[LeatherTrumpet]

'Wait until JK Rowling hears about this!': Shoppers ridicule 'woke' Superdrug
after it launches sanitary products for 'people who menstruate' because the
word woman ‘is not inclusive enough’

• Customers slammed the £3.99 Luna brand for saying 'people who menstruate'
• One Tweeter said online that it would make a great present for her father
• Others criticised Superdrug for 'playing games' with gender identity on labels

full details in link below



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...enstruate.html

[Shaun]

I really don't get why it's so hard to understand that trans men sometimes still menstruate, and do not wish to be identified as women.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

I really don’t get why people get upset/annoyed over stuff like this

[Smithy]

There’s people starving all round the world and snowflakes get upset about stuff like this?

[LeatherTrumpet]

top comment from the article:

That is highly insulting to women

[Cherie]

If they have transitioned they won’t be menstruating so this is pointless, if they have to use female products while transitioning so be it, they won’t be female forever, I don’t get why some men get so annoyed about an issue that affects women born as women

[UserSince2005]

Originally Posted by Cherie

If they have transitioned they won’t be menstruating so this is pointless, if they have to use female products while transitioning so be it, they won’t be female forever, I don’t get why some men get so annoyed about an issue that affects women born as women

Its not that simple. Just because you identify as a man doesn't necessary mean that you want to have the operation to change sex.
You can have the gender of a male and still menstruate.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by UserSince2005

Its not that simple. Just because you identify as a man doesn't necessary mean that you want to have the operation to change sex.
You can have the gender of a male and still menstruate.

Why does the product have to bow to that persons wishes? Are we not all equal allegedly...

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Why does the product have to bow to that persons wishes? Are we not all equal allegedly...

Probably because they're the consumer making the purchase

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Cherie

Why does the product have to bow to that persons wishes? Are we not all equal allegedly...

Yet you seem quite happy to alienate a section of people, is that equal?

[LeatherTrumpet]

how many people are we talking about here

roughly?

[Liam-]

Also I’m pretty sure, if you asked pre-op trans women, I’d imagine writing on the back of a box would be the last thing on their minds

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Yet you seem quite happy to alienate a section of people, is that equal?

Originally Posted by Liam-

Also I’m pretty sure, if you asked pre-op trans women, I’d imagine writing on the back of a box would be the last thing on their minds

So, is it trivial or is it alienation?

This is, kind of, my problem with the debate. Women are told to stop getting offended or for caring too much about trivial matters like "words on a box" whilst simultaneously being told that trivial matters like "words on a box" are alienating trans people. So, effectively, trans people can take issue with words they find degrading or erasing, but cis women can't. It's a double standard.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

So, is it trivial or is it alienation?

This is, kind of, my problem with the debate. Women are told to stop getting offended or for caring too much about trivial matters like "words on a box" whilst simultaneously being told that trivial matters like "words on a box" are alienating trans people. So, effectively, trans people can take issue with words they find degrading or erasing, but cis women can't. It's a double standard.

Well not really, my point was nobody is actually asking for these things to be done, but people’s reaction to it being done shows that they are indeed perfectly fine with the idea of certain people not being represented or included imo.

It’s like the equivalent of the strawman of angry flag wavers being mad at black people, for the bbc choosing not to sing a song.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Well not really, my point was nobody is actually asking for these things to be done, but people’s reaction to it being done shows that they are indeed perfectly fine with the idea of certain people not being represented or included imo.

It’s like the equivalent of the strawman of angry flag wavers being mad at black people, for the bbc choosing not to sing a song.

Not really an equivalent. Stopping racist actions against minorities has no effect on white people. It helps to move towards equality.

Forcing a change in language women can use about themselves because a minority of people find it excludes them is simultaneously telling one group their feelings on language used to refer to them matters more than the other. That's unequal and a double standard.

[Liam-]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Not really an equivalent. Stopping racist actions against minorities has no effect on white people. It helps to move towards equality.

Forcing a change in language women can use about themselves because a minority of people find it excludes them is simultaneously telling one group their feelings on language used to refer to them matters more than the other. That's unequal and a double standard.

Nobody is saying women can’t call themselves women, inclusivity is in no way ‘erasure’ or an attempt to silence or eradicate women

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Liam-

Well not really, my point was nobody is actually asking for these things to be done, but people’s reaction to it being done shows that they are indeed perfectly fine with the idea of certain people not being represented or included imo.

It’s like the equivalent of the strawman of angry flag wavers being mad at black people, for the bbc choosing not to sing a song.

If nobody asked for it to be done why is it, if you're against this you're that same as racists? Nah...

These are for people with a female reproductive system, that's just a fact, it's not highlighted to offend anyone.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

So, is it trivial or is it alienation?

This is, kind of, my problem with the debate. Women are told to stop getting offended or for caring too much about trivial matters like "words on a box" whilst simultaneously being told that trivial matters like "words on a box" are alienating trans people. So, effectively, trans people can take issue with words they find degrading or erasing, but cis women can't. It's a double standard.

[Liam-]

I can’t help but find it funny that a large chunk of the women offended by something like this, would probably also be the type of people offended by ‘fathers day’ because it doesn’t include single mothers

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I can’t help but find it funny that a large chunk of the women offended by something like this, would probably also be the type of people offended by ‘fathers day’ because it doesn’t include single mothers

[AnnieK]

I'm a bit torn by this......"for people who mensutruate" is fine as far as I'm concerned but in all honesty why does it need any kind of descriptor like that on it? Its a sanitary product and only useful for one thing.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by AnnieK

I'm a bit torn by this......"for people who mensutruate" is fine as far as I'm concerned but in all honesty why does it need any kind of descriptor like that on it? Its a sanitary product and only useful for one thing.

I got a whole load of pads in with several boxes of odds i bought at an auction and i used them for packing parcels as they were good for fragile items.

Someone left me neutral feedback with the comment "sanitary pads should not be used as void fill"

[Saph]

this is truly disgusting i shall be writing to the ceo of superdrug to have these removed from the shelves!!

[Saph]

im talking about the £1.99 clunky mascara they do btw not this

[LeatherTrumpet]

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/s...-a4540671.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...ducts-22630029

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/li...-debate/04/09/