I’m counting my lucky stars that I don’t live in Texas, Alabama or any of the other five states where my extensive vibrator collection might land me in jail.
For some reason, the legislatures in these states says it’s their right to dictate what people do in their bedrooms. But anti-sex toy laws are not only anti-progress, they are an invasion of privacy, and therefore unconstitutional.
Both Alabama and Texas have similar laws against sex toys – and while many people simply laugh them off as a joke (oh, those silly Texans) – these laws hurt people who really aren’t doing anything wrong.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a case filed by the American Civil Liberties Union that contested the Alabama law, which has now been upheld.
The case was a constitutional challenge to a 1998 (no, these laws are not prehistoric) amendment to Alabama’s obscenity provisions that made it illegal to sell or produce “any device designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs.” A violation can lead to up to a $10,000 fine and up to one year in jail.
Sherri Williams, the main plaintiff, is the owner of two stores called “Pleasures,” an Alabama corporation. She is fighting to keep her two stores open. Other plaintiffs were either vendors or users of sex toys.
The Texas Penal Code has a similar section that contends that anyone who “wholesale promotes or possesses with intent to wholesale promote any obscene material or obscene device” has committed a criminal offense.
And these laws aren’t just written into the code and then ignored. A former fifth-grade teacher, Joanne Webb of Texas, who is a part-time salesperson for Passion Parties Inc., was arrested in November 2003 for selling obscene devices. She then went through an eight-month legal battle before the charges were finally dropped. What’s ridiculous about this law is that as long as you market the device as a novelty it’s legal to sell it. The reason Webb was arrested was that she explained how to use what she was selling.
Lisa S. Lawless, the president and founder of the National Association for Sexual Awareness and Empowerment and CEO of Holistic Wisdom Inc., has worked with both Williams of Alabama and Webb of Texas.
“One of the things that was so outraging to me was to watch women like Joanne Webb and Sherri Williams go through these witch hunts concerning the sale of sex toys, which in themselves are not only beneficial to health and sexuality, but also a constitutional right of adults in this country. These backward laws blatantly violate our constitutional rights and are absolutely ludicrous,” Lawless said. Lawless founded NASAE in order to empower professionals in the sex industry by networking and providing legal assistance. NASAE also has a “Sexual Emergency System” that is designed specifically to help people like Williams and Webb who are facing legal action but may not have the resources or knowledge to protect themselves.
The organization also works to coordinate the efforts of groups such as the ACLU and the Free Speech Coalition that are not solely dedicated to this cause, but work on similar issues. According to Lawless, people in Webb’s situation are often threatened, being told that if they go to the press there will be no chance of a lenient sentence.
Lawless strongly believes in our right for sexual freedom, whether this is using sex toys or not. “If you don’t feel that sex toys are appropriate for you, that’s fine, but there shouldn’t be a legal agenda about it.”
The courts upheld the Alabama law because it did not impinge on a fundamental right (you can own them, you just can’t sell them) or target a certain group of people.
Yet another argument used by the ACLU in the Alabama case was that sex toys can often be used for therapeutic and medical purposes. According to Lawless, women who have had hysterectomies and lost their sexual drives can often use vibrators to increase the blood flow to the vaginal area.
With this information, the Alabama legislature did add an exception. You are exempted if “the act charged was done for a bona fide medical, scientific, educational, legislative, judicial, or law enforcement purpose.”
Law enforcement purposes? My imagination is running wild.
But the medical benefits of sex toys shouldn’t even be needed to argue this case. It should be given that you can walk into a store and buy a vibrator without it having to be marketed for other purposes.
I can’t even think of what other purposes a vibrator or dildo would be marketed for.
It is time for the Supreme Court to, once and for all, set a precedent that will get rid of these ridiculous laws.
If you own six or more obscene devices, e-mail Lara at lloewenstein@media.ucla.edu before moving to Texas.
Comments
Add a comment