From the article: > “Part of it is to make sure if you’re a young girl that you can find a police car, fire truck, a periodic table or a dinosaur,” Low said. “

From the article: > “Part of it is to make sure if you’re a young girl that you can find a police car, fire truck, a periodic table or a dinosaur,” Low said. “And then similarly, if you’re a boy, if you’re more artistic and want to play with glitter, why not? Why should you feel the stigma of saying, ‘Oh, this should be shamed’ and going to a different location?” > Low said the daughter of one of his staff members inspired the bill when the girl questioned why she had to go to the boys section to find certain toys. Actually most of the article is dedicated to answering this question. You can also look at the bill: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202120220AB1084 https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml... > The Legislature finds and declares both of the following: > (a) Unjustified differences in similar products that are traditionally marketed either for girls or for boys can be more easily identified by the consumer if similar items are displayed closer to one another in one, undivided area of the retail sales floor. > (b) Keeping similar items that are traditionally marketed either for girls or for boys separated makes it more difficult for the consumer to compare the products and incorrectly implies that their use by one gender is inappropriate.