Should the titillating covers of magazines such as Maxim and Cosmopolitan be on full display in stores where children can see them?  A Tennessee Senate bill that will be voted on today proposes to make it a misdemeanor to display those magazines without a suitable cover – a cover like those over more pornographic magazines such as Playboy and Penthouse.  Here is the summary for SB 2249/HB2438 which clarifies who will be held responsible for displaying such materials.  This is from the Tennessee State Legislature page.

Bill Title: As introduced, clarifies that the person committing the offense of display of materials harmful to minors is the person responsible for displaying the visual depiction that contains material harmful to minors, which may include a retail store owner, retail store employee, distributor, supplier, or wholesaler of the material; increases offense from Class C to Class A misdemeanor. – Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 17.The bill is not designed to put such magazines out of business; rather, it strives to keep the covers from being on full display.

I did an online search of images for Maxim front covers.  Some front covers were okay, but others crossed the line, in my opinion.  I did the same for Cosmopolitan.  Cosmo covers were definitely tamer than Maxim, but there were still some questionable ones.  I won’t post the covers here, but you can do your own search if you are unfamiliar with the magazines.

Both proponents and opponents to the bill are vocal. Some say that kids see more exposure at the neighborhood swimming pool or shopping mall than they’d see on the cover of these magazines.  Others say that with provocative nudity becoming more and more commonplace, the line needs to be drawn somewhere.  What do you think?

Note:  This post was edited to clarify the wording of the bill and to include a direct reference to the TN legislature page for the bill.