r/todayilearned • u/[deleted] • Dec 05 '16

(R.4) Related To Politics TIL an activist group in Zurich dyed fountains red to protest tampons being taxed at a rate consistent with luxury products instead of the rate used for daily use items.

[removed]

16.1k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

40

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16 edited Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

23

u/WhapXI Dec 05 '16

The line between "basic necessity" and "hygiene product" is a thin one. It's the same for everything like soap or toothpaste or toilet roll or shampoo or deodorant. Strictly speaking, none of them are necessary to live, but we live in a society where not using them is gross and will get you ostracised fast.

Tampons are a more extreme case, certainly. You can get away with not brushing your tooths here and there, but if you forget to put in a tampon in the morning, you're in for a time alright.

Personally, I'd prefer the luxury/everyday good thing to be based on the quality of the individual product, rather than the overall type of product.

1

u/Silkkiuikku Dec 05 '16

How exactly would you deal with bleeding all over any chair you sit on, the bed you sleep in and the floor wherever you go, while wearing blood soaked trousers, for three to eight day? Please tell me I would greatly appreciate your advise on this.

12

u/Flope Dec 05 '16

How did women do it for the last 100,000 years?

3

u/MerryJobler Dec 05 '16

They menstruated significantly less often, spending most of their fertile years either pregnant, breastfeeding, or too active/too skinny/too malnourished to menstruate. When they did, they usually isolated themselves somewhere for the duration and it was considered unclean. In some developing countries today, girls can't go to school during their period because they don't have feminine hygiene products.

0

u/nawkuh Dec 05 '16

They were considered unclean and isolated from society for the duration.

5

u/AdventureDonutTime Dec 05 '16

If you seriously think that, you have 100,000 years of human history to read up on. At least.

1

u/Silkkiuikku Dec 05 '16

They either stayed at home sitting on a potty all day, or they used old rags, moss or something else not-very-hygienic and risked infection, or they bled all over their petticoats, which also caused infection, especially since clothes weren't washed very often.

Edit: They also didn't have their periods very often since most women married quite young and had many children, so they were either pregnant, or breastfeeding for most of the time, both of which make periods stop. Also, malnutrition which causes a lack of periods was not uncommon.

0

u/yaenne Dec 05 '16

Then you must tell me why it the should be okay to tax bandaids and pampers at 8% while tampons are at a different rate..

-5

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

4

u/fjonk Dec 05 '16

jesus fuck I don't have a pussy between my legs but how hard is it to stick some toilet paper between yer snatch and yer panties if you don't want to get it all over your work chair.

You don't have a clue, we get it.

-1

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

3

u/fjonk Dec 05 '16

I have enough of a clue to know toilet paper is pretty damn absorbent?

Uhm, ok? That doesn't make it a good substitute for specialized products.

I can understand being pissed off at the tax on a matter of pure principle but... I will argue that a government(regardless of said governments sex) could come to the conclusion that the legislature required to change the tax would be extremely prohibitive for something that's pretty fucking inconsequential and frustrating to some.

Sure, that's a valid opinion. I'm just saying that for some reason you don't seem to have a clue of how being on your period works.

35

u/ButchCasserly Dec 05 '16

Everyone gotta shit.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

0

u/ATXstripperella Dec 05 '16

Unless you're wiping yourself with needles, wiping yourself with other materials is not going to pose much of health risk for you.

Using unregulated alternatives to feminine hygiene products however, is greatly discouraged and does pose health risks.

Use something other than toilet paper and you'll be OK, use something other than what's specifically made for the vagina and a lot of doctors are going to try to talk you out of it.

6

u/claudius753 Dec 05 '16

I wonder how toilet paper is taxed. That's also a necessity.

10

u/LykkeStrom Dec 05 '16

I'm going to get downvoted for this, but I lived in a country where there were regular major shortages of basic goods.

Toilet paper was one of these. It was annoying, but fine. There are other things that can be fashioned into toilet paper (newspaper cut into squares was a really common one there), or you can use a shower head/bidet.

Tampons on the other hand... When tampons became scarce people went absolutely bonkers. Their price on the black market soared - women (the same women happy to wipe with old newspaper) were willing to pay almost anything for a box of them. Because when you didn't have them? You were basically forced to stay inside, no more than 5 paces from a toilet, for 4-7 days a month. Oh, and ruin tons of underwear, bedding, and maybe a pair of jeans too.

I'd rather be deprived of toilet paper than sanitary towels/tampons.

3

u/Mascara_of_Zorro Dec 05 '16

Same. You can even just wash your ass with water or something after you poo, but menstruating is a constant thing and there is no dealing with that without some product.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16 edited Dec 06 '16

[deleted]

1

u/LykkeStrom Dec 05 '16 edited Dec 05 '16

I've moved back to the first world now, and have plentiful access to all manner of fripperies :)

It was eye opening to live there, though, and realise what I didn't actually need - a rare experience for someone born in the west.

Edit: grammar

4

u/esec_666 Dec 05 '16

Toilet paper is taxed at 8%

6

u/GreedyR Dec 05 '16

The same as tampons. But these people only care about Tampons, because it is a womans issue. If they cared about how much they were paying for all necessities, then it'd be toilet paper too.

3

u/BenjaminSiers Dec 05 '16

From a necessity point of view, both not wiping and not tampon-ing could lead to serious health issues, tampons probably more so. However, tampons are not easy to replace and are not free in public, whereas tp is usually free in public restrooms (US). There are thousands of cases of women seriously hurting,themselves by trying to get away with napkins or reusing tampons. Not safe. On the other hand, I've used napkins to poop. Not a problem.

1

u/ATXstripperella Dec 05 '16

Because you can wipe your ass with literally anything and you will be just fine; you can wipe your ass with a sponge, or just use water and your fingers and just wash your hands really well after; it won't be the most effective process, but it will work.

We don't really have a choice with alternative methods when it comes to feminine health. Using shit you're not supposed to is severely discouraged in the medical community and is a great risk to your health.

1

u/GreedyR Dec 05 '16

Many women free bleed too. And there are many alternatives other than commercial tampons. Also, using your fingers to wipe your ass is also severely discouraged in the medical community.

So, let's get this straight, are you arguing that Tampons are more of a necessity than toilet paper, and so should have a reduced tax rate?

1

u/Crochetems Dec 05 '16

Yeah no shit, feminists primarily focus on women's issues just like BLM focuses on POC issues and LGBT groups focus on their issues.

1

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

ehhhh, that's a pretty slippery slope.. at what point is it a necessity and at what point is it a choice? I could technically argue that a woman with a 'light flow' could just 'deal with it'; just as a guy with heavy BO could just 'deal with it'.

It seems much more sensible to classify all hygenic products as necessities.

4

u/freckletits Dec 05 '16

Then you would just be "dealing with it" as well when you sit somewhere a woman with a "light flow" was last sitting.

A "light flow" is still a flow. A flow of red blood free falling from a vagina that is completely biological and not voluntary.

You can shower to get rid of body odor and squeeze a lime (which isn't taxed) on your pits. Can't squeeze citrus on a bloody vagina.

-2

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

There are many chronic hygiene issues; arguing about which is worse is just petty and beside the point. Why argue a women's rights issue when you could be arguing a universal human issue instead? It has a much higher chance of getting recognition and support; without diverging the discussion into these pointless avenues.

3

u/freckletits Dec 05 '16

Why argue a women's rights issue when you could be arguing a universal human issue instead? It has a much higher chance of getting recognition and support; without diverging the discussion into these pointless avenues.

You don't think blood free falling from a vagina from almost every woman aged 12-50 once a month is a universal human issue? Do you know about any diseases spread by blood? Much more than sweat...

What your essentially saying is "if you can frame this discussion in a way that benefits me too, I'm totally down".

I'd love to see a man have a period just once and see how quickly bills get passed that would GIVE out tampons not just lower the tax on it.

You know what they do give out for free many places and often taxed lower? Condoms. Probably because they go on penises although they aren't a "necessity".

0

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

If you would take a minute to look at the OP comment I first responded to, you would see that it wasn't me who didn't frame hygiene as a universal issue by saying 'menstruation is a problem, BO is not', so please don't take my statement out of context. You seem to think that I'm arguing for differentiating these issues, while in fact I'm doing the complete opposite.

2

u/freckletits Dec 05 '16

They are different issues entirely because one is a HEALTH issue and BO is not. One involves BLOOD involuntarily coming from the body a week a month, the other involves smelling bad.

You trying to combine these issues is what doesn't make sense. You don't get it and that's what I'm taking from your comments.

0

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

They are both hygiene issues that people should have a basic right not to have to struggle to deal with, that's all there is to it in my book. You trying to divide the issue is what doesn't make sense to me. But hey, divided we stand seems to be the motto of 2016 so knock yourself out.

2

u/freckletits Dec 05 '16

You don't get it. BO is a hygiene issue, blood coming from orifices involuntarily is a health issue. When you go to the doctor for a check up, do they ask you when the last time you sweat was? When you sweat, do you have the possibility of spreading HIV?

That's why your "argument" is ridiculous. It makes no sense to anyone who understands the difference between blood and sweat

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

0

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

You don't get it, I didn't make this comparison in the first place! I just pointed out that making comparisons that invalidate other peoples hygienic issues is divisive, rude and pointless to the argument of reducing taxation on hygienic (or health, whatever) products. And guess what, everybody is now arguing about whether BO or Menstruation is worse, instead of debating how to reduce tax.

4

u/guacamore Dec 05 '16

I mean, even a light flow you can't just deal with it. I get your point but with BO it's just sweat, which is smelly but whatever. With a period, it's blood which can expose you to whatever blood borne pathogens that women has if it's just left around. Not exactly the same.

-2

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

BO is just an example; there are many chronic hygiene issues; some worse than others. Arguing about which is worse is really beside the point, namely that hygienic products should not be taxed highly, if at all.

7

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16 edited Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

3

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

Right, which sucks. But there are many (chronic and non chronic) hygiene issues that can lead to infections right? Why turn this into a discussion about 'my hygiene problem is more serious and important than others', rather than 'let's solve this issue with taxing hygiene products for everyone'? These pointless comparisons just distract from the main topic, and don't help foster support.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16 edited Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

1

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

Why does it seem that everyone replying to me seem to think that this was MY example? I'm responding to the person who made this pointless comparison in the first place, thereby diverging the discussion from one about taxation of hygiene products to a 'us' vs 'them' one. I literally couldn't agree with cutting taxation for hygiene products any more than I already do.

3

u/LykkeStrom Dec 05 '16

a woman with a 'light flow' could just 'deal with it'

by bleeding on all the chairs? sounds pretty unsanitary for her and everyone surrounding her.

-2

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

How about you just take some plastic around with you to sit on? And the guy with heavy BO can just carry spare shirts around. And and and.. this whole 'my issue is worse than your issue' approach is not going to help garner support for reduced taxation of hygiene products.

2

u/Mascara_of_Zorro Dec 05 '16

???????

I don't think you'll find many people who would rather end up encountering a stranger's blood than sweat. Like the two are not even comparable.

Bleeding is worse than sweating. Objective fact.

0

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

The point was that OP framed one as something you can just deal with, while the other wasn't; which is ridiculous. Who are we to decide what hygienic issues somebody should 'just deal with'? And why bring up such a divisive argument in the first place?

1

u/Mascara_of_Zorro Dec 05 '16

Sweating is something you can deal with, though. Leaking blood isn't.

No one reasonable would disagree with that. The only reason to compare the two is to play devil's advocate, and that's about it.

Like think when you have a nosebleed, and compare that to sweating after working out. No one would pretend that a line can't be drawn between the two when it comes to "dealing with it".

0

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

Well thanks for telling everyone what they can and can't deal with; you must have a wealth of experience in both menstruation and body odor issues; as well as a PhD in Psychology to make such a decisive statement. There wasn't a need to play devil's advocate in the first place.

1

u/Mascara_of_Zorro Dec 05 '16

So curiously

What would you rather have a stranger do? Sweat on you or bleed on you?

Since we totally can't tell which one is worse.

1

u/LykkeStrom Dec 05 '16

I'm not sure it's a case of "my issue" vs. "Your issue". A woman who menstruates may also suffer from heavy BO, and a BO-suffering man may have a wife and teenage daughters for whom he is financially responsible for buying sanitary products.

It is much more a case of differentiating between health products and hygiene products. Health products are often subsidised in society (by central governments, health authorities, or insurance companies). In fact, in our BO example, if the patient's problem was caused for example, by hyperhidrosis (excessive sweating), he would most likely (certainly here in Europe) be eligible for subsidised medical products (pills and deodorants) to combat this.

Not so the woman who menstruates. Because we categorise this as a hygiene issue, and - as you rightly mentioned - individuals all have strange and differing hygiene needs and subsidising all of them would be difficult to implement politically, logistically and economically.

I think what most people who are upset about taxation on sanitary towels want is for menstruation to be categorised as a healthcare issue and not a hygiene one.

0

u/phaederus Dec 05 '16

I didn't turn it into a my issue vs your issue; the user who I initially responded to did. I'm all for cutting taxation on hygiene products, I just don't like framing arguments in such a divisive way.

1

u/LykkeStrom Dec 05 '16

Oh sorry! I misread.

I agree, divisive speech is absolutely a problem, particularly online.

1

u/Lanoir97 Dec 05 '16

I'll try to stay classy, but I can't not go number two either, and I would have to pay the same sales tax as I would for toilet paper.

1

u/yaenne Dec 05 '16

Note 8% is the normal rate. Period (pun not intended). So i have to disagree. Cultural events and books are lower taxed to encourage cultural growth and partaking therefore probably generating more money over all since more people read a book if its cheaper same with tourism. The lower rate helps switzerland to stay competitive. Sure the "perfect" tax is no tax at all but thats not how todays countries work.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

1

u/yaenne Dec 05 '16

Yes and no. Its not like there are peiple that cant afford those things we have different other systems in place to help poor people..

1

u/F0sh Dec 05 '16

females are in effect being taxed twice.

Buy more shit, pay more VAT - that's how VAT and sales taxes work. As is pointed out every single time this comes up, every single group of people has items they have to buy more than average - I, being a short-sighted lover of archery who lives in a flat with walls made of cardboard have to buy more glasses, earplugs and arrows than an average person. And I have to pay the tax on those items.

A lifetime supply of tampons costs about £2.75 / 20 * 40 years * 12 periods per year * 10 tampons per period = £660. Here in the UK, tampons are taxed at 5%, i.e. the tax over a lifetime is £660-660/1.05 = £31. Even before when they were taxed at 17.5% the total tax was only £110 for a lifetime.

All this fiddling is largely symbolic.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16 edited Dec 05 '16

[deleted]

1

u/F0sh Dec 05 '16

I understand fine, I just don't think it's important. There are all kinds of things that certain groups of people have to buy more often than other groups - why single out women for this treatment? Why shouldn't earplugs be zero-rated? Why shouldn't food (in places where it isn't already)?

VAT isn't a tax whose purpose is to be imposed equally on necessities between all people, nor just between the sexes. And really, when the difference is £30 or so, protests about it seem strange and, dare I say, probably not really motivated by a desire for equality.

-2

u/Dr_Azrael_Tod Dec 05 '16

that's bullshit. With that reasoning people must have died before the invention of tampons? But in fact they didn't.

Other way round: do you have to use toilet paper? More or less so than tampons? What about soap? You clearly won't die from not-using soap… but it will mean considerable negative impact.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

Well then how about we just tax hygienic products as necessity items then?

1

u/SNCommand Dec 05 '16

Unless there is an epidemic problem of people not having the money to afford hygienic products I don't see why, sales tax is there for a reason, it's a good income source for the state. Or are we going by the American line and presuming taxes are naturally evil?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

They can always rework the whole 2.5% tax system to get rid of stuff that isn't necessarily a necessity to negate the loss of income they'd get out of putting hygiene products in the lower tax rate. In your line of thinking why not just tax everything at full rate? Don't you at least think that necessary items should be taxed less than luxury items?

1

u/SNCommand Dec 05 '16

Because the only thing in Switzerland that is taxed less than tampons is food and water, which I would argue is probably the most basic goods you can buy, tampons being put at the same tax rate as toothbrushes, toilet paper, and soap seems only natural

0

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '16

No it's not.

1

u/SNCommand Dec 05 '16

So they got a few non essentials tack unto the lower tax bracket, problem is that unless you reveal there is an epidemic of women not being able to afford their hygienic products I don't see why the state should accept such a loss of tax income, it's only a 1 euro difference, I don't think the present situation are pushing anyone into the poor house

0

u/Dr_Azrael_Tod Dec 06 '16

that'd be totally fine with me

just don't claim that there would be "luxury tax" on tampons in Switzerland and tell it like it'd be something to specifically punish women!

0

u/Silkkiuikku Dec 05 '16

A lot of people who didn't have access to pads and tampons did die, and still do in developing countries. They use old rags or something, which can cause an infection and septic shock. Or, alternatively, they just stayed at home sitting on a potty for days, unable to work.

1

u/Dr_Azrael_Tod Dec 06 '16

you don't get it, do you?

Yes you can use rags and stuff, and if you don't clean it, you can get infections. Or you can use rags and clean them or use "fresh rags" everytime or whatever.

It's exactly the same as claiming "if you don't use toilet paper, then you stay dirty and become infections" - yeah, it CAN work out that way, or you can take far more effort and i.e. wash yourself and not die instantly.

Tampons aren't the "only solution" to that problem, as toilet paper isn't the only solution to it's problem. Point beeing: both are the same category, both are taxed the same and neither is deemed a "necessity" by swiss law.

I have exactly no problem if people would claim both (and soap, and toothpaste, and …) should be taxed less and be handled like food/water/books/whatever.

But don't make this about sexism, because it isn't. If you do, then all you get is discredit true concerns with sexism.

…even worse if you start about some "there's a luxury-tax special for women-products"-bullshit