Is this a male in period pants?

[NoHopeForUs]

If yes AIBU that they should NOT be advertising this?

https://www.modibodi.co.uk/products/classic-boyshort-heavy-overnight

🙄🙄

What was offensive? Please explain.

"Just terminology" = dishonest semantics to obfuscate and lie about objective, provable fact.

Words matter. They have meanings.

If sex is observed rather than assigned - and it is - then why can't we use the word "observed"? And why do you think people who aren't trying to muddy the concept of sex wouldn't want to use the right words?

Oh for goodness sake, that's a transman or a biological female, person with XX chromosomes, uterus owner, menstruator, whatever. So fucking what?

About needing T shots to grow facial hair - go tell that to the fabulous Harnaam Kaur!

While I'm at it - ALL bodies are marvellous. Regardless of whether they are capable of bearing and/or feeding children. Let's not reduce the female body down to the sole purpose of procreation - we are worth much more than that.

Can we refer to transwomen as being male then? After all it's just terminology.

I cannot understand why anyone is worried about what underwear anyone else wears. I'm not even this invested in what DP puts on each day!

Products are always marketed using the body types (one of) their target markets aspires to have. This is why stairlift adverts always have models who look about 50 and fit enough to run a 5k, toys aimed at 7 year olds use models that look about 12, and bra manufacturers use young women with large, pert boobs.

If period pants are marketed towards transmen who aspire to have facial hair, it's no surprise they use a model who is a transman with facial hair, regardless of what his ovaries might do each month.

Honestly I cannot see why anyone is getting their own panties in a twist over it.

I'm not at all bothered by a transman modelling period pants. He probably needs them. I'm nor bothered by a transwoman modelling bras either, although it would put me off the brand because if they fit her, they aren't going to fit me.

I'm bothered by dishonest semantics designed to muddy the concept of sex and suggest it's not innate, observable and immutable, though.

Can we refer to transwomen as being male then? After all it's just terminology.

As if you don't already??

If it's on here discussing it in the abstract, clearly you're allowed. Go right ahead. Posts don't get deleted for just that. Noone's stopping you. People might stop you if you were to say it to or about a specific person, as it's just rude. I'd stop you if you were referring to one of my friends.

I meanwhile will continue to call transwomen women and transmen men, and AMAB and AFAB respectively if needs be. I and every other person is perfectly aware of the anatomy they may have been born with, but a) that's none of my business and b) is exactly why this advert is important. Showing people you can say 'I'm a man' and appear very masculine, while not being ashamed of those parts.

I meanwhile will continue to call transwomen women and transmen men, and AMAB and AFAB respectively if needs be.

There's never any need to use an incorrect or misleading term on purpose unless you're trying to obscure a truth or literally deny the language that makes it possible to express.

You're intentionally avoiding the prefix 'trans' and the word 'observed' because you want to deny the truth that they express. If it didn't matter, you'd happily use those terms because they're accurate.

It's Newspeak.

Its not newspeak, its being kind, and respectful, and using the phrases and terminology that the people it applies to prefer is used.

you know, manners.

It is the very definition of Newspeak. It is literally changing words and nullifying the meaning of existing ones to try to make it impossible to express a truth.

I can tell you exactly what's wrong with "assigned sex". Sex isn't assigned, ever. It's the wrong word. It is absurd. It means something that doesn't and cannot apply here. Sex can't be assigned. Nobody decides what it is for you. That's literally against its very nature.

Can you tell me what's wrong with "observed sex"?

The company can advertise its products to - and for - whomever it wishes.
Get a life.

I got a post deleted simply for explaining factually to the OP why the individual might need period pants for menstruation.
So not only are the meanings of words nullified, objective reality may not be stated.

You got deleted for breaking the Talk Guidelines. Maybe read them before posting again.

You got deleted for breaking the Talk Guidelines. Maybe read them before posting again.

I didn't break talk guidelines in my post.
Still, deleted now so people can decide who they believe.

You're intentionally avoiding the prefix 'trans' and the word 'observed' because you want to deny the truth that they express. If it didn't matter, you'd happily use those terms because they're accurate.

Used trans twice, use it all the time. Don't want to use the term 'observed', nothing wrong with 'assigned'. As in, 'that's what was written down on the paperwork'. That's true. Also includes the words male and female, which you lot jump and up and down about. Surprised you're so bothered. But is it just because the other side thought of it?

Sometimes it makes sense to say trans or AFAB etc, because I'm talking about transpeople or with them and it needs to be said. If however I'm just out with friends or talking about a trans person and their gender is irrelevant, I'll just say woman/man.

Anyway I can't be bovvered anymore and I'm just drawing this stupid thread out.
TWAW, TMAM.

No, "male" is both an adjective and a noun.

Don't want to use the term 'observed', nothing wrong with 'assigned'. As in, 'that's what was written down on the paperwork'. That's true.

But it wasn't assigned. Writing it down wasn't assigning it. It was a record of observing it.

Sometimes it makes sense to say trans or AFAB

It never makes sense to say AFAB because nobody ever had their sex assigned to them. It's not something that exists in a nebulous state until a doctor writes it down. It exists innately even if nobody knows it. It is not assigned. It never is. If I write down that a baby boy is a baby girl, I have not assigned him a sex, I have objectively, factually, recorded the wrong one.

You know all this, of course. If the words didn't matter, you'd use the right ones. It's precisely because they matter that you are so hell bent on using the wrong ones so you can obscure the truth.

This is why you "don't want" to use the word "observed". Because it's the right word and expresses the truth you think you can suppress.

Who, exactly, do you think you're fooling?

This shit is why this website gets called transphobic, I mean literally who the fuck cares. It's an obviously female person presenting as male, we can all see that with our eyes, who cares!!

Honestly - puts me off. I can see it’s a woman but the visual of someone looking male in period pants makes me feel queasy. It just does. Ditto a man modelling a bra.

I’d much rather see a range of women modelling.

The vast majority of people buying period pants are women. Not trans men. But modibodi persistently uses trans models. It irritates me and they lost me as a customer.

Im fairly sure that trans men know about periods and period pants and don’t need to be quite so over represented.

@Ladybrrrd TWATW and TMATM. Actually.

I can't even be bothered now when people try argument by assertion. I can say TWAW just like I can say the moon is made of cheese. And it's true, if we change the definition of cheese to mean "moon rock".

Did you know that the magic word Abracadabra comes from ancient Hebrew/Aramaic, meaning "I create as I speak"? Is that how these people think it works?

Well it’s a woman advertising them. The company is obviously desperate to be seen as right on.

i don’t buy from companies who buy into this ideology if I can help it.

so what’s the definition of woman that you are using when you say TWAW?