• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    101 month ago

    What is the cost?? That boys learn about things they should not know about? And don’t tell me the extra tampons, that’s not how that works

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        81 month ago

        If they’re not getting used, nobody’s having to pay very much for them. It’s a stupid thing to worry about.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 month ago

          hey, I agree that there should be tampons in bathrooms. It just seemed like you were misunderstanding each other, so I tried to help out. I also think that we should be able to cover the, idk, 500k per year to outfit schools with tampons.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 month ago

        How? Like that’s saying a town should not get water because they don’t have that many residents. Every paid for tampon is for the same reason no matter where it is placed. This is just a convoluted rationalisation for discrimination

        • Schadrach
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 month ago

          Like that’s saying a town should not get water because they don’t have that many residents.

          More like a water company not being willing to run pipes out to service that one house up the hollow past where the state stops bothering to pave the road. And you know what? Water utilities don’t run those pipes, because it would cost a bunch of money for very little public benefit. You don’t have to get too rural before you start seeing people with well or spring water because it stops being worth it to run city water.

    • Schadrach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      01 month ago

      Extra tampons, dispensers, installation and maintenance on those. Like I said, a low but non-zero cost for a small benefit (tampons in the boys bathroom) utilized by a tiny minority (trans girls and girls that send boys to fetch them tampons in an emergency). It might actually be a net positive (compared to what you could do by taking the funding used to include boys bathrooms in the tampon program and spending it on something else), but if it is it’s not going to be much of one just because of how small the total benefit is.

      • @kingcake
        link
        English
        31 month ago

        You simply eliminate gendered bathrooms all together and save a bunch of money.

        • Schadrach
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          You could, doing so would likely increase utilization of the tampon policy meaning it would have a larger benefit for the same cost.

          I suspect if you tried to in schools you’d end up with a weird Title IX ruling that claimed that not having a girls room (regardless of availability of a unisex restroom) is sex discrimination in a way that not having a boys room isn’t, because equity. They have a bad habit of taking that kind of approach, see school sports.