or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › I need feminism because tumblr
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I need feminism because tumblr - Page 356

post #5326 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

Well that's going to withstand legal scrutiny.

 

By then they'll have gotten their 15 minutes of fame and the election will be over.

post #5327 of 5582
As a cis male who identifies as a lover of the color pink, I'm appalled by the appropriative nature of the term "pink tax."
post #5328 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrG View Post

As a cis male who identifies as a lover of the color pink, I'm appalled by the appropriative nature of the term "pink tax."

I'm certain you first wrote "As a cis male who loves pink" then thought better of it. #lockerroomtalk.
post #5329 of 5582
I actually don't think there is any legislation prohibiting retailers from doing this. Happy to be proven wrong though.

If you did this in financial services, however, you can expect a nice 8-figure fine
post #5330 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

I actually don't think there is any legislation prohibiting retailers from doing this. Happy to be proven wrong though.
Depends where you live. I'm pretty sure that at least in some states this would be found to violate laws prohibiting sex-based discrimination.
post #5331 of 5582
The irony is there'll be a tiny uproar over the color pink, plus the male clerks having to *mansplain* the rationale behind the tax differences.

They've got a point on the hygiene products, though -- though if they really want to fight pink razors costing more than blue ones, they could probably just stop selling them, and email the companies explaining why?
post #5332 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRoi View Post

I actually don't think there is any legislation prohibiting retailers from doing this. Happy to be proven wrong though.

If you did this in financial services, however, you can expect a nice 8-figure fine

It looks like they are not charging an extra "tax" to men but rather just not charging tax to women (the store is allegedly picking up the tab). Of course, besides the gender discrimination issue, they are inviting the IRS to comb through their sales and tax receipts, which is a more brutal outcome then any protesting or bad press. And of course people are shitting all over their yelp and google reviews.
post #5333 of 5582
Sounds like some dudes in NY now have good reason to insist that their wives/girlfriends/whatever go do all of their pharmacy shopping for them.
post #5334 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

It looks like they are not charging an extra "tax" to men but rather just not charging tax to women (the store is allegedly picking up the tab). Of course, besides the gender discrimination issue, they are inviting the IRS to comb through their sales and tax receipts, which is a more brutal outcome then any protesting or bad press. And of course people are shitting all over their yelp and google reviews.

Wait, you mean the breitbart article posted by suited didn't give us the straight scoop? butbut.gif
post #5335 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

Wait, you mean the breitbart article posted by suited didn't give us the straight scoop? butbut.gif

It gets better. Here is what is actually happening, which is BS

"Despite what her signs say, Alony explained, men aren't actually coughing up more than they normally would at the register; rather, she's offering a 7 percent discount for women—effectively cutting out sales tax. She's still required to report all sales and pay out the sales tax in full, so, she said, she's just making up the difference herself."


But here is the baldy[1].gif part of the story

Update: After this story was published, NYC Department of Consumer Affairs wrote back to Gothamist to explain that there's no legal issue with the Thompson Chemist promotion, as there isn't a prohibition on price discrimination for goods. It is illegal, however, to discriminate in the pricing of services.


eek.gifconfused.gif
post #5336 of 5582
In Canada some feminists have defined "the female tax" as the need to buy products for one's period and want them either free, subsidized by the government, or at the very least not taxed. Their rationale for this is of course patriarchy.
post #5337 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by edmorel View Post

It gets better. Here is what is actually happening, which is BS

"Despite what her signs say, Alony explained, men aren't actually coughing up more than they normally would at the register; rather, she's offering a 7 percent discount for women—effectively cutting out sales tax. She's still required to report all sales and pay out the sales tax in full, so, she said, she's just making up the difference herself."


But here is the baldy[1].gif part of the story

Update: After this story was published, NYC Department of Consumer Affairs wrote back to Gothamist to explain that there's no legal issue with the Thompson Chemist promotion, as there isn't a prohibition on price discrimination for goods. It is illegal, however, to discriminate in the pricing of services.


eek.gif confused:

That does sound odd. I wonder if the DCA believes there's a prohibition on race-based or religion-based price discrimination.
post #5338 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

In Canada some feminists have defined "the female tax" as the need to buy products for one's period and want them either free, subsidized by the government, or at the very least not taxed. Their rationale for this is of course patriarchy.

To be fair, feminine products are a necessity for women and the argument could be made that they should fall under the same category as groceries, which are not taxed in most states.
post #5339 of 5582
If items such as soap, razors, etc. are truly fungible why not just buy the cheaper stuff? If there's a material difference then it's not an A to A
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nil View Post

To be fair, feminine products are a necessity for women and the argument could be made that they should fall under the same category as groceries, which are not taxed in most states.

Why not just make all personal hygiene products untaxed?

Also, if razors, soaps, etc. are truly fungible why not just buy the cheaper stuff?
post #5340 of 5582
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawyerdad View Post

That does sound odd. I wonder if the DCA believes there's a prohibition on race-based or religion-based price discrimination.

Well, you're the lawyer bigstar[1].gif


But you want to talk about a pink tax, I submit the tens if not hundreds of thousands I've spent in my life on trying to get the pink shog[1].gifcensored.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › I need feminism because tumblr