• AmidFuror@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    You joke, but there is disagreement about making feminine hygiene products free of charge to help poor girls be able to attend school and other activities.

    • OpenStars@discuss.online
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 months ago

      I only half-joke b/c to some people, literally everything indeed MUST be political. Like whether a woman should have the same basic human rights as a man, especially if she chooses not to have kids - and let’s say enjoys cats or dogs instead.

        • OpenStars@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          2 months ago

          Nuh-uh, b/c catz rule while dogz drule!

          Oh ah… ahem, I mean yes, quite possibly you may be correct my good sir and/or madam.

    • humblebun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      I heard the argument was that boys should not see these hygiene products or else they might have a temptation to become girls and they won’t have willpower to resist it. This will result in a shortage of military deployed in the middle east by 2035

      • superkret@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        It’s a slippery slope. If we agree to fund free “feminine hygiene products” on public toilets, next thing you know, the liberals will want to add “toilet paper”, “plumbing” and “door locks” to the list.
        Meanwhile over here in the conservative American heartland, we’re fine just shitting in a hole, and there’s nothing wrong with that.