For context: many places around the US will separate food, drugs, and medical appliances (considered essential for life) from all other goods, taxing the former at 2% and the latter at something like 8-10% - Chicago, for example [1]. This 2% category often includes candy, soda, Viagra... in 15 states there are no restrictions, as long as it is consumable as food. Goods in the latter category are considered "luxury," so what's mentioned here is the battle against the luxury tax for products that are essential to a female's life.

Chicago, a small handful of cities and ten states have already eliminated this unfair burden on top of the average $18,000 spent on feminine hygiene over a lifetime [2].

But the most tragically comical story I've found about this is what happened in Utah - the all-male panel rejected eliminating the tax, citing that they would need to recoup those tax funds from other sales, and that it was "unfair to tax the whole population for something that only affects half of it." The representative sponsoring the bill keeps trying every year, and every year the all-male committee continues to say No to her...

[1] https://accountingsolutionsltd.com/faqs/sales-tax-rate-chica... [2] https://www.sapling.com/3308/the-amount-youve-probably-spend...

> the all-male panel rejected eliminating the tax, citing that they would need to recoup those tax funds from other sales, and that it was "unfair to tax the whole population for something that only affects half of it."

They should go have a chat with their moms.

Wouldn't it be a better marketing tactic to propose that pads & co should be considered medical appliances?

It's inconsistent tax rates which are crazy. Isn't toilet tissue 'essential' in the same way? Should that be exempt from sales tax? In many EU countries foodstuffs (difficult to 'make do' in its absence) and pharmaceutical products attract VAT albeit at a reduced rate.

Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I think the concern is more that Women have to pay money for essential hygiene products than Men due to their gender - which can be seen as inequitable.

Toilet paper is an essential for both genders.

I agree with your main point - it's the inequity that's the point.

In the UK tampons and pads have VAT charged on them (as they count as a luxury); there is a campaign to remove this and it has been reduced to 5%, but it's still there (due to EU regulations I believe).

As a side point, in many parts of the world, toilet paper is not an essential; it's regarded as a dirty and unclean western practice.

What is the tax status of razor blades in your state?

Shaving is both not a necessity and something people of every gender do equally.

Razor blades are also substantially cheaper than feminine hygiene products. One number I saw was that the average woman spends $150 - $300 per year on pads.

In contrast, I can spend an order of magnitude less on razor blades, as a pack of Harry's blades end up being something like $2/each, and that's basically about a dollar or two a month (or less).

None of that is essential.

For menstruation, you can do free bleeding.

For defecation, you can use a bidet, or go old-style with corn cobs. You can use an odd number of stones, as specified by Muhammad.

The same goes for shampoo (don't need it), deodorant (don't need it), and many other things.

What this all boils down to is a fear of having other people think you are weird, defective, dirty, gross, etc.

> Toilet paper is an essential for both genders.

In walked the bidet.

Well, they don't need to. Maybe pads should be taxed more so that more women would use menstrual caps? Pads seem to be quite environmentally harmful as well, they produce a lot of non-recyclable waste (unlike toilet paper).