"Always" to ax female symbol from sanitary products packages in nod to trans users....GOD HELP US!

[laughing dog]

As Keith&Co. pointed out, Proctor and Gamble made a business decision to improve their image among their customer base. zorg points out that P&G is removing an image of a pagan god. My guess is you had no idea about this product or its packaging. Yet here you are, having a hissy fit about the packaging of a product.

And I'm the problem? Get real!

You're the one with dumb OP.

Just don't complain then when we mention all the stuff companies deliberately do to alienate Christians.

Please, start a thread so we can be educated.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Looks like dismal got triggered.

 

[Toni]

I’m confused. Personally I’ve never noticed a female symbol on Always products or any other menstrual products.

There is no reason at all to have a female symbol on packaging for menstrual products.

A company made a decision regarding the packaging design of its products. Assuming there was some female symbol on the packaging which I doubt. So?

I don’t understand the issue or why it’s made the newspaper why it’s being discussed here.

I think someone is having you on.

 

[spikepipsqueak]

Half-Life, clarify one thing for me, please.

What was the symbol doing there in the first place?

All through the decades were there women buying these, not because they need them, but because the symbol said they were for women? Were men browsing the aisles and reaching for this product but withdrawing their arms when they noticed this symbol?

And how does it hurt you, either way?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Someone asked a question.
A corpotation made a move to increase their customer base and improve their profile in the market.

Halfie is triggered, and gives them free advertising. How in the fuck is this business decision a 'leftist' issue?

Oh, it's another brilliant "someone is triggered" argumenrt here at the forum. BRILLIANT!!!!! I thought Higgins had the patent on this but others share his remarkable keen intellect it seems.

I just wish I was the one who could come up with intellectual gems like this!

If you want to object to my post I just got one thing to say: "sorry my post triggered you triggered motherbitches!!1!!".

"Triggered" is a description of reaction, not an argument. Once you learn to distinguish the difference, you might save us these hissy fits.

Halfie posted GOD HELP US! for a marketing decision on a product he'll never use. And dismal thinks that doesn't justify an interpretation of Halfie being triggered? And thinks it's an argument?

I mean, i fully understand that time Derec got upset that a number of Subways he'll never even walk past went to Halal service for their largely observant neighborhood, but this really seems like taking outrageous emotional offense just for the sake of the emotiona offense. If that isn't 'triggered' then what the fuck is?

 

[Keith&Co.]

Were men browsing the aisles and reaching for this product but withdrawing their arms when they noticed this symbol?

from the picture on the article, it's not on the package, but on the product itself. They would not know it was women-only until they got home and opened the box.
But then, P&G already maee the sale, so why would they change....

 

[Keith&Co.]

More insanity from leftists. A trans woman can not have a period because they are a man! Therefore, the product is for FEMALES, not MALES. Very simple.

Halfie, are you aware that tampons were INVENTED for men?
They started as an aid for soaking up blood from battlefield wounds.
Nurses got ahold of them and started an off-catalog usage.

I knew many corpsmen in the military who carried boxes of the things in their cars for emergency use.

They didn't care about any markings. And i would guess if you were in a traffic accident, bleeding out allover the nice clean roadway, you wouldn't care, either. Same as all the guys getting shot in combat.

So, again, why does it matter to you that the symbol is going away? Did it ever do anything for you? Did you know it existed before it was time to protest?

 

[Toni]

Were men browsing the aisles and reaching for this product but withdrawing their arms when they noticed this symbol?

from the picture on the article, it's not on the package, but on the product itself. They would not know it was women-only until they got home and opened the box.
But then, P&G already maee the sale, so why would they change....

Putting a symbol on a product that one buys does not mean only those people who identify with that symbol can use the product. I’ve used men’s razors before and the police did not show up at my door and I did not sprout a beard or testicles. My husband did not sprout breasts when he took my Centrum vitamins for women.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I’ve used men’s razors before and... I did not sprout a beard or testicles.

maybe you didn't use them right? I used to have to shave daily because it keptmaking my beard sprout....

 

[Metaphor]

Were men browsing the aisles and reaching for this product but withdrawing their arms when they noticed this symbol?

from the picture on the article, it's not on the package, but on the product itself. They would not know it was women-only until they got home and opened the box.
But then, P&G already maee the sale, so why would they change....

Putting a symbol on a product that one buys does not mean only those people who identify with that symbol can use the product.

Could you please let feminists in on this fact? Many apparently believe that if a razor is pink and marketed at women, it costs more money than the same brand razor marketed at men and that they are forced at gunpoint to buy said 'feminine' version. They call this odious patriarchal perversion a "pink tax".

 

[Toni]

Putting a symbol on a product that one buys does not mean only those people who identify with that symbol can use the product.

Could you please let feminists in on this fact? Many apparently believe that if a razor is pink and marketed at women, it costs more money than the same brand razor marketed at men and that they are forced at gunpoint to buy said 'feminine' version. They call this odious patriarchal perversion a "pink tax".

Actually I much prefer the razors designed for shaving legs vs the ones designed for shaving faces. I prefer they not be pink but I do like the gel pads that help prevent nicks. Now I no longer have easy convenient access to face shaving razors since hubby now sports a beard—unless I go buy them myself and they don’t have those little gel strips so why bother with the face ones?
F

There is a good point to be made that there is zero reason for leg shaving razors to cost more than face shaving razors except for those with the little gel strips.

Actually I’m just glad that feminists no longer debate whether they should shave their legs. We need to tackle more important issues such as convincing young women that men will still want to have sex with them even if they don’t rip their pubic hair out. It’s there for a reason.

 

[Derec]

Someone asked a question.
A corpotation made a move to increase their customer base and improve their profile in the market.

Increase by what, 0.5%? Actually probably far less, as most normal trans people (i.e. excluding activists who are angry for the sake of angry) probably do not care that there is a feminine symbol on their tampons. This whole caving to a loud minority of angry activists (in this case transivists) is going too far.
I have nothing against trans people as such, but I do have a lot against people that think 0.5% of the population should be normative for the rest of us. Best example is demanding everybody state their preferred pronouns at all times (some of Democratic hopefuls such as Elizabeth Warren and Kamala Harris have accepted that insanity btw).

Halfie is triggered, and gives them free advertising. How in the fuck is this business decision a 'leftist' issue?

Disagreeing with something and posting a thread is not being "triggered".

 

[zorq]

Disagreeing with something and posting a thread is not being "triggered".

Sure. True.

But screaming out "GOD HELP US!" calling it "insanity" and "sick" when it affects him in... no way at all... ever. It kind of seems like his reaction is over the top enough that it could be called "triggered." Don't you think?

 

[Metaphor]

Disagreeing with something and posting a thread is not being "triggered".

Sure. True.

But screaming out "GOD HELP US!" calling it "insanity" and "sick" when it affects him in... no way at all... ever. It kind of seems like his reaction is over the top enough that it could be called "triggered." Don't you think?

What does labelling a poster as triggered, without addressing any argument, achieve?

Or, if a poster is called "triggered" followed by actual arguments against their position, again, what did labelling that particular emotional reaction achieve?

It seems to me it achieves nothing at all, except smug satisfaction at ridiculing an imagined emotional reaction.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

No one cares but you. Really, with all the stuff going in this world, and the removal of a symbol from a product causes a meltdown from you? Hmmm, I wonder who the real snowflake is.

This makes no sense. The people who care are the TRANS PEOPLE! They are the ones who are melting down by the female symbol on the packaging.

And I'm the problem? Get real!

You do seem a bit upset about this. Am I reading that in? Why do you care one way or the other?

 

[zorq]

Disagreeing with something and posting a thread is not being "triggered".

Sure. True.

But screaming out "GOD HELP US!" calling it "insanity" and "sick" when it affects him in... no way at all... ever. It kind of seems like his reaction is over the top enough that it could be called "triggered." Don't you think?

What does labelling a poster as triggered, without addressing any argument, achieve?

Or, if a poster is called "triggered" followed by actual arguments against their position, again, what did labelling that particular emotional reaction achieve?

It seems to me it achieves nothing at all, except smug satisfaction at ridiculing an imagined emotional reaction.

What's the point of labeling trans people "insane" and "sick" for caring about some obscure hidden symbol on the packaging of a product they use?

Here's a hint. This thread isn't really about trans people or tampons. It is about overreacting.

The whole point of the thread is to point out how bad it is that some people are "outraged" over trivial issues. Noting that the poster has become outraged over a similarly trivial issue is on-topic because the topic is, partially, "trivial outrage." Clearly the poster thinks it is okay to be outraged over trivial issues given his current post ... which decries the villainy of getting outraged over trivial issues. This also identifies the poster's hypocrisy on this issue.

As a hypocrite, his message loses integrity.

Did that explain it for you?

 

[Metaphor]

What does labelling a poster as triggered, without addressing any argument, achieve?

Or, if a poster is called "triggered" followed by actual arguments against their position, again, what did labelling that particular emotional reaction achieve?

It seems to me it achieves nothing at all, except smug satisfaction at ridiculing an imagined emotional reaction.

What's the point of labeling trans people "insane" and "sick" for caring about some obscure hidden symbol on the packaging of a product they use?

Here's a hint. This thread isn't about trans people. It is about overreacting.

The whole point of the thread is to point out how bad it is that some people are "outraged" over trivial issues. Noting that the poster has become outraged over a similarly trivial issue is on-topic because the topic is, partially, "trivial outrage." Clearly the poster thinks it is okay to be outraged over trivial issues given his current post ... which decries the villainy of getting outraged over trivial issues. This also identifies the poster's hypocrisy on this issue.

As a hypocrite, his message loses integrity.

Did that explain it for you?

No. You've labelled it as a trivial issue, not the original poster. The OP might be mistaken about the importance of the issue, but that wouldn't make him a hypocrite. It would make him mistaken.

The subtraction of a symbol from a product lineup is not the source of the outrage. It's the reasoning behind the subtraction, and the implications of that.

 

[ruby sparks]

.....what did labelling that particular emotional overreaction achieve?

FIFY.

 

[Metaphor]

.....what did labelling that particular emotional overreaction achieve?

FIFY.

Wow.

 

[zorq]

No. You've labelled it as a trivial issue, not the original poster. The OP might be mistaken about the importance of the issue, but that wouldn't make him a hypocrite. It would make him mistaken.

The subtraction of a symbol from a product lineup is not the source of the outrage. It's the reasoning behind the subtraction, and the implications of that.

He insists that minorities asking companies to be more inclusive to minorities is outrageous. Companies should only cater exclusively to the "Majority" and exclude minorities at any chance available. Don't say "Happy holidays" he says. Don't you dare imply that people should have BOTH a merry Christmas AND a happy New Year in one concise statement. Oh NO! That's outrageous! What if a Jew thinks you are wishing them a pleasant Hanukkah? GOD HELP US! Everyone knows that Jesus hated Hanukkah and all the people who celebrate Hanukkah! If people celebrating Hanukkah have a good time because someone told them to have "happy holidays".... baby Jesus will cry! ONLY say "Merry Christmas!"

Face it, he is easily triggered and his penchant for triggers is partially what made him post this thread. The reason for his outrage is that Transsexuals have insufficient reason to be outraged... because they are a minority. And minorities aren't worthy of inclusion.... AND it's an insignificant transgression.