Police to get tough on internet trolls.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Not the greatest act of sexism no,

It's not any act of sexism.

[RichardCoulter]

It stupidly infers that only men require larger tissues and could make women feel uncomfortable buying them for various reasons e.g. that needing larger tissues means they are less feminine as a result.

I doubt that many men would still buy their favourite aftershave if it was renamed as perfume and described as having a feminine smell!

[Russ]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

It stupidly infers that only men require larger tissues and could make women feel uncomfortable buying them for various reasons e.g. that needing larger tissues means they are less feminine as a result.

I doubt that many men would still buy their favourite aftershave if it was renamed as perfume and described as having a feminine smell!

Any woman feeling uncomfortable about buying tissues because of what is on the packet would clearly have other issues in her life she'd need to deal with first.

That has to be the most ridiculous attempt at justification I've ever heard.

What's next, fathers feeling emasculated about shopping in Iceland because, according to their advertising, that's where "Mums go"?

Avoiding Mothercare for the same reason?

Please, a dose of reality FGS.

Originally Posted by Russ

Any woman feeling uncomfortable about buying tissues because of what is on the packet would clearly have other issues in her life she'd need to deal with first.

That has to be the most ridiculous attempt at justification I've ever heard.

What's next, fathers feeling emasculated about shopping in Iceland because, according to their advertising, that's where "Mums go"?

Avoiding Mothercare for the same reason?

Please, a dose of reality FGS.

[techguyone]

As a society we do seem to try our hardest to tie ourselves up with Gordian knots over the most stupid things, I sometimes wonder where it'll end.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Russ

Any woman feeling uncomfortable about buying tissues because of what is on the packet would clearly have other issues in her life she'd need to deal with first.

That has to be the most ridiculous attempt at justification I've ever heard.

What's next, fathers feeling emasculated about shopping in Iceland because, according to their advertising, that's where "Mums go"?

Avoiding Mothercare for the same reason?

Please, a dose of reality FGS.

Since writing this post i've seen a discussion about this on TV where women basically outlined what I suggested. Stupid sexist ideas have no place in modern society.

[Russ]

Change is coming yo’

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

I suspect that you agree with this because, in your day, you had bigger fish to fry as far as equality goes (I remember a discussion that you contributed to about women needing a man's permission to take out a loan or have a guaranteed cheque account).

This fight has resulted in a shift in the attitudes of society and as younger people gradually replace older people in marketing, CEO's etc they are finding that outdated assumptions are embarrassing and not a good image to portray.

Remember, no complaints were made, Kleenex did this entirely off their own back. Men's noses are on average 10% larger than women's, but these days it's not appropriate to assume that larger tissues are only for men, they're for whoever needs them for whatever purpose.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

but these days it's not appropriate to assume that larger tissues are only for men

If I was a gambling man I'd be pretty happy to place a month's salary on nobody whatsoever assuming those tissues were only for men.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Russ

If I was a gambling man I'd be pretty happy to place a month's salary on nobody whatsoever assuming those tissues were only for men.

I'm talking about the original marketing concept, not updated since 1956. More about the decision here:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45899784

[Russ]

Right. So whether we're talking about "these days" or 1956 I'm pretty sure you'd agree women were/are intelligent enough to know that a tissue is a tissue and can be used by anyone.

Originally Posted by Russ

Right. So whether we're talking about "these days" or 1956 I'm pretty sure you'd agree women were/are intelligent enough to know that a tissue is a tissue and can be used by anyone.

Agreed

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Russ

Right. So whether we're talking about "these days" or 1956 I'm pretty sure you'd agree women were/are intelligent enough to know that a tissue is a tissue and can be used by anyone.

Of course and some women do indeed use them, but I think that it's a good thing that the manufacturer has decided to update the product name.

As I said earlier, I think that this is pretty low on the list as far as the way that sexism affects women, but it is indicative of the way that society is improving.

I can't go into any detail, but i'm wondering if action that I took against Kimberly Clark (the manufacturer) about a different and msuch more serious act of discrimination has led them to take a long hard look at the way that they do business in other matters of equality. If so, I'm pleased that it did.

Probably not, but I can’t go into details why not...

[Russ]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Of course and some women do indeed use them, but I think that it's a good thing that the manufacturer has decided to update the product name.

So the original point you made about it was redundant and irrelevant then - glad we're agreed on that

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

As I said earlier, I think that this is pretty low on the list as far as the way that sexism affects women,

Try "non-existent". It was not sexist in the slightest. Just a pointless token gesture to grab some headlines as we head in to "cold and flu" season.

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

I can't go into any detail,

So absolutely no reason whatsoever for you to bring it up.