Skip to main content

The Tampon Tax

 In high school, I had an art teacher that often said something that always stuck with me: "Life sucks and then you die." This often reminded me of the sentiment that the only certain things in life are death and taxes. Every time I get a paycheck, I look at the amount removed by taxes and automatically get sad. I think about how much we pay in taxes and how much of that is wasted on things that the government doesn't even tell us about. Another thing I think about are the necessities that we all pay for that taxes could be going towards, and I don't mean food and water. Obviously, I think that food insecurity is a tragically common issue, but that is not the discussion that I will focus on today. The issue that I would like to focus on is tampons.

In many states, tampons and other feminine hygiene products that are undeniably necessary are taxed. Firstly, these products are extremely overpriced for something so crucial. Secondly, do you know what product isn't taxed? Viagra. Viagra, which treats erectile dysfunction, is not taxed. Does nearly every man need this? No. Is it somewhat of a luxury item? Yes. But please, tax the products that women need to perform the same jobs as men while they bleed. Tampons are easy to produce, but they are hard to afford for many people due to their high demand. Women have to spend a crazy amount of money just to ensure that they don't bleed on everything; for women that don't have enough money to get these products, this is just one more problem they have to worry about. I once watched a video of a homeless woman describing how she makes tampons, and it was genuinely heartbreaking. I cannot fathom how difficult that would be. To the people that don't have to worry about this, consider yourselves lucky. If the time comes in the future to vote on this issue, please vote on the side of women. It shouldn't be this costly to maintain your body's natural functions.

Comments

  1. I could not agree more. I'm glad you opened up on this topic, it's a pretty big deal to many people!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Crickets and Kelp

This week in class, we discussed Kawabata's "The Grasshopper and the Bell Cricket". Last week, we discussed a poem about kelp. In both cases, relationships/people are compared to these mundane creatures. This begs the question: how do you know if you're a cricket or kelp? Essentially, a cricket is something truly special; it's the end all be all person that you've been searching for and are lucky to have. Kelp means you allow someone to take what they want from you, leave, and come back as they please. Basically, kelp=doormat. But, how do you know if you're being treated like this? How do you know when you're a kelp when you think that you've been giving yourself freely but you've really been "being gathered" in a way? And what if you spend all your life thinking you're a cricket but you're actually a grasshopper? Or vice versa? And which would be worse? What if you really are a cricket and you end up with a grasshopper that t...

Cotton-Eyed Bartleby

Herman Melville's "Bartleby the Scrivener" is secretly about Cotton-Eyed Joe. We often talk about how poems resemble songs, so why can't the plots of short stories do the same? In the case of "Bartleby", I think that he as a person can easily be likened to our dear old pal CE Joe. We don't know where he came from, we don't know where he went (in the biblical sense). He has an air of mystery about him. He messes with the narrator's personal life. I know that this is silly, but I think it's fun to relate things that you don't necessarily enjoy to things that you do. If anyone can think of other parallels between the two, please feel free to comment them below.

The Fair Jilt: Feminism or Misogyny?

 Aphra Behn's The Fair Jilt details young, beautiful Miranda's exploits as she ruins people around her to fit her fancy. At the beginning of the work, Miranda is portrayed as a frivolous girl with simply far too many options to settle down. Cupid supposedly curses her to fall in love with someone she simply cannot have as a punishment. However, this "punishment" barely phases her. She puts in some work and is still kindly denied, so she ruins Henrick's life. He remains composed and does not even attempt to rectify is wrongful imprisonment. When Van Brune is put to death because of her, he is apologetic for failing his assassination rather than devastated that he was about to die. No matter what Miranda did, Prince Tarquin stayed at her side. Miranda was constantly in the wrong, and no one ever seemed to hold it against her. Was she entirely wrong, though? Truthfully, she did not force anyone's fate except for the friar. Was she a ruthless gold digger or a fem...