SEXIS WRONG

store in New York City, Eve’s Garden. Southern legislatures
acted against the dire threat represented by women discovering
that vibrators produce their orgasms much more reliably
than penises do. Apparently they’d all heard the old joke that
goes: “When did God make men? When she found out vibrators
couldn’t dance.”
Although one would intuitively suppose that legislatures
had better things to do, other states with apparently similar
fears followed suit: Colorado’s Rev. Stat. § 18-7-1-101, 102
to the same effect was passed in 1981 and overturned in
1985. Georgia passed § 16-12-80 (c) on this question in 1975.
The Texas statute, § 43.21, revised in 1977, was the model
for some of the later laws, including Alabama’s 1998 Anti-
Obscenity Act. These statutes prohibit the sale of “a device
designed and marketed as useful primarily for stimulation of
the human genital organs,” making it an offense to possess
“six or more obscene devices or identical or similar obscene
articles,” because such possession indicates intent to sell.
Nebraska legislated in 1977 against any “article, or device
having the appearance of either male or female genitals” (Nebraska
Code § 28-808), clearly reacting to the appearance
rather than the function of sexual devices.
The American Civil Liberties Union challenged the Alabama
act of 1998 almost as soon as the ink was dry, and it was
twice upheld in the (Federal) District Court for the Northern
District of Alabama. In 2003 Alabama’s law was upheld as
absurd but constitutional by the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals,
the same Atlanta body that ruled in George W. Bush’s
favor in the 2000 election. The laws remain on the books,
and the threat of enforcement remains, as well. Georgia’s law
was challenged a few years ago by a sex-toy store and was
upheld.
Despite the best efforts of Eve Ensler of Vagina Monologues
fame, Joanne Webb of Burleson, Texas, and an article by Jennifer
Senior in the New York Times Magazine of July 4, 2004
(Independence Day!), reactions from the feminist community
since 1998 have been muted. Some of us have trouble
believing that anything as ludicrous as this could possibly be
going on in a modern industrial democracy. Others assume
that women in the sex-toy-prohibition states can still buy their
favorite gadgets legally over the Internet, which unfortunately
isn’t the case. The seller is still technically violating the law
by completing the sale within the state, although so far there
have been no indictments of out-of-state sellers.
In 1983, two more states weighed in, Indiana with a statute
(IC § 35-49-1-3) as vague as South Dakota’s and probably
copied from it, and Mississippi with what
was already becoming the standard wording
for this new type of legislation, prohibiting the
sale of any “device designed or marketed as
useful primarily for the stimulation of the human
genital organs” (Mississippi Code § 97-
29-105). In these legislative novelties, appearance, packaging,
and marketing rather than functionality seem to be the
decisive factors in whether or not a device is “obscene.” So
you can sell whatever you please, as long as you’re sufficiently
hypocritical about what the device is good for.
Thousands are dying in Iraq, global warming is a fact, certifiable
wackos roam the streets with dangerous firearms, and
These statutes prohibit the sale of
“a device designed and marketed as
useful primarily for stimulation of
the human genital organs.”
what do Southern legislatures and law enforcement agencies
worry about? Women having more fun by themselves than
they might be having with men. With fun-loving guys like
them in charge, maybe they ought to worry. Hell, they probably
can’t dance, either.
“TWO! FOUR! SIX! EIGHT! LET ALABAMA MASTURBATE!” 307