Edinburgh considering period products for all people

No not aimed at anyone (well maybe those who faint at the sight of the word ‘woman’ on sanoro packaging).

Sitting here having a coffee with the period from hell so thinking aloud - I have this period because I am a woman and no amount of rebranding or wishing will make not stop.

@KittenKong I'm a bit confused. Is this aimed at me? - *Give your head a wobble.

I was continuing the conversation regarding the word 'people' being used rather than 'women or girls' from upthread.

Surely people will just sell them online. (to places that pay for them)

Bit insulting that all these things were utterly ignorable before wokeism.

When I have my period - and it’s not pleasant these days - I don’t sit and ponder my identity. It’s not an issue.

All I think of is how come they don’t make extra extra extra heavy flow pads, and if my additions two pairs of period pants will stop the bed looking like the horse head scene in the godfather by morning.

It’s very much a luxury to be concerned about the use of a bloody descriptive word for a physical function. Give your head a wobble.

www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/period-products-free-provision-scotland-bill

Monica Lennon's report, included as a link on that page -

Mentions 'those who menstruate' once

Mentions 'boy's' once

Mentions 'female' once

But goes through some spectacular linguistic gymnastics to avoid the words 'women' or 'girls'.

Neither of which appear at all. In a report to support a Bill to do with period products.

This obviously has nothing to do with men thinking they can menstruate. I would have thought it’s for women who menstruate but don’t ‘identify’ as women.

It is coming directly from Stonewall, to get higher up on the list.

Yes indeed, that's frequently a factor.

I'm pretty sure that is 100% what it is about, yes.

And I'm pretty sure that's an extremely naive view. The pressure to detach "woman" from female bodies across the board is mainly coming from males, because people listen to what male people want more. The same language is much rarer in men, and not as dehumanising (no one calls them "ejaculators" unlike "menstruators", "bleeders" and "birthing bodies".)

Hi

So every Scottish authority has to do this survey by law - from the SG.

You also have to target men for responses as to how distribution could work. It’s not a terrible idea on two fronts - reducing stigma and thinking about men as parents.

I filled the survey in and told them that they should use 'women and girls' in their promotional material and not make girls feel ashamed of being girls. They never listen but it made me feel better about the stupidity. At least they can't say no one told them.

[quote owlinnahat]@AlisonDonut - I'm saying I don't think that Edinburgh LA's language in launching this scheme has anything to do with those women. I think they are making this scheme more accessible to men and NB people who also need period products.

Unless you think that's wrong and no one should be allowed tampons unless they can turn up in a floral pink dress with "adult human female of childbearing age" embroidered along cuffs and hems.[/quote]
Which women? Do you mean the women that aren't men or the men that aren't women?

Why is it ok to advertise things to 'men' knowing that everyone knows what a man is, but not women without having to also include all the men that may or not actually be women?

[quote owlinnahat]@DameHelena - I'm pretty sure that is 100% what it is about, yes.[/quote]
Thank you

@DameHelena - I'm pretty sure that is 100% what it is about, yes.

Does it mean women who have female bodies but identify as men?

@AlisonDonut - I'm saying I don't think that Edinburgh LA's language in launching this scheme has anything to do with those women. I think they are making this scheme more accessible to men and NB people who also need period products.

Unless you think that's wrong and no one should be allowed tampons unless they can turn up in a floral pink dress with "adult human female of childbearing age" embroidered along cuffs and hems.

I don't think the "all genders" is aimed at trans women at all - this is clearly language aimed at including AFAB non binary people and trans men. Trans women clearly won't need these things but many people who don't identify as women will.

men with "female" anatomy?

What do you mean by female anatomy? Why would anyone refer to it as female?

As an example -

www.nhsinform.scot/healthy-living/screening/cervical/cervical-screening-smear-test

www.nhsinform.scot/illnesses-and-conditions/cancer/cancer-types-in-adults/prostate-cancer

For the first link, the word woman is never used on it's own. It always appears with a qualifier - 'woman and those who...'.

The second link, it only mentions men.

Odd that.

I think they mean women.

People with lady-dicks are welcome to insert tampons up there if they like. That should be an eye - waterer opener.

@Lekisa658 Men don't have female anatomy.

'You people'? Seriously?

The whole 'people', 'those with a cervix' (seen most recently on the Scottish cervical screening radio ads), 'menstruators' thing etc etc isn't inclusive. In the case of 'people', It's meaningless. In the case of 'those with a cervix', it excludes various groups of women.

And it doesn't happen to men's health, services and products, strangely enough. Have you seen many condom ads which refer to 'ejaculators'? Many ads for erectile dysfunction ads which refer to 'sperm producers? Many prostate cancer campaigns which refer to 'those with a prostate'? (Hint, even Prostate Cancer UK stand by using the word men on their publicity materials).

If it's about 'inclusion', we should see all the above, in the same way as it has happened to the word woman.

It hasn't. Why?

The message obviously isn't getting though @Leiska658