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

[HardRockOwl]

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?

calm down - a woman asked for it to be removed

@tinierclanger ?? No idea what you're objecting to.

One bloke on one social post was humoured by the social media team, who said they would pass on the feedback

Get a grip FFS

The diminishing of FGM by bringing it in as a lever for outrage on this is awful behaviour.

Not all feminists are gender critical. Not all women are gender critical. Not all men who wear tights are fetishists. Not all tights are worn by women.

End game, erasure of women, fetishists yada yada yada…. Take it back to the sex and gender board. So fed up of this shit being posted on the feminist chat board.

@SamphirethePogoingStickerist

i think we’re broadly on the same page. I don’t want to see woman erased either. Women aren’t a minority, but we are often treated as one, and at this present time we are starting to get more of an equal voice. So, others who do not have that voice tend to gravitate to those who have been in that situation with the hope they will aid them. Surely there can be a way that everyone can help each other without causing detriment to their own cause. There are a minority who’s views are incompatible, but it is a minority.

I just think clothing (with the exception of period pants), should be completely neutral and campaigning for it to be gendered seems a backwards step.

it’s interesting that you say that Snag have a longer crotch though, surely that would be beneficial to those who have bulges in the front (men) or in the back (bigger bums in general for females). Seems like a win win, unless you’re a woman with a small bottom. I loved my maternity tights as I could tuck them under my bra to keep them up! Just a shame they don’t sell them in more options - I love a coloured and patterned tight!

The diminishing of FGM by bringing it in as a lever for outrage on this is awful behaviour. Did you actually read what I posted, in context, or did you just skip to the chastisement?

And if you REALLY don't like the thread then just report it, get it moved over to the other board. After all that's what 'so many' lobbied for!

Not all feminists are gender critical.

If you’re not gender critical, you’re not a feminist. Gender criticism means objecting to societal stereotypes supposedly defining what women can and can’t do (and objecting to its modern-day extension, that adhering to feminine stereotypes make you a woman).

I loved my maternity tights as I could tuck them under my bra to keep them up! Just a shame they don’t sell them in more options - I love a coloured and patterned tight! And that's what Snags are - though the patterns are a bit weird and some of the colours really bright. Great in winter, all that extra fabric up top.!

And yes, I agree, we are broadly in the same page. It's likely that I have become more and more cynical, less willing to give an inch over the last few years. Mainly because once you see this kind of mangling of the language in one place you start to see the creep of it in many other places too. And, in my youth, I read too much Orwell to shrug my shoulders and think meh!

I just think clothing (with the exception of period pants), should be completely neutral and campaigning for it to be gendered seems a backwards step.

Sorry @Qwill I missed that bit. This is what I mean by I think you have misunderstood. I don't want anything to be gendered. Sexed maybe, but gendered? Never!

And I am 'campaigning' for the rights of women to be protected against the not so slow creep of genderism with its adherence to all those crude sexist stereotypes and patriarchal mores.

Did you actually read what I posted, in context

Yes.

You used FGM as a lever to rouse up outrage about one social media post with a request from one man about labelling on a package of tights.

I realise you think that’s fine. I think it’s not.

You do you. But other women are not compelled to agree with you, or let your remarks go un-challenged.

FFS. This is why there’s a feminist chat board.

GC feminists don’t own feminism.

That is utter bollocks. And the reason why everyone hates Mumsnet. Because you’ve pissed on the name of feminism for anyone who isn’t a white middle class “GC”.

Just report the thread already then, and get it moved to the feminist naughty step so you don't have to see it any more.

@SamphirethePogoingStickerist

I thought you were saying that you were upset that the word woman was taken away from snag tights. That’s what I got from your posts, if that wasn’t the case then I did misunderstand, but can you see that your posts were a bit confusing? I just don’t believe there should be the word ‘man’ or ‘woman’ or ‘unisex’ on an item of clothing unless there was a biological need for it to be there.
There is no need for tights to be sexed.

Do I really have to spell out that if you don’t object to gender stereotypes, you’re agreeing that women shouldn’t be leaders because we’re “too emotional”; shouldn’t work in traditionally male industries because they’re “not for girls”; should automatically be the primary caregiver (and therefore take the resulting hit on career progression) because we’re “nurturing” etc etc? Or as Edwardian men believed, shouldn’t have the vote because politics is too complex and unseemly for our silly little lady brains? All of those are gender stereotypes.

WTF do you think feminism is if not fighting against the gender stereotypes that have prevented us from achieving equality of opportunity?

I mean if they fit men, and snag seem keen to suggest they do by using males in their marketing, then it’s fair that they market them as unisex tights if that means it’ll reach more of their desired customer group.

Surely it’s better than saying these are women’s rights and therefore anyone who wears them is a women? That’s a lot of what the gender ideology/trans stuff is based on “oh I knew I was trans as a child because I wanted to play with barbies like a girl” etc etc

Ive looked at the comments on the post based on what other posters have said, and it seems they’re right you have been deliberately misleading OP. The commenter originally asking for women to be removed from the packaging is a woman. And the commenter you mention by username is just stating it’s awkward receiving post that clearly states on the packaging is women’s tights. Plenty of companies send their items using discreet packaging.

I’ve got concerns over what snag posts at times, but this isn’t one of them.

It’s entirely possible to object to gender stereotypes without agreeing remotely with a “GC” position.

Trying to argue otherwise is either completely ridiculous and dishonest, or a sign that you need to go refresh yourself on the current usage of “GC” in feminism and what it means.

Back to tights…. They’re not gendered, and fine for fellas to wear, and fine to not be labelled as for women. Get over it.

If you seriously think non “GC” identifying feminists aren’t against gender stereotyping, then you have got so trapped in your tiny bubble it’s disturbing.

Also not their target audience but you find a comment (that you incorrectly stated was from a male) on their social media dated over a month ago.

What is so harmful here is the labelling of men who choose to wear tights as fetishists with kinks.

The irony of the supposedly critical-of-gender seeking out and publicly shaming an identifiable individual for asking the packages of tights they buy to be labelled gender-neutrally!

It’s nonsensical.

I suppose that for you "GC" would simply equal "anti-trans", @tinierclanger ? Fwiw I would not use "GC" as a description of my feminism, because it's a given that feminism is against gender stereotyping. I'm what used to be called a radical feminist, in the decades before modern gender ideology took hold.

And yes. Tights should be for anyone who wants to wear them. But I don't agree that it needs the hiding and removing of any references to women in order to achieve that. Why has the use of the words women/woman become something to apologise for? Why can't men be included, in addition, rather than references to women removed?

Why do tights need to have the word woman on the packaging?

Why should the word woman never appear on the packaging? Along side men too, of course. Is it an offensive or problematic term? After all women are the very large majority purchasers of them.

It wasn't a man that said it tho?

I think it would be great to have less gendered products where the sex of the user is irrelevant.

As someone else said - something like tampons? No way to de sex that as only women have periods. Tights that are actively marketed towards both men and women? Unrelated to sex so the use of “women” is based on gendered stereotypes. Same for boys toys and girls toys etc

Op deliberately lied about that to whip up a bit more hyperbole