Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: chat

Feminism: sex and gender

Original poster

This is how quickly Snag Tights are rolling over to males with kinks

290 replies

HardRockOwl · 16/05/2022 17:21

Just had the misfortune to stumble across their social media. I work in the same field and was researching something and came across this little exchange .... I know MN are having paragraph issues so apologies if this is one long block of text!

Instagram user (male) .... could you remove the word 'women's' when referring to your tights? If we are wanting to be more inclusive, we could start there.'

Snag ... yes we absolutely agree! We will get this feedback sent over to the team. Thanks for the amazing feedback, we want everyone to feel included.'

They then go on to reassure another commenter called 'pretty fat boy' that they'll look into change all their packaging asap.

The world has gone quite mad hasn't it? And yes, I know men can wear tights. That's not my issue. My issue is these blokes with obvious kinks and fetishes requesting the word 'women' be erased to keep them happy.

Thoughts?

OP posts:
Branleuse · 16/05/2022 18:46

honestly, can you just leave them alone. Theyre just a small independent business. Theyre allowed to cater to the weirdos. Theyre hardly the only ones.

SpeedofaSloth · 16/05/2022 18:47

Shame, I like their tights. I will have to buy from Popsy instead.

Loopytiles · 16/05/2022 18:47

doubt they will actually do this, as their advertising dept likely to suggest it’d likely reduce not increase sales.

KittenKong · 16/05/2022 18:48

Companies making womens stuff - when they start fawning over males and dropping the word women on their marketing and packaging - nah, count me out.

And yes - some men do wear womens rights for warmth (outdoors work and skiing) but they tend not to have My Little Pony patterns.

Antarcticant · 16/05/2022 18:48

at the end of the war there was considerable pressure on women to revert to their former roles. Hence the whole New Look trend and the move to hyper feminine fashion.

But surely no one now would see that kind of pressure to conform with traditional 'feminine dress' as a good thing; so why are we saying tights should have sex-specific marketing? I haven't seen anything to say these tights are being redesigned for a male anatomy - presumably men who wear them manage with the existing design.

ExMachinaDeus · 16/05/2022 18:49

Another example of how the word "woman" is being erased. YANBU.

Another company to stop buying from. That list is getting quite long ....

veronicagoldberg · 16/05/2022 18:49

Snag is for fat lasses and art teachers.

(I'm one of those things, but I still don't buy them!)

KittenKong · 16/05/2022 18:50

Antarcticant · 16/05/2022 18:48

at the end of the war there was considerable pressure on women to revert to their former roles. Hence the whole New Look trend and the move to hyper feminine fashion.

But surely no one now would see that kind of pressure to conform with traditional 'feminine dress' as a good thing; so why are we saying tights should have sex-specific marketing? I haven't seen anything to say these tights are being redesigned for a male anatomy - presumably men who wear them manage with the existing design.

We all run here - and I can tell you, the mens running ‘tights’ (they are really leggings as they don’t have feet) do have accommodation for goolies…

Antarcticant · 16/05/2022 18:54

We all run here - and I can tell you, the mens running ‘tights’ (they are really leggings as they don’t have feet) do have accommodation for goolies…

Yes - the point I'm making is that nowhere have Snag said their tights will be redesigned to cater for men. Posters would have a point if they were saying they'd only be selling tights to fit male anatomy - but they aren't saying that.

museumum · 16/05/2022 18:55

I reject gender stereotyping in all its forms. And I sports woman’s sex based rights.
but… nothing about tights is inherently female. I knew lots of men in theatre and dance who wore tights. I’m more than happy for snag to sell tights to anybody with legs (or at least one leg).

tinierclanger · 16/05/2022 18:56

If you are actually GC, it makes no sense to jump on removing the designation of clothing as male or female. It’s not an “erasure” to acknowledge that actually, clothes can be worn by anyone regardless of their sex and that’s a good thing.

I’m not sure why the perfectly innocuous request OP has quoted could be in any way interpreted as bowing down to males with kinks.

Original poster
HardRockOwl · 16/05/2022 18:58

@floofycroissant I wasn't trying to catastrophise when I posted. I spotted a man with a clear fetish requesting that the word 'women' be removed from the packaging etc of the tights as it would be more inclusive if they did

Snag responded in a rather gushing way, saying they were so thankful for the amazing feedback and they'd be looking into this asap etc

My point isn't men wearing tights as I don't have opinion on that really. My point is these weird blokes with fetishes requesting the word 'women' be removed and Snag falling over themselves to gush what a great idea it sounds

OP posts:
Original poster
HardRockOwl · 16/05/2022 18:59

@tinierclanger maybe treat yourself to a peruse of some of these blokes Instagram accounts....

OP posts:
RoseslnTheHospital · 16/05/2022 18:59

@Antarcticant I don't know where the idea that I'm suggesting tights can only be for women has come from. My point about the history was a comment on a statement that there was never a reason for tights to originally be marketed as womens wear. My point was that in the 50s, women would have been the only market. Obviously, and I thought it wouldn't need saying, it's not the 50s now. I don't care if tights are marketed at men and women. Or brands just for men. Or unisex brands that feel they can cater in one product to both male and female body types. What I would object to is men who decide they want to buy womens wear items, clicking their fingers and insisting on the word "women" being removed from all marketing! As if we don't exist and aren't the major purchaser of said items.

tinierclanger · 16/05/2022 19:01

Ok, is it all right if I message them and ask for the word “women” to be removed then, as I think that would be more inclusive? You just object to the messenger, not the message?

CervixSampler · 16/05/2022 19:01

Surely if something is inclusive to kinks then the kink loses its appeal as it's not seen as particularly out there any more, it's just normalised. Maybe some want this but half the thrill is the taboo/forbidden bit I thought? If it's 'normal', it's not special so what's the fun in that. What would the pearl clutchers clutch about? Where would the attention fix come from?

respectmysex · 16/05/2022 19:03

So I am their target audience and do buy a lot from Snag. Not just tights but leggings, swimwear and other bits.

Tights aren't just for women, but please don't remove women as we are your core market. It's enough that they show representation in the promos, with men/trans women being featured regularly.

tinierclanger · 16/05/2022 19:04

@HardRockOwl no thanks, I’m not interested in other peoples fetishes.

RoseslnTheHospital · 16/05/2022 19:07

@tinierclanger is it a good thing for all clothing to be unisex? I'm a very curvy shape. I couldn't wear a unisex suit, or a man's suit. It just wouldn't fit. Mens shirts wouldn't have space for my boobs. A "unisex" top would either have to have space or stretch to accommodate. And I'm shorter than nearly all men.

Women, in general, have a different body shape. Having clothes designed, aimed and marketed as "for women" meets that need. Ditto in for men. I don't think that's somehow problematic or lesser.

Squills · 16/05/2022 19:09

RoseslnTheHospital · 16/05/2022 18:41

It became acceptable during WW2, but at the end of the war there was considerable pressure on women to revert to their former roles. Hence the whole New Look trend and the move to hyper feminine fashion. If you look at any photos/film of ordinary people en masse in the era that modern tights were invented you will see the overwhelming majority of women wearing skirts/dresses. And more importantly, not a single man openly wearing a dress or skirt and so also in need of tights. To be clear, when modern tights were invented, the only possible market was women.

Tights didn’t become available until the 60’s - they were essential when wearing a mini skirt or dress. During the previous decades women wore stockings.

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 16/05/2022 19:11

Antarcticant · 16/05/2022 18:54

We all run here - and I can tell you, the mens running ‘tights’ (they are really leggings as they don’t have feet) do have accommodation for goolies…

Yes - the point I'm making is that nowhere have Snag said their tights will be redesigned to cater for men. Posters would have a point if they were saying they'd only be selling tights to fit male anatomy - but they aren't saying that.

No. They are saying that the bodies they recently said they saw as womanly, beautiful are now literally the same as male bodies. Their tights for all women's bodies, even the male ones.

Quite a change in ethos, don't you think?

Antarcticant · 16/05/2022 19:11

I don't know where the idea that I'm suggesting tights can only be for women has come from.

You've described them in the same post as 'womens wear items'. I agree that women, at least in the western world, are the primary consumer for tights, but that doesn't mean there's any intrinsic value in marketing them exclusively at women.

As I said originally, this is a marketing issue. Despite what Snag might gush on their Twitter, it will be financials that determine this in the cold light of the boardroom. Anyone who doesn't like the marketing, should stop buying the product. If the marketing doesn't work, it will doubtless be changed. At about £8 a pair, they're out of my budget anyway, but I wouldn't not buy them for that reason.

SamphirethePogoingStickerist · 16/05/2022 19:13

The price tag is actually cheap when you realise how long they last. They aren't just a good size they are bloody good quality too.

Mine are now going to have to last forever!

Antarcticant · 16/05/2022 19:19

No. They are saying that the bodies they recently said they saw as womanly, beautiful are now literally the same as male bodies. Their tights for all women's bodies, even the male ones

Quite a change in ethos, don't you think?

Unless they are tailoring each and every pair of tights for the individual consumer, it's all meaningless - no two women's bodies are identical, even if they are the same height and overall dress size.

I have a top-heavy figure with big boobs, a bit of a belly and flat hips/bum - from the waist down my shape is probably more masculine than feminine - but I find a 'medium' in most tights fits me, because tights are stretchy - they'll also fit hourglasses and pears.

Snag's USP seems to be the wide range of sizing - from size 4 to 36 according to their website, and different heights - so most people are going to be able to find something that fits - but to say that this means women's bodies are 'the same' as men's bodies is meaningless unless you believe all women are exactly the same shape, which no sensible person would think.

RoseslnTheHospital · 16/05/2022 19:19

As I'd hoped from the context of my post, the phrase "women's wear" was meant as short hand for products aimed at and bought in an almost 100% majority by women. Perhaps I should have put it in quotes.

It's reasonable to object to men demanding not the addition of the word "men" but the removal of the word "woman" from all advertising of a product which is bought in the very large majority by women. And for their demand to be met with total acquiescence, immediately, and with fawning apologies for having had the temerity to mention women in the first place. Woman is not a dirty word.