<< "This OJ tastes funny"
today in "our new robot overlords" news >>
"Do you have Prince Albert in a can?"
Genital piercings for women were banned by the Georgia House Wednesday as lawmakers considered a bill outlining punishments for female genital mutilation. [...] An amendment adopted without objection added "piercing" to the list of things that may not be done to female genitals. Even adult women would not be allowed to get the procedure. The bill eventually passed 160-0, with no debate.
Amendment sponsor Rep. Bill Heath, R-Bremen, was slack-jawed when told after the vote that some adults seek the piercings. "What? I've never seen such a thing," Heath said. "I, uh, I wouldn't approve of anyone doing it. I don't think that's an appropriate thing to be doing."
The ban applies only to women, not men.
Tags: big brother, perversions
Current Music: Sunshine Blind -- Noone ♬
I blame Alice Walker.
ralesk says:
Who'd have thought. Of course, men driving several piercings are doing no harm to themselves.
Mind, I haven't got too much problem with it. If someone wants a half-pound metal thing dangling along with their bits, I say go and do it. I'll probably give them a weird look and if it's big enough I'll call them crazy, but... These double-standards just SUCK.
I'm sure you have heard me rant enough about the other double standard, so I'll refrain from bringing it up. I know others will anyway.
anti_tim says:
Both South Carolina and Oklahoma still have a ban on TATTOO SHOPS, so at least Georgia is a bit more progressive in some regards.
wsxyz says:
I live in Georgia.
This is a classic example of legislatures voting on a bill without knowing what is in it. Sure you can find the odd moron to make a stupid comment like the representative in the story, but I'm don't believe most legislators would knowingly ban voluntary genital piercings.
The problem of female genital mutilation is a serious one, especially as the number of immigrants from cultures where it is practiced grows. The Atlanta area has become a magnet for immigrants in the past decade, and I think the impetus behind the law was good.
Whoever was behind the amendment adding piercings is no doubt pleased with his coup, but I expect the law will be changed next year, and simply ignored until then. It has to wait until next year because the yearly 90-day legislative term is almost over, and no one is going to call a special session to talk about genital piercings.
icis_machine says:
rumor has it that one of the people on "mad mad house" wasn't aware that people pierced themselves there, so apparently there needs to be a PSA.
i'm just wondering what got someone to write up such a thing. aren't we suppose to be working on unemployment or terrorism or something?
bazil says:
Here's my question for you, a Georgian: Are any of your representatives female?
And I bet a number of the men have or had teenage daughters.
But then, I suppose that's the point.
Yes I imagine there is a core anti-piercing block in the legislature composed of concerned dads.
I don't think this piece of news is any more or less suprising and stupid than the dihydrogen monoxide scare a few days ago.
no one is going to call a special session to talk about genital piercings.
We can dream, can't we?
jason0x21 says:
I'm personally waiting for a "pierce-in".
zapevaj says:
You know, you *do* live in San Francisco. Get three gothchicks in one place at one time and within 15 minutes one of them will start talking about her hood piercing.
otterley says:
What terrible writing. They're not banned yet; the bill that would make them illegal is still under consideration.
One would hope the text would be revised before it appears on the governor's desk, but it's Georgia, so who knows?
suppressingfire says:
What, no photo for this story?
cirollo says:
Another gem from the legislature that wanted to require a grand jury indictment against a fetus before an abortion could be performed.
From the text of the bill:
(c) Any person seeking to have an execution performed shall first seek a grand jury indictment against the fetus for the commission of an offense for which the death penalty can be given, including the offense of murder as defined in Code Section 16-5-1, kidnapping as defined in Code Section 16-5-40, hijacking an aircraft as defined in Code Section 16-5-44, rape as defined in Code Section 16-6-1, armed robbery as defined in Code Section 16-8-41, or treason as defined in Code Section 16-11-1.
suppafly says:
hahaha.. that's awesome.
jkonrath says:
I think this is supposed to cover the fairly common situation where a pregnant woman gets through TSA security with no incident, then aborts the baby on the plane and uses the fetus as a weapon for a hijacking.
gths says:
This reminded me of The Family Guy. Thanks a bloody lot.
en_ki says:
I eagerly await the day when the electric chair is introduced as an abortion method.
bbe says:
Amendment sponsor Rep. Bill Heath, R-Bremen, was slack-jawed
Wow, I wouldn't think Georgia politicans being "slack-jawed" would be considered worthy of noting.
e_ambrosienyx says:
Remind me not to move to GA then. Wonder how much the fine is? Like any of those dried up, wrinkly ass fossils would ever begin to be able to describe any of the following:
pleasurable sex
breasts that don't sag to the navel
(p.s. I'm not very fond of the bible belt for stupid laws like this)
kendo_motoko says:
I'm just wondering how they intend to enforce this ban on the individual woman. Routine inspections? Will a clit feel become part of your standard frisking in the police department? Or if the woman got the piercing out of state? Will they add a new element to border patrol? How will they make women stop wearing them? Sheesh! Talk about unnecessary body politicking! You can't classify a woman going into a piercing shop to get a genital piercing the same thing as enforced genital mutilation. The ignorance of politicians is shocking. I guess we can all rest easy now since Rep. Bill Heath never heard of such a thing, it can't possibly exist or isn't something of which we should approve. Automagically. Just cuz he says so.
If the law passed (it has not) and then stood more than a year (unlikely say others in this thread) then the next logical step would be to use the then existing law to enforce the ban in body piercing shops. Note that I think this is unlikely to happen and hope so since all banning shops will do is push the willing towards "Have piercing equipment, will travel" freelancers, not that there is anything wrong in my eyes with their practice.
Entertainingly enough I found this via Wikipedia's Current Events and posted about on lj before reading jwz in friends: http://www.livejournal.com/users/wilylojik/13547.html
tjcrowley says:
And people wonder why I moved out of Georgia.
belgand says:
While I certainly don't approve of the underlying concepts involved and the general idiocy that seems to be the hallmark of this sort of thing anything decreases the number of mutilated skanky women out there is a good thing.
My suspicion is that one of the state reps picked up someone with a pierced girly bit and didn't dig it.
I mean, yeah, it's nasty as fuck, but at least give people the right to fuck themselves up as long as it can't possibly hurt anyone in any way possible. Well, maybe if you try sticking anything near the newly dentate vagina.
valacosa says:
Clit piercings: Voluntary.
Female Genital Mutilation: Involuntary.
Clit piercings: Increases sexual sensitivity.
Female Genital Mutilation: If orgasms are still possible at all, they take hours to achieve. Intended to ensure those evil sensual women don't go astray...
Also, I like this modification of the actual news statement:
Amendment sponsor Rep. Bill Heath, R-Bremen, was slack-jawed when told after the vote that some women actually have orgasms. "What? I've never seen such a thing," Heath said. "I, uh, I wouldn't approve of them doing it. I don't think that's an appropriate thing to be doing."
sanguine37 says:
Does anyone know if this ammendment would ban consensual female circumcision or how genital mutilation is defined within the ammendment? There are woman out there who choose, for their own reasons, to undergo clitoral circumcisions, removal of the labia, and so on. Would that be banned as well?
What a scary world we live in.
beschizza says:
At that point, we should also implement a "three nutjob strikes and you're out" rule.
e.g. one could voluntarily have one's clitoris mutilated for fun, voluntarily stuff one's titties into a chipper for fun, voluntarily have one's anus stretched to accomodate a magic eight ball for fun, and so on.
But do three, and you get sectioned for being, like, totally fucked up.
Same goes for men. Express your emotional retardation by damagin thyself all you like, but we throw you in the loonie bin eventually.
phaid says:
In these sorts of cases, before everyone goes all hog-wild posting about the stupidity of lawmakers, it's a good idea to read the text of the actual bill.
Looks to me like it was a perfectly reasonable thing to pass, until they went and added the word "piercing" to the list. Their site must not be updated all that frequently as a search for "piercing" yields nothing, so the amendment either wasn't really tacked on, or it's not made it into the database yet.
kimcorp says:
hmmm, so cutting the foreskin off new born male babies is still okay ?
novalis says:
Not so -- the ban doesn't apply to adults.