Council Approves Sex Shop Sign
Council votes to approve a new sign to be hung in front of Feminique Boutique.
The West Chester Borough Council voted to approve a new sign that will be hung in front of Feminique Boutique on Wednesday. Residents objected to the sign because it contains the outline of a nude woman and the slogan “get your heart on.”
Several borough council members voiced their disapproval of the sign, but said their hands were tied by the first amendment.
“We cannot look into the morality of this issue,” said borough council member John Manion. “We can only look at the legality. If we say no we’ll end up with a lawsuit we cannot win.”
According to the borough’s lawyer Michael Gill borough council can only vote on whether or not the sign met the borough’s code for sign appropriateness in the historic district.
That code only covers things like the size of the sign, sign materials and the materials used to hang the sign. Gill said that the council could not make any decisions based on content.
“You cannot make any determination based on speech that isn’t false or misleading,” Gill said.
Several residents, as well as borough council members, made reference to an agreement Jill McDevitt signed when she opened Feminique Boutique in 2008.
In that document, McDevitt said, “Our signage and advertising will be similarly discreet and also will not depict human genitals, pubic region, anus, buttocks or female breasts or sexual activity involving those areas.”
“She made an agreement to not depict forms and shapes,” said borough council member Cassandra Jones. “I do not appreciate the fact that there’s an agreement made, but that it’s not being followed.”
Jill McDevitt, owner of Feminique Boutique, declined to comment on the agreement but later thanked borough council for allowing her the opportunity to spread her “sex positive” message.
“My hope is that a woman will read the article that will be written about this and feel empowered,” McDevitt said.
Several residents called the sign inappropriate with several more going so far as to call it outright obscenity.
“I know we can’t legislate morality,” said borough resident Gordon Woodrow. “We also can’t legislate taste. This is certainly in poor taste.”
“People in this town work hard to maintain the historic character of West Chester, and I think it’s our duty to work just as hard to maintain its moral character.”
Council member Jordan Norley added, “A no vote on this would be walking in with open eyes into breaking the law and opening the borough up to a lawsuit.”
Dog Lover
7:39 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
I think the sign is very tasteful. It is not crude.
EJR
8:21 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Tasteful. That's rich. Sheesh. Guess some folks have a broad definition of tasteful. It is about as "tasteful" as a cartoon drawn in a grade school notebook and passed around at recess time for a snicker...
As a professional and a woman, this certainly does not make me feel "empowered." it's just a lowbrow sign.
Beege Marshall
2:16 pm on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Agree with all you said EJR. Also agree with most statements in this article that were made by townspeople. I've been a resident of West Chester for many decades. Friends who visited from elsewhere always loved the historic feel of the town and complimented it.
The borough's code needs an amendment. When it was written it never anticipated a business having anything to do with sex opening up in town. This is a slippery slide going down hill. And they've been talking about property values surrounding the school district and taxes ? Within the next ten years we can have a block devoted to sex shops, or have them sprinkled around town. THAT will certainly draw families to our terrific school district.
nona
10:25 am on Thursday, June 28, 2012
Gordon: Who is this "moral character" you speak of? [My attempt at humor].
But seriously folks: "people work hard to maintain the historic character of West Chester..." ...Have you met Eli Kahn? Have you seen the Rite Aid sign and its windows that resemble a gangsta car's [no view in]? I don't have a huge issue with the design of the sign, other than it's "sophomoric" as one commentor posted yesterday. I do question how binding or legal her initial agreement with the borough is vis à vis signage depiction, which begs the question: How moral is she being breaking her own promise? That's the morality question I have. But also Bravo! to her for her tenacity in being able to keep her business going in these tough times. If one has an issue with her establishment, one needn't visit it. But hide your children! They may grow up to have sex!
soupchef
12:56 pm on Friday, June 29, 2012
The sign is tacky and the building looks like something from a Mississippi strip mall. This is one unclassy owner.
Cathy Binder
7:30 pm on Sunday, July 1, 2012
I am no prude but I do not find the sign in keeping with West Chester's tone. But the borough does to some degree have its hands tied with the issue. I think the owner could have come up with a way to get people into her shop in a more discreet way. This I agree is too much a play on words and more than slightly immature.