Community Chat

[SahmIam]

I wish they would include ALL types of pads not just for when you menstruate:

Diapers for all (infant through adults)

Pads for all (infant through adults).

[Sooner]

---

@sidsmom wrote:

@Sooner wrote:

---

@sidsmom wrote:

The condom/birth control argument is always

presented as a male equivalent.  It’s not.  

‘What about toilet paper?’  We all use toilet paper.

’What about razors?  We all use razors.

‘What about’, ‘What about’, ‘What about’.....

There is no male equivalent to a regular bodily function.

Female menstration is not a choice.

---

@sidsmom  Neither are a lot of medical needs that are far more "not a choice" and are necessary for one to live--which tampons are not.  So what's fair about that please tell me?  You can't tailor an economic system or a health insurance system to individual needs.  That destroys the whole concept.  So if we do not tax any medical needs, where does the revenue come from that supports government assistance programs?  

The complications of a lot of insurance, tax and entitlement programs have become so complicated and specific that it takes away the whole purpose to spread the needs to benefit all.  It's the simple economics of it.  

---

It’s unfortunate people want to talk a simple topic of woman’s periods

and go completely off topic.

It’s a monthly menstrual cycle which only females have. 

It’s pretty basic.

We’re only talking menstruation in this thread. 

---

If women want equal pay for equal work, then come back and want a tax exemption like this, NO.  Lots of us have to pay for things we need and have to have, and have to have to live.

So no, you can't want equal pay and standing then want tax deductions because you are a woman.  What a joke that is!  

A feminist from tohe 1960's is saying this.  We've worked too long to say we can do a man's job, we want equal pay and standing then to go back to the 1950's and want special treatment.  That's a hot button topic for me.  You simply can't have it both ways. 

[Pearlee]

---

@JeanLouiseFinch wrote:

It's a numbers game.  The state still needs revenue so some other tax will need to be raised to offset the loss.  Another consideration, are men going to get same benefit on condoms?  If not, why not?

---

@JeanLouiseFinch  Perhaps because the act for which a man needs condoms is voluntary, whereas a menstrual period is not?

[Pearlee]

@lolakimono I think it's an excellent idea.  Kudos to the state.

[sidsmom]

People aren’t quite understanding this..

and I believe that’s the reason for pushback.

——————————————

Let’s try this:

Name one thing, which is a natural biological function,

which is gender specific...and must be acted upon:

Female:  Menstruation

Male:  ?

——————————————

(Saw this in a comment section - Washington Post):

The issue is that it's a tax on a product that only one gender MUST use

(and it's really not a choice, as other alternatives to modern feminine

products are unsanitary and possibly dangerous to health.) 

[stevieb]

I equate this to 'lady's night' at the local watering hole, where women don't pay the cover charge... Nope, can't get behind it... As advantageous as it might be for women, it's setting up a double standard and is unfair... If things went the other way and only men were to benefit from a change in tax laws (or cover charges...) the cry would go out and would be long and loud... 

[sidsmom]

@stevieb

‘...double standard...’ is defined:

A rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways

to different people or groups.

Menstration, last I heard, is not a function males have

so ‘double standard’ does not apply.

[stevieb]

---

@sidsmom wrote:

@stevieb

‘...double standard...’ is defined:

A rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways

to different people or groups.

Menstration, last I heard, is not a function males have

so ‘double standard’ does not apply.

---

@sidsmom Let's agree to disagree, shall we... Last I looked, in most state most purchases are subject to sales tax. Exempting a class of goods or services used by one sex whether or not there is a comparable set of goods or services used exclusively by the other sex sets up a double standard as far as I'm concerned... Moreover, as others have mentioned, there are goods and services required by both sexes that will continue to be taxed. I think it's a stupid choice, but don't live there and even if I did, not worth getting too riled about... Frankly, if I did live there, my main concern would be that this is what my elected legislators are spending their time on... 

[Sooner]

---

@sidsmom wrote:

@stevieb

‘...double standard...’ is defined:

A rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways

to different people or groups.

Menstration, last I heard, is not a function males have

so ‘double standard’ does not apply.

---

@sidsmom  @stevieb  LOTS of people have issues that are a result of genetics that they have that others don't.   So this is obviously a gender issue, which has no point other than boo hoo I'm a female so give me something extra.  My husband shaves because he is a male.  Is there a tax break for that?  No.  

Females either want equal treatment or not.  And today, you really do not have to have these products either if we are going to talk about that.  

And if you open the door to special treatment gender related through no taxes then you can come back with the "no women fighter pilots" or "no women in combat" issue or other such discriminatory acts.  You either want to be discriminated against or you don't.  Don't open that argument again or you really aren't going to like the answers. 

Lots of legal issues crop up here.  I don't know how people can't understand that.  Lawyers will be all over this.   As they should be. 

[sidsmom]

---

@Sooner wrote:

---

@sidsmom wrote:

@stevieb

‘...double standard...’ is defined:

A rule or principle that is unfairly applied in different ways

to different people or groups.

Menstration, last I heard, is not a function males have

so ‘double standard’ does not apply.

---

@sidsmom  @stevieb  LOTS of people have issues that are a result of genetics that they have that others don't.   So this is obviously a gender issue, which has no point other than boo hoo I'm a female so give me something extra.  My husband shaves because he is a male.  Is there a tax break for that?  No.  

Females either want equal treatment or not.  And today, you really do not have to have these products either if we are going to talk about that.  

And if you open the door to special treatment gender related through no taxes then you can come back with the "no women fighter pilots" or "no women in combat" issue or other such discriminatory acts.  You either want to be discriminated against or you don't.  Don't open that argument again or you really aren't going to like the answers. 

Lots of legal issues crop up here.  I don't know how people can't understand that.  Lawyers will be all over this.   As they should be. 

---

Again, the ‘razor argument’ is ridiculous...we all use razors.

Pilots?  We all can be pilots.

Combat?  We all can be in combat.

Name one thing....which is male gender specific...which must need

attention on a regular basis for multiple decades? 

You can’t.