Novelty Testicles Are No Laughing Matter in Virginia

You remember my lovely post about truck nuts, right? Well, it seems some people more notable than I have also taken notice of these delightful novelty items. I dropped by Jeffrey Rowland’s blog this morning to find that he, too, takes issue with genitalia for motor vehicles. Not only that, but he pointed out that the widely beloved comic Achewood has even dealt with the topic in its own insultingly sophomoric way.

But that’s not all! I guess this truck nuts phenomenon is so well-endowed that it is now raising the eyebrows of politicians – particularly one Lionell Spruill, Delegate for the 77th District of Virginia. And I guess it’s relatively big news.

According to The Virginian-Pilot:

The buzz in Richmond and around the globe is all about HB 1452: “No person shall display upon or equip any motor vehicle with any object or device that depicts, represents or resembles human genitalia, regardless of size or scale.”

The penalty for driving around with dangling plastic genitals could be $250.

At first, I was aggravated that it was a Democrat who was championing this one because I felt it provided a perfect example of the very untrue things conservatives claim to hate about liberals: that we feel the need to squelch everything that even remotely disturbs our overly sensitive natures. And then it occurred to me that if I installed a hood ornament that looked like a great big erect penis, complete with veins, I’d probably be cited for some form of indecency. So I suppose it stands to reason that certain Virginians might want to ban the frighteningly detailed novelty ballsacks.

But should they? On the one hand – and this is coming from someone who has one hell of a disgusting a sense of humor – I think they’re tasteless and silly and not at all clever. On the other hand, it’s not like they’re the direct cause of Virginia’s social woes. I doubt burglars choose their targets based on whether the vehicle in the driveway has gonads.

I understand the need for decency in a civilized society, but where is that line when it comes to novelty items? Is Spruill overreacting? Should cars have body parts hanging from them that are, by law, covered up on their drivers? Or is it completely stupid to worry about this sort of thing in light of problems like homelessness and mental illness?

What it finally boils down to is a matter of free speech and, as such, is worth consideration. I personally think such a ban is pointless, but I just don’t care enough about truck nuts to rally behind Spruill’s detractors. To me, it’s a major case of Who Gives a Shit?

Although Rowland does make a good point:

I guess people should technically be allowed to have the fake balls, but why do people need to want to have some fake balls? It's just crap is what it is.

Indeed.

Read and post comments

Advertisements

About kirkstarr

I draw pictures for a living.
This entry was posted in Can I Say Something? and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Novelty Testicles Are No Laughing Matter in Virginia

  1. snoringKatZ says:

    And yet those mudflaps with the (obviously) nude buxom bimbo silhouette have been rolling around the US since I was a little kid… I think if my son asked what those are I'd say "They're testicles on a four-wheeled penis."

  2. Xeyli says:

    Ummm…. who on their natural bodies has HOT PINK TESTICLES?But yeah, why should it matter, and why would anyone want it on their truck anyway?

  3. Jay says:

    Personally, although I find them tacky-to-the-max, I don't mind them so much for the sole reason that they better help me identify douchebags and the vehicles they drive. I say, thank you Mister Truck Toy Testicle Inventor. Because of you I no longer need to extend the benefit of my doubt to that fellow in the F350 there. He's clearly marked his douchiness with his dangling toy coin purse. We're all laughin' with ya dude…….right.

  4. DKN says:

    Hmmm….I dunno…are you by any chance related to any rednecks? LOL! My redneck cousin would LOVE these.And L to the O to the L, Kirk. Good find!!

  5. tom says:

    Remember, when truck testicles are outlawed, only outlaws will have truck testicles.

  6. Budd says:

    These things are retarded. The propeller is in much better taste.

  7. GuitPicken61 says:

    Did you say "free speech?" Truck nuts are a "right" defended by the Constitution?

  8. Kirk says:

    Sure, in the same manner as any bumper sticker or mudflap. The statement is stupid, but the scrotum-loving douchebags have their right to make it.

  9. Jenn says:

    LOLblue balls…funny. :)These things are nuts. Heh.Nuts.LOL

  10. CrowSeer says:

    Oooh… that's a tricky one. It does seem kinda like censorship to fine people for attaching "truck nuts" (I still giggle everytime I say that in my head) to their vehicles. Obviously I can't even begin to understand why someone would want them… but banning representations of the human form does sort of remind me of that episode of The Simpsons, where Marge is all for "decency" until the mob want to tear down Michelangelo's sculpture of David. I know, there's no comparison between a classical work of art and plastic car novelties… but where do you draw the line?

    "Is it a masterpiece, or just some guy with his pants down?" —Kent Brockman

  11. Lauri says:

    Oooh, and you posted (so to speak), on my birthday!!!I suppose it would be alright if people put them in teeny jock straps???

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s