Introduction
The Op-Ed titled “Do we really need a law mandating gender-neutral toy sections at stores?” written by Nicholas Goldberg in the LA Times Column deals with the issue of gender-neutral toy sections in stores. The author refutes the idea of gender-separated toy sections but simultaneously points out the bill’s necessity. His main thesis is that despite the importance of the issue, the adoption of such a bill fails to solve a problem that the government should not solve. Goldberg argues that the government should introduce such an approach, i.e., legislative intervention, only when no other solutions are left (Goldberg). The author concludes that society should step away from imposing unnecessary mandates but rather attempt to draw the lines on government intervention.
Analysis
Throughout the text, Nicholas Goldberg makes several assumptions and claims, which are directed to different auditory and presume numerous variables in them. Some of them are good examples of factual statements and political claims. His position in the article is clear, and the methodology to prove his claims is somewhat reliable, even though the evidence can sound controversial to some parts of the audience.
The first claim made by the author was the bill wanted to solve a problem that had already been essentially solved. This is a claim of fact because department stores have already stepped away from the gender separation of toy sections. The unspoken assumption in this claim, which is the same as the second claim discussed, is that there is nothing to be legislatively fixed since everything can be done without government intervention. Another important assumption of Goldberg goes far beyond the focus on the toy section and attempts to touch upon the bigger picture. He asks if the government’s role should be that encompassing, implying that the government’s influence on the economy should be reduced (Goldberg). This claim became an interesting example of a political assumption attempting to change or re-establish the action course.
As evidence to the claim that the problem has already been solved, Goldberg gives a factual example that department stores do not really have gender-based toy departments, e.g., Walmart, Target. (Goldberg). In this regard, the imposing of the mandate serves no benefit. Talking about diminishing the government’s role in the economy and distribution sectors, the author’s evidence is theoretical. The main evidence of the author is that the general good of improving wages and workers’ rights’ protection is beneficial, but several legislations are a burden to the economy. Such legislation as whom to appoint, what to sell, and how to sell do not result in an increase in productivity and social benefits, as claimed by Goldberg.
Goldberg tried to appeal to the audience by using traditional techniques such as ethos, pathos, and logos. Through his support of Potato Head and gender diversity, the author implies ethos in an attempt to prove to the audience that he can be considered a reliable supporter of gender initiatives. Pathos, an emotional appeal, could be seen through his appeal to an “old-fashion” approach to dealing with gender-segregated toy section – boycotting. Lastly, the logical appeal of Goldberg, or logos, was seen in his argument by presenting the opinions of scholars in relation to the issues discussed. Law College Professors from different institutions were used to give the Op-Ed piece a logical and professional flavor.
Conclusion
Overall, the author’s thesis that the legislative action fails to solve a problem that the government should not solve and sometimes can be excessive can be agreed with. The government indeed can lower its intervention, especially in the areas where it can spark controversy and can be theoretically solved at the societal level. Despite the lack of solid statistical evidence, the extensive and appropriate usage of appealing techniques and logical claims made the article a credible opinion. Based on them, I can agree with the author’s thesis and the assumptions provided.
Work Cited
Goldberg, Nicholas. “Do we really need a law mandating gender-neutral toy sections at stores?” LA Times. 2021.