This Washington

More on Sex Toys Amendment

By Josh Feit February 21, 2012



We were able to get a copy of the controversial (and discarded) amendment to state Sen. Sharon Nelson's (D-34) toxic toys bill.

As we reported in Fizz this morning, state Rep. David Taylor (R-15, Moxee) tried to add an amendment that would have added sex toys to the list of products that couldn't use toxics known as TRIS.

We asked Nelson what was wrong with Taylor's amendment—embarrassing as dildos may be to talk about, isn't women's safety a legit issue?

Nelson called Taylor's amendment distracting. "This is a distraction from what I'm trying to do with this bill," Nelson says, "which is protecting children and babies." She says Taylor's amendment is "out of scope" and if he wants to deal with that issue, he should do it with a separate bill.

"I'm dealing with 16 industry lobbyists [against the toxic toys bill] right now," she says, "and we don't need this distraction."

Again, we have a call in to Rep. Taylor.

Nelson also said, "frankly, the language was so graphic that female legislative staffers were having trouble with it."

Here's the language:
2SSB 6120 - H COMM AMD ,
By Committee on Environment

On page 2, line 32, after "(b)" insert ""Children's product" also includes any manual or electronic device or mechanism that is designed to be inserted into the vagina or used to manipulate female genitalia for the purpose of sexual stimulation and that contains a high priority chemical that could harm the normal development of a fetus, cause developmental toxicitv to a fetus, cause Genetic damage to a fetus, or cause reproductive harm to a female.

EFFECT: Specifies that the definition of "children' s product" also includes-any manual or electronic device or mechanism that is designed to be inserted into the Vagina or used to manipulate external female genitalia for the purpose of sexual stimulation and that contains a high priority chemical that could harm a fetus or cause reproductive harm to a female.
Share
Show Comments