<-- home

i saw another tweet variation of the olde 'y r condoms free but tampons not' thing. this...

i saw another tweet variation of the olde ‘y r condoms free but tampons not” thing. this variation was, at least on the surface, not transmisogynist. but it really was.

the thing it made me realize is that

  1. this is a false equivalence.
  2. implicit in the equivalence is that condoms are for men, and tampons for women

why? bc the point only has rhetorical force if you assume that free condoms exist mainly bc they benefit cis men. and that tampons are only used by cis women. otherwise its like saying…

“some doctor”s offices give out free lollipops but not tampons”

like…. who cares? i mean, my memory is that as a kid the lollipop was usually a way to make a not so great experience slightly better. but adults don”t get them, so free lollipops only benefit a small segment of ppl.

and its a false equivalence bc condoms and tampons do not serve the same function, anymore than lollipops and tamons. what does one have to do with the other? no really, what?

this particular tweet was also annoying bc it went on “ppl chose to have sex, but not to have their period”

and….?

like this is why you don”t need to rely on a false equivalence to simply state “tampons and pads should be free”. bc they are necessary and outrageously expensive. the point stands on its own.