular attention to any terrorist acts during the Time of Deprivation.
The part of me that owns stock in the company that produces Jim Beam will rejoice if this law passes, because whiskey purchases by SC prosecutors will go through the roof. Speaking as a some-what sane civil prosecutor, (I work for a state agency, prosecuting consumer fraud cases. More on why a government employee likes a libertarian blog later.) this is the kind of law that gives us nightmares. I can imagine some poor assistant DA with five child molesters, a couple rapists and seventy-five repeat drunk drivers in the filing cabinet suddenly being presented with a stack of sex toy prosecutions. Let's take our time away from getting actual, violent criminals off the street so we can lock up a few sex shop owners. Just the thought of trying to draft pleadings makes being a Wal-Mart greeter looks like a decent career option. I can see the potential for great war stories at their Christmas parties, but that's hardly compensation for having one's workload increased for utterly stupid cases.
As an SC escapee, I'd like to call attention to Sploid's mostly accurate description of the state in their coverage:
Despite recent migrations of educated people to South Carolina's coastal communities, most of the state is a primitive backwater where blacks live in near slavery and whites live in illiterate poverty.
What's innacurate is that educated Yankees are actually moving as much to the upstate as to the coast for some of the industrial management jobs there.
Otherwise, yep, that sums it up.
Comforting to know that bin Laden's in custody and out of commission, that the price of gas is twelve cents a gallon, and that whole Iraqi things been's resolved to everyone's satisfaction...just so that our leaders have the time to focus on issues like the sale of steely dans. (sigh) Gawd bless America...
*(yes...I know this is a state issue; the point is- oh, the hell with it...)
I sense a great opportunity for monkeywrenching here. Carpet-bombing the state - or at least the statehouse - with dildoes during an inauguration...selling something in what is obviously a sex toy masquerading as a bottle...mailing a free sex toy to every member of the state (no pun intended, honest)...there's gotta be some clever plan we can come up with to make these bluenoses look stupid.
"Or hell--just tell me that I'm wrong, and that situations of extreme horniness are actually the best times to commit acts of clear-thinking rationalism."
Nope.
Heck, Neal Stephenson devoted a couple of chapters to just this concept in Cryptonomicon. There were even charts.
It was really, really well done.
And funny as Hell.
"The more I hear someone ranting against sex, the more I'm sure that person hasn't experienced it himself."
Or it could be the opposite. Someone who has made a lot of really poor or irresponsible decisions with regard to sex could very easily turn into a puritan.
...there's gotta be some clever plan we can come up with to make these bluenoses look stupid.
I don't know if it's possible to improve on the job they're doing, but what about renting some billboards on I-95, putting pictures of nasty looking French ticklers on them, and having a line like "The Concerned Douchebags for Decency want to thank the SC legislature for keeping these from our children" above the pictures.
All I know is that when sex toys are outlawed, only outlaws will have sex toys.
Pro Libertate:
Interesting idea....Aristophanes wrote a little play about that very idea back in 411 BC:
"Lysistrata". Check it out for a good read.
Anyone want to invest in my new product? It will be marketed via the internet to the frustrated ladies of the south:
A ten inch dildo with the Stars and Bars overlaid on the plastic. Two sizes, the 10 inch Robert E. Lee and the 8 inch Johnny Reb will surely elicited moans of ecstasy if not a few "rebel yells."
Still under developement is the combination dildo and butt plug called the Slave Driver.
I'm an SC ex-pat (live in the liberal citadel of Chicago now) and like most news stories from the south this one misses a critical portion: the back story.
Yes, there are puritanical nut jobs everywhere down there who think that sex should only happen between people of the same color who are bound in holy matrimony. You can't go out on a Friday or Saturday night for drinks with your friends on Main St. in downtown Greenville without tripping over street preachers.
But more to the point - I think people down there are generally queasy about sex and the sight of purple neon "adult stores" has probably rubbed them the wrong way.
I suspect that the adult industry has grown to the point where people are sick of seeing XXX stores on every block and having to explain to their kids what those places are for.
Even if this isn't the case I think enough South Carolinians are blase about adult stores to look the other way while they are outlawed by a religious wacko minority.
Hey, there are no tattoo parlors there either and you can't buy beer on Sunday... it's a strange place.
But what MAKES these people so furious at the notion of sex?
I'd respond, but I promised I would try to cut down on my level of Christian bashing.
Down here a gal don't need no vibrator--she's got her own pappy.
Does this mean the politicians, being dickheads, would ban the sale of themselves?
dildo czar
I think we also need a strap-on satrap and a vibrator vizier.
And a dicktator.
(That last would have been funnier if it were not coming -- so to speak -- on the heels of Eddy's somewhat similar pun.)
Then give Palestians half the Israeli air force and half of the Israeli's armored vehicles. Ditto for the Iraqis. Then there would be a realistic chance of having a fair fight between two opposing military forces in those countries.
Truer words were never spoken. Give the Palestinians one half of the Israeli planes and armor, and Iraq the other half, and the two of them might have a chance against the Israeli Army. If they didn't blow each other up.
Karen said:
I can imagine some poor assistant DA with five child molesters, a couple rapists and seventy-five repeat drunk drivers in the filing cabinet suddenly being presented with a stack of sex toy prosecutions...[etc]
A similar situation surely occurs as a result of the WOD. Why would this be undesirable but prosecuting loads of drug offenders not be? I'm not being rhetorical.
"I can imagine some poor assistant DA with five child molesters, a couple rapists and seventy-five repeat drunk drivers in the filing cabinet suddenly being presented with a stack of sex toy prosecutions. Let's take our time away from getting actual, violent criminals off the street so we can lock up a few sex shop owners."
Karen;
You could easily replace "sex shop owners" with non-violent drug offenders and you have the same situation as you describe in your example with the real crime not being prosecuted effectively. Using the war on some drugs logic (can you say Bizarro?), I can see this crazyness as something that government will go for.
Oh hell. They're going to get outlawed whatever they want. Nobody will stop them, and the U.S. will just be that more fucked up. Like Mencken, quoted earlier, said, "No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
People in America are just stupid -- it's the simplest and truest explanation.
cliff,
I BROUGHT IT UP FIRST!! WHAAAAAH!
I want Karen to explain it though.
"People in America are just stupid..."
JUST in Amerikka? Even if not, then your statement is still logically true. Stupidness knows no borders but its flavour is regional.
--
flavour, aluminium, boot, lift, centre, licence. Why can I not spell all Americal-like right now?
Does this mean the politicians, being dickheads, would ban the sale of themselves?
As of 1990, they were going for pretty cheap--$500 could buy you a vote. Lost Trust was a sting by the FBI for political vote-buying.
My guess is, they just made you prove you're not an FBI agent before you could buy them.
As of 1990, they were going for pretty cheap--$500 could buy you a vote...
Wow. We've been going about this libertarian thing all wrong. Now, if we can just get about $300,000 or so...
The SC legislature clearly have too much time on their hands. It's time for SC voters to cut back their hours (and their pay commensurately).
MarkV, Aristophanes is one of my favorite authors. I wouldn't knowingly plagarize his ideas. Must've been an unconscious act on my part. Besides, he was talking about Greek women, I was addressing American women. Completely different.
I was just having this discussion with friends the other day. They aren't allowed to see women, let alone get to have a little hanky-panky with them...that would make me do some crazy shit, too.
I was allowed to see women, yet for most of my twenties couldn't get laid to save my life. Is that worse? I did manage to get a Ph.D., though.
Wait, you're right. I wasn't thinking clearly. Should've gotten an MBA, and then I'd be rolling in hotties.
Damnit.
I wonder how they decide who gets to be a dildo detective? Or dildo dick if you like...... I'd like to see those criteria. I'm betting the first qualification will be "noticable lack of a social life."
I agree with everyone that Christians are anti-sex... but I believe being anti-sex is pretty much a universal part of authoritarianism.
I mean, left-wing feminists are anti-sex, muslims are anti-sex, even in the book 1984 there was "celebacy leauges" or something like that.
People who want a totalitarian state, tend to be anti-sex.
Rex,
>People who want a totalitarian state, tend to be anti-sex.
Good point. They want people's allegiance to be to the state and not each other.
Apparently Jim Jones of the People's Temple did everything he could to discourage strong personal ties between his disciples. He taught, unbelievably, that all men are homosexual except for himself. Of course, this permitted him to rape his female disciples with impunity.
I'm ready Seductive Poison by Deborah Layton, the PT member who escaped Jonestown and ratted them out. It's wild stuff.