I have absolutely seen it all!

@Bergamotte I'm really confused now 😂
If Oscar is the tiny girl-man that's the one I am talking about not having a mastectomy, not the giant woman (? Carolina?). Or to put it in a different way neither person in that photo has had a mastectomy but if one identifies as a man (the small one) you would think they would have had a mastectomy.

Tell me about it my first six years of periods were hell every three weeks and the pain, then 10 months utter hell with pains with a coil do any trans women want to swap places with that kind of agony? No thought not.

Available in woman’s sizes I see.

We can self id as laydees. But when trying to target women as a biological group it is: Menstruators, People with a cervix, menopausal people, pregnant people, birthing partners or just avoiding the word altogether.

Not so with men.

I do think that has eased off a bit of late, maybe peak madness has passed, but some people have a short memory.

I don't think I've misunderstood anything.

How many people needing to use period protection denied themselves that luxury before these type of ads?
Precisely none, I'll bet.
The market remains the same. Biological women who have a period every month. No matter what they're calling themselves.

I think you completely misunderstood my post.

Also, pretty sure we're allowed to call ourselves women.

That photo does look like some sort of trick perspective!
In some other pictures Oscar's tattoo of a zombie unicorn, with lots of red blood dripping from its mouth, did make me look twice (seemed like the period pants might not be very effective). But of course something catching your interest like that is probably what they want when advertising.

But to your question: Carolina (the model without a masectomy) makes no claims to identify as a man.

It's not the person or their presentation I object to. It's the undefining of woman as a sex class, which I object to because it unavoidably requires social and political erasure of the female experience and the invalidation of female voices.

In short, the picture doesn't bother me. The framing of this person as Not a Woman and of periods as things that happen to A Random and Undefinable Group of People does. I believe it diminishes and damages all of us, so I think very little of brands that are happy to partake in erasing the female voice to sell a few pants.

I don't think anyone is saying people shouldn't have whatever makes them comfortable.

But this isn't about 'each to their own'. It's about messages in advertising, about influence. Most of us think we're immune to advertising because we can consciously dismiss it, but our subconscious minds absolutely are influenced, especially when we're young.

Not so long ago there was a scandal around the fashion industry featuring size zero models, literally making money while 'modelling' anorexia to young women, some of whom went down a path they would never have otherwise been led down.

Here we have a business whose purpose is to make money via sales in the short term and via bolstering their brand in the long term – for example by flashing their inclusivity credentials at the younger generation, who after all, are going to be their most lucrative market because they will be buying period products for many years to come.

These are the people they're targeting. And if one single girl sees this and thinks, "How great, how inclusive, how kind, and I'm a bit uncomfortable in my body, or a bit gender non conforming, or think I'm gay," and if this smiling trans model helps to push her down a path of mutilation and medicalisation with who knows what long term effects on her health, even if it's just one single girl, then fuck that.

There are certain things I regret asking in this life. Asking wtf a packer is ranks high 😳

Superglue?

How do they attach them?

Ok. Thanks for answering. That does show some very strange way of thinking though, doesn’t it?

in biology it is female that is the default/standard. Though socially I do see that men have some advantages.

This.
Meh, each to their own.
I don't need or want one of those but why shouldn't trans men have them if it makes them more comfortable?
Chocolate and wine and big pants makes mine more comfortable, if these make someone else more comfortable, that's a good thing, surely?!

Access? What female bodied person has been denied "access" to period products and gynae care?

Why do we need to agree with this nonsense that these products are also for men, in order for biological females who deny their biology to be able to access them? 🤯

Yeah I tend to agree with this, transmen are still biologically women and will need access to period products and gynae care right?

I don’t like the term gender affirming, how can you affirm a gender by wearing a pair of boxer shorts when you are literally bleeding through your vagina? I don’t believe an item of clothing defines a gender. Apart from that irritating sentence I am not bothered and agree, all women, regardless how they present or live their lives deserve access to period care and products that work for them.

They should just wear a Kotek night pads.

Its makes me look like I'm wearing a pecker!

Nope. Because having demanded that their personalities cannot possibly exist in a woman's body and thereby redefined womanhood as an unspecified-but-definitely-not-bodily bundle of preferences, character traits and behaviours, there is no reason now not to reassert the fact of their female bodies. As long as you don't actually use the word female, or woman, or any other similar collective noun to group the people who share the same type of bodies together.

Everyone seems to be buying period pants these days. Trans women wear them too apparently. I feel sad for the bio woman who actually has to deal with this shit for real. Not in a imagined way, who has enough trouble dealing with cramps and pain, flooding and the shitty end of being female. Without wondering where the pecker, real or plastic will fit.

Wouldn't transmen who want to wear a packer prefer the normal plain black normal modibod briefs?? Why the need for these in your face designs?

This. It's just pants. TBH I quite like the idea of cycling short type period pants.

No bikini line worries 🤣

On that subject, I really do hope that transpeople can succeed in 'normalising' having whatever healthy body you were born with.

I think that ship sailed some time ago.

Wanting a historically marginalised group to retain the right to their own name and to the resources they have fought for to mitigate that marginalisation is not hate.

No one objects to a female person presenting however they wish and being made visible in that presentation.

We do object to a female person who insists that womanhood is not the same thing as being female because in doing so (s)he unavoidably requires us to redefine Womanhood for every single one of us. (S)he, in her need to define herself as Not Woman while having to acknowledge the fact she is female, undefines womanhood for all of us and in doing so, disempowers all of us.

It is not hate to reject another person's unilateral imposition of their own prejudice on oneself and ones people.

It is not hate to say "No, this definition you require me to accept for myself is not true and it damages me"

On that subject, I really do hope that transpeople can succeed in 'normalising' having whatever healthy body you were born with.

Nobody should feel they need to remove body parts to conform to any kind of body ideal.

How many of these do you think they sell. And how does that compare to the number of women who have stopped buying their products?