Feminist Theory & The Tampon Tax: Why Does It Still Exist?
The debate over whether tampons should be taxed or not has been going on for years. Recently, Canada has finally lifted the tampon tax and feminine hygiene products are being recognized as the medical necessities they are. While some progress has been made, almost all states in the U.S. still tax tampons as a “luxury” (Larimer, 2016). As to why this tax exists and what we should do about it, I would like to examine four specific facets of feminist theory in relation to this issue. These aspects are as follows; how male domination and female subordination is not determined biologically, but socially, how women are subordinated because men enjoy more rights, how gender inequality is generated through teaching girls and boys differently, and how inequality can and should be changed to benefit everyone (Brym, Roberts, Strochien, & Lie, 2016).
On March 3rd, 2016, five New York women filed a class-action lawsuit against the state for taxing feminine hygiene products unfairly. The lawsuit demands that millions of women be reimbursed for the money they lost through tax applied to tampons (ECBA, 2016). Tampons are not exempt from the current New York sales tax of 4% in the same way that products such as condoms, Rogaine, chapstick, face wash, dandruff shampoo, and adult diapers are because they are deemed “medical devices” by the FDA. The suit hopes to have feminine hygiene products recognized as part of this group and begin the process of making them cheaper and even free, so everyone that needs them will be able to access them (Peck, 2016).
To understand why this has to be made, the first belief of feminist theory that will be applied is that male domination and female subordination is not determined by biological standards, but by social standards (Brym et al., 2016). As previously discussed, certain products like condoms and adult diapers are not taxed because they are defined as necessities (Peck, 2016). Examined from a purely biological standpoint, it would make more sense for tampons not to be taxed than for condoms not to be taxed because while sex/safe sex is a personal choice, menstruating is not. Biologically, tampons are a necessity and condoms are not. From the same standpoint, adult diapers and pads are essentially the same product because they have the same hygienic function, except for the fact that adult diapers are used by both men and women. Biologically, pads serve the same purpose as adult diapers and should be equally taxed. Feminist theory has a direct explanation for this nonsensical tax; the reason feminine hygiene products are taxed unfairly has nothing to do with biological necessity, but the social stigmas attached to them. Therefore, feminist theory supports the idea that taxing tampons is a form of sexism.
Having understood why the tampon tax is sexist, for economic sexism surrounding feminine hygiene products to be eliminated, they would have to be free to all women. Unisex sanitary products such as toilet paper, paper towels, and soap are supplied in every bathroom in the United States, but tampons are not. When they are available, they cost money while the other products remain free (Peck, 2016). Again, it would make biological sense for pads/tampons to be supplied in the same way that toilet paper is, especially considering that many people who don’t have access to feminine hygiene products end up having to use folded-up toilet paper as a highly ineffective substitute. Even though it is physically evident that tampons/pads are just as important as other bathroom necessities, they are not only unavailable in public restrooms, yet taxed by the state as luxuries. Feminist theory explains this biologically incorrect discrimination by stating that social conditions cause male domination and female subordination.
The next question to ask after determining that the only reasons for tampon tax/cost are social is: what are the social conditions that caused this to happen and allowed it to persist for so long? To answer this question, I’d like to turn to another belief of feminist theory, that women are subordinate to men because men enjoy more political, economic, legal, and cultural rights (Brym et al., 2016). All over the world, men heavily dominate politics. In the U.S. Congress, women take up only 19.6% of the 535 members, men taking up four times that amount (Women, 2017). This ratio persists in state governments as well, making the people who decide whether tampons get taxed predominantly men. While many men claim to support the removal of the tampon tax, they don’t address it because they are either not thinking about it, are too afraid, or are “waiting for a woman to carry the issue” (Larimer, 2016). This hesitant approach causes the issue to be shelved by the primarily male lawmakers who are unable to be overpowered by the significantly smaller number of female representatives. Feminist theory would conclude that the tampon tax, a form of female subordination, persists because men enjoy more political, legal, and cultural monopoly.
How did this culture of avoidance and general discomfort around the topic of menstruation begin? Feminist theory states that the main inequalities between men and women include but are not limited to: differences in teaching, regarding, paid work, domestic duties, politics, and class structure (Brym et al., 2016). To analyze how society came to fear periods, differences in teaching between young men and women should be examined. Traditionally, the first signs of puberty in a young boy are celebrated. They brag about their first chest hairs to their friends and parents, who teach them to be proud that they are becoming men. On the other hand, when girls get their first period, they are taught to be discreet about it. They have special bags to keep their hygiene products in so that they remain unnoticed, in constant fear that someone will know they are on their period. Girls are trained from a young age to be embarrassed about becoming a woman. This imprints onto young boys, and they become accustomed to avoiding the topic. Feminist theory would support the idea that these inequalities in teaching perpetuate into larger social inequalities in later life, leading to the taboo surrounding periods. Contradictory teaching patterns are not just intergender, but intra-gender. While girls are told to be discreet about their periods and trained to be embarrassed by them, they are unable to hide them because tampons and pads are not available in the bathrooms at school. Often, they will end up having to walk out of the room holding their backpacks, which pretty much announces that they are going to change their tampon. At some schools, girls are forced to go to the nurse for feminine hygiene products that they do not have access to, and then have to sit and be questioned while they fill out forms for something as bodily basic as going to the bathroom, and let’s be clear- this would never happen to boys. (Scaccia, 2016). Providing tampons/pads in schools would keep girls from having to go to unnecessary lengths to take care of themselves and help normalize menstruation. Again, feminist theory would argue that the culture of general fear around discussing periods and providing young girls with products stems from multiple types of contradictory teaching between men and women.
The final facet of feminist theory that I want to address is the idea that patterns of gender inequality can and should be changed to benefit all members of society (Brym et al., 2016). Nancy Kramer, founder of the Free the Tampons movement says that it would only cost $4.67 per woman to provide them with tampons for a whole year (Scaccia, 2016). A small price to pay to stop women from bleeding out and getting infections and diseases due to poor hygiene. This would not only benefit women but benefit whole families in poverty. Many families are “forced to choose between spending their last $10… on menstrual care or food” (Scaccia, 2016). By removing the tax on tampons and eventually making them free, the money that would otherwise be used for tampons and pads could be used by families in need of other necessities like food, shelter, and clothing. Feminist theory supports that patterns of inequality like the inequality women face in bathrooms every day can be changed, and should be changed to benefit not only women but entire families.
The issue of tampon tax, increasingly appearing in government offices all over the U.S., can be defined, analyzed, and developed using feminist theory. Defining tampon tax as an act of sexism is backed up by the aspect of feminism that states female subordination is not biological, but social. From this, we can analyze the social influences that came to create this sexist double standard using two more beliefs of feminism; women are subordinated because men enjoy more rights, and inequalities between men and women arise as a result of different teaching. Understanding that the predominantly male government and the social training of females to be embarrassed by their periods perpetuates these sexist ideas, one final aspect of feminist theory can be used to determine how to solve the issue. The idea that inequality between men and women can and should be changed to benefit all of society demonstrates how easy it is to help billions of women and families everywhere by making tampons cheaper and even free (Brym et al., 2016). Through the eyes of feminist theory, it is possible to better understand and take action on tampon tax, for the benefit of all members of society.
Photo Credit: (Mila Mores/Adobestock)
Sources:
Brym, Robert J., et al. Sociology: Your Compass for A New World. Nelson Education, 2016.
“ECBA Files Class Action to End Tampon Tax in New York.” Emery Celli Brinkerhoff & Abady LLP, 12 May 2016, www.ecbalaw.com/ecba-files-class-action-to-end-tampon-tax-in-new-york/.
Larimer, Sarah. “The 'Tampon Tax,' Explained.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 8 Jan. 2016, www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/08/the-tampon-tax-explained/?utm_term=.c76ff3f0a58c.
Peck, Emily. “Free Tampons Should Be A Human Right.” HuffPost Canada, HuffPost Canada, 8 Mar. 2016, www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/free-tampons-human-right_us_56deffbce4b03a40567a1e33.
Scaccia, Annamarya. “The Price Young Girls Pay When Tampons Aren't Free.” Free The Tampons, 29 Feb. 2016, www.freethetampons.org/the-price-young-girls-pay-when-tampons-arent-free.html.
“Women in U.S. Congress 2017.” Women in U.S. Congress 2017 | CAWP, www.cawp.rutgers.edu/women-us-congress-2017.