Absolutely certain, FF. Absolutely certain.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
"Tampons"
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by WOM View PostThis question comes up a lot, for some reason. And I think it's uniquely (and quite oddly) political. Why should tampons be free? The usual answer is 'they're a necessity...women can't help but need them'. So, okay, but lots of other things are a necessity...and we charge for them. Toilet paper for starters. And, you know, food. And water. Medicines. Shoes, even. But to say 'of course you should charge for tampons' is like the third rail of some conversations. If you say 'yes, of course' then you - for some reason I can't quite understand - apparently just don't get it.
Comment
-
When my wife worked at the IGA (Canadian supermarket chain) her (male) boss was approached by a customer.
"Where are your tampax?" he was asked.
He misheard her and thought she said 'tintacks'...
"What type are you looking for?" he replied. "The ones you push in with your thumb, or bang in with a hammer."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Stumpy Pepys View PostToilet paper isn't free; neither are nappies. What makes tampons special?
The thread is 'about' tampons/sanitary towels - that's why they're at the fore here.
Originally posted by WOM View PostThe inequality thing that pisses me off most: the line for women’s washrooms. Men breeze in and out. Women have to line up fifteen deep. Nuts.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Femme Folle View PostShaving isn't really something that you have to do though, which is where this comparison disintegrates.
If men had to have mammograms, I promise you that we would universally be using an MRI-type scanner instead of having our tits smashed between two cold metal plates.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Jah Womble View PostI'm guessing that part of the issue here is that cubicles take up way more space than urinals. I agree it's ridiculous, however.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Femme Folle View PostShaving isn't really something that you have to do though, which is where this comparison disintegrates.
If men had to have mammograms, I promise you that we would universally be using an MRI-type scanner instead of having our tits smashed between two cold metal plates.
Viz the 'shaving' comment, if you read what I said, no, it isn't a direct parallel - but it can be applied to the 'if men...' smokescreen. (There was a supposed opportunity not taken.) Don't get me wrong, of course I agree that men have been arseholes over the centuries - but I don't think constantly flagging up biological impossibilities is helpful in what should be a discussion about basic human rights and necessities.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Billy Casper View PostWhen my wife worked at the IGA (Canadian supermarket chain) her (male) boss was approached by a customer.
"Where are your tampax?" he was asked.
He misheard her and thought she said 'tintacks'...
"What type are you looking for?" he replied. "The ones you push in with your thumb, or bang in with a hammer."
Comment
-
Having seen a mammogram it does seem like it was designed by someone who thought women had no nerves in their boobs.
I see the argument that without a vibrant market mechanism the many innovations in sanitary protection probably wouldn't have happened (wings, applicators etc) but basic versions should be cheap to produce and give away, a bit like generic drugs and stuff.
Like many things though, women not being able to afford their choice of sanitary towel or tampon is an indictment on how morally poor we are as a society. Just like the existence of food banks, or homeless people sleeping on the streets. It's depressing in the extreme.
Comment
-
Thing is with medical technologies like mammograms and the like, big Pharma companies like making money. Lots of money. The male arseholeness thing that TonTon identified, except here its actually quite useful because they aren't really interested if the sector is making more, as long as they themselves are. If they can invent something that shrinks the pie by 50% but takes their chunk of that up from 10% to 95%, then they will do it. Like a shot. Because it means more money for them, and they couldn't give a rats-arse about their competitors losing out.
Hence mammograms. If it really was easy to invent something that was less difficult for the patient but as reliable, then a company would have done so and marketed it. I mean, it's hardly an unknown problem we are talking about here, or a small scale one either. People will be trying hard to do it as there is lots of money to be made, and that is what drives corporate interest. And you can be damn sure that, if it existed, female patients would vote with their feet on which to use.
Comment
Comment