Scotland votes to provide free period products universally

[url] https://www.rte.ie/news/uk/2020/1124/1180267-scotland-period/[/url]

Great for Scotland! Would be nice to see something like that here, ridiculous they cost anything at all like.

Wibbs

Well bog roll costs money and that's required on a daily basis. I can certainly see very good logic in subsidising period products, but free to everyone?

nullzero

It's not free if taxes are paying for it.

Mrs OBumble

Food is also required by everyone. Perhaps should be free too.

NIMAN

It's anti woman charging for these products, and that's just not allowed these days.

I'd say not a single woman thought these should be handed out for free, until this idea was floated.

Zaph

NIMAN wrote: »

It's anti woman charging for these products, and that's just not allowed these days.

What complete and utter nonsense. Period poverty is very real for many women, I've read stories of girls skipping school when they had their period because they couldn't afford sanitary products. A simple measure to ensure that doesn't happen again in the future should be applauded, not derided.

It will be interesting to see how they manage this. It’s a great idea but I would imagine the implementation could be tricky.

nullzero

Zaph wrote: »

What complete and utter nonsense. Period poverty is very real for many women, I've read stories of girls skipping school when they had their period because they couldn't afford sanitary products. A simple measure to ensure that doesn't happen again in the future should be applauded, not derided.

With that in mind, I don't believe anyone has an issue with people who need to avail of these products in this manner having them made available to them in a school setting or in a setting where public bodies have influence, the sticking point is the following ; "Sanitary products are free for pupils and students in Scotland, but the bill now places a legal duty on ministers to set up a country-wide scheme to ensure anyone can get access to them."

How exactly can that be implemented? I think asking that question is fair enough and doesn't fall under the heading of derision.

CtevenSrowder

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Food is also required by everyone. Perhaps should be free too.

When out and about would you expect to pay for the toilet paper in the toilets of the local shopping center? Did you pay for the toilet paper in your school when you went there? What about where you work?

Guy:Incognito

Aegir wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how they manage this. It’s a great idea but I would imagine the implementation could be tricky.

How is it tricky? They put vending machines in the womens toilets in public buildings (schools etc)

****ing hell, some people (this part is aimed at the thread, not you ) will oppose anything that involves people being helped out. It really is an indictment of society the way a certain portion of people think. Their first reaction to the actual people in society that need help might be getting it, is to think "well this is going to cost me money" or that they dont deserve help.

You only have to look at the UK. Every story like this is flooded with comments about what a disgrace it is and what a waste of money it is. Its very interesting when you look at the profiles of these people (when its on social media) and they bend over backwards in other stories defending the Tories and the billions they shovel in to the pockets of their friends. Theres plenty of similar attitudes here. None of these people are self aware enough to realise they are David Mitchell in a nazi uniform.

CtevenSrowder

nullzero wrote: »

With that in mind, I don't believe anyone has an issue with people who need to avail of these products in this manner having them made available to them in a school setting or in a setting where public bodies have influence, the sticking point is the following ; "Sanitary products are free for pupils and students in Scotland, but the bill now places a legal duty on ministers to set up a country-wide scheme to ensure anyone can get access to them."

How exactly can that be implemented? I think asking that question is fair enough and doesn't fall under the heading of derision.

Vending machines in toilets, available for free in pharmacies, available for free in shops. It's not that difficult to implement.

Reading the first few replies filled me with despair, the latter half thankfully rectified that.

Can’t understand how anyone would suggest that a woman should be forced to go without sanitary products for lack of income or otherwise.

CtevenSrowder

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

Vending machines in toilets, available for free in pharmacies, available for free in shops. It's not that difficult to implement.

Machines in toilets in restaurants, schools etc is easy. Making them free in shops will mean shops won’t stock them.

And what product is free? Tesco own brand, or all brands?

nullzero

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How is it tricky? They put vending machines in the womens toilets in public buildings (schools etc)

****ing hell, some people (this part is aimed at the thread, not you ) will oppose anything that involves people being helped out. It really is an indictment of society the way a certain portion of people think. Their first reaction to the actual people in society that need help might be getting it, is to think "well this is going to cost me money" or that they dont deserve help.

You only have to look at the UK. Every story like this is flooded with comments about what a disgrace it is and what a waste of money it is. Its very interesting when you look at the profiles of these people (when its on social media) and they bend over backwards in other stories defending the Tories and the billions they shovel in to the pockets of their friends. Theres plenty of similar attitudes here. None of these people are self aware enough to realise they are David Mitchell in a nazi uniform.

Talk about an over reaction.

Outraged on the behalf of others? Check.

Condescending tone? Check.

Use of the word Nazi? Check.

If we're talking about making these items available in public spaces, it's easy to implement, but if the notion that they should be made available to all citizens who require them free of charge then that's something to ponder, which can be achieved without opposing the idea.

Dyr

Deleted User wrote: »

Reading the first few replies filled me with despair, the latter half thankfully rectified that.

Can’t understand how anyone would suggest that a woman should be forced to go without sanitary products for lack of income or otherwise.

bog roll, food, medicine, electricity, heating, housing.

Of course the real difference is men use all of the above so cant be handed out at the tax payers expense.

One eyed Jack

Zaph wrote: »

What complete and utter nonsense. Period poverty is very real for many women, I've read stories of girls skipping school when they had their period because they couldn't afford sanitary products. A simple measure to ensure that doesn't happen again in the future should be applauded, not derided.

I agree with the sentiment of your post, but that’s just poverty, I don’t get why it needs to be called “period poverty”. I know it’s only a small thing but it zeroes in on such a small part of a much wider issue IMO, which is the number of women and girls who are in circumstances where they need to avail of sanitary products funded by the State in the first place. The announcement of State sponsored fanny pads doesn’t mean diddly squat tbh.

nullzero wrote: »

With that in mind, I don't believe anyone has an issue with people who need to avail of these products in this manner having them made available to them in a school setting or in a setting where public bodies have influence, the sticking point is the following ; "Sanitary products are free for pupils and students in Scotland, but the bill now places a legal duty on ministers to set up a country-wide scheme to ensure anyone can get access to them."

How exactly can that be implemented? I think asking that question is fair enough and doesn't fall under the heading of derision.

It says in the article that they will be made available in all public facilities, and I’d imagine distribution would be similar to the way the HSE provides for these things for women and girls here in Ireland. It’s not exactly a popular service, most women will go without something else in order to be able to go to the supermarket with a bit of dignity rather than their local community centre or family planning clinics or what have you for these things.

Guy:Incognito

nullzero wrote: »

Talk about an over reaction.

Outraged on the behalf of others? Check.

Condescending tone? Check.

Use of the word Nazi? Check.

Could be worse, I could have just jumped straight in with questioning poor people getting help.

nullzero wrote: »

If we're talking about making these items available in public spaces, it's easy to implement, but if the notion that they should be made available to all citizens who require them free of charge then that's something to ponder, which can be achieved without opposing the idea.

What are you afraid of? That a few women who could be able to afford to buy themselves tampons might get a couple for nothing? Such a waste of government resources that could be used to fund nuclear missiles or something........

joseywhales

Aegir wrote: »

It will be interesting to see how they manage this. It’s a great idea but I would imagine the implementation could be tricky.

No apparently its very easy these days, you just pop it in, no awkward pads or embarrassing moments.

Guy:Incognito

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How is it tricky? They put vending machines in the womens toilets in public buildings (schools etc)

****ing hell, some people (this part is aimed at the thread, not you ) will oppose anything that involves people being helped out. It really is an indictment of society the way a certain portion of people think. Their first reaction to the actual people in society that need help might be getting it, is to think "well this is going to cost me money" or that they dont deserve help.

You only have to look at the UK. Every story like this is flooded with comments about what a disgrace it is and what a waste of money it is. Its very interesting when you look at the profiles of these people (when its on social media) and they bend over backwards in other stories defending the Tories and the billions they shovel in to the pockets of their friends. Theres plenty of similar attitudes here. None of these people are self aware enough to realise they are David Mitchell in a nazi uniform.

The UK has already reduced VAT to the lowest it can for these products and all schools issue them for free.

But as I said in my previous post, where are they free and what brands does it cover?

Shelf space in a shop is a precious commodity. If supermarkets don’t get revenue they won’t waste space in the products. If they do, human nature also says people will take ten times more than they need as well.

eviltwin

Of all the things my tax pays that I could get outraged about this seems very trivial.

enricoh

What's the dole in scotland £60 odd iirc, what's it here e203.
Cut the dole to uk rates and hand out free sanitary stuff - sorted!

strandroad

It's a no brainer for public facilities and schools anyway. They really are an equivalent of toilet paper, it's a horrible horrible feeling to be caught out without supply when you need it. Even if you have the money not to mention without.

igCorcaigh

I fully support this.

The UK are in such a sorry state after a decade of austerity.

Period poverty, food poverty, fuel poverty...

The essential things in life should be available to all. It's entirely possible.

nullzero

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Could be worse, I could have just jumped straight in with questioning poor people getting help.


What are you afraid of? That a few women who could be able to afford to buy themselves tampons might get a couple for nothing? Such a waste of government resources that could be used to fund nuclear missiles or something........

I have no issue with people who need assistance receiving it. Although I appreciate how you would make an assumption like that given the overall weakness of your argument otherwise. Why play the ball when you can take a sly swipe at the man?

I never said I was afraid of anything. Strange you would use that word.

I honestly think that disadvantaged women who need assistance accessing sanitary products is to be applauded, but the notion of freely available products for everyone regardless of their ability to pay (which is what is implied by what is being said) is something worthy of attention.

As for government spending being wasted on this, that depends on how the budget is used, we can probably agree that if it were something introduced in this jurisdiction our government would likely pay way over the odds to obtain said products.

As for nuclear missiles? I'll file that under bizarre along with your Nazi uniforms.

Just because somebody asks questions about an issue like this doesn't mean they are opposed to the idea. Do you accept everything at face value?

CtevenSrowder

Aegir wrote: »

Machines in toilets in restaurants, schools etc is easy. Making them free in shops will mean shops won’t stock them.

And what product is free? Tesco own brand, or all brands?

The cheapest. It'll likely be put out to some sort of tender. Shops may or may not but be good PR if they did, Pharmacies likely would, and toilets and schools covers a vast area regardless.

SEPT 23 1989

I agree with this but

Why can't the mother and father pay for these products for their daughter?

Just like the breakfast clubs etc

If you can't support your own child for the most cheapest basic life expenses how are you fit to be a parent?

nullzero

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I agree with this but

Why can't the mother and father pay for these products for their daughter?

Just like the breakfast clubs etc

If you can't support your own child for the most cheapest basic life expenses how are you fit to be a parent?

If it's a similar issue in disadvantaged areas over there as it is here, we can probably assume that the money to buy these type of essentials may well be present but ends up being spent on shall we say, non essential items /substances.

eviltwin

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I agree with this but

Why can't the mother and father pay for these products for their daughter?

Just like the breakfast clubs etc

If you can't support your own child for the most cheapest basic life expenses how are you fit to be a parent?

Because some parents are absolutely rubbish. The child shouldn’t suffer for that.

strandroad

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I agree with this but

Why can't the mother and father pay for these products for their daughter?

Just like the breakfast clubs etc

If you can't support your own child for the most cheapest basic life expenses how are you fit to be a parent?

Because some people are cnuts. And their boy going hungry or their girl bleeding through her underwear is not going to make them care, you're only punishing the children.

enricoh

enricoh wrote: »

What's the dole in scotland £60 odd iirc, what's it here e203.
Cut the dole to uk rates and hand out free sanitary stuff - sorted!

18-24 £57.90 max rate
25+ £73.10 max rate
18+ Couples get £114.85 between them.

El_Duderino 09

joseywhales wrote: »

No apparently its very easy these days, you just pop it in, no awkward pads or embarrassing moments.

Yeah but, as we know from the ad “you gotta get’m up there, girls!”.

I’d bet the people who opposed that ad, for reasons, are the very same posters who oppose this, for reasons.

One eyed Jack

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

I agree with this but

Why can't the mother and father pay for these products for their daughter?

Just like the breakfast clubs etc

If you can't support your own child for the most cheapest basic life expenses how are you fit to be a parent?

Ehh, for all the other reasons which make people good parents?

Honestly that remark just shows a level of cluelessness as to the reality of people’s circumstances besides your own.

There are a whole multitude of circumstances to explain why parents may not be able to afford the basics for their children, and sanitary products aren’t cheap when you can’t afford them in the first place and are dependent upon charity from other people and organisations which provide these kinds of services for women and girls.

The HSE also provide a range of products for mothers and their children too and there’s no judgement of whether they have the capacity to be a good parent or otherwise just because they can’t afford nappies or other products.

Guy:Incognito

nullzero wrote: »

I honestly think that disadvantaged women who need assistance accessing sanitary products is to be applauded, but the notion of freely available products for everyone regardless of their ability to pay (which is what is implied by what is being said) is something worthy of attention.

Again, why is it worthy of attention? A few people getting some free tampons they might not technically "deserve" because they can afford to buy them is nowhere near a spending issue worth the cost of getting a civil servant to spend time even thinking about.

People in need will get the products they need. Some people may take advantage of that and grab themselves a few tampons. There isnt a "meh" big enough for that.

nullzero wrote: »

As for nuclear missiles? I'll file that under bizarre along with your Nazi uniforms.

What are you finding hard to reason with? This is government spending. A very small amount of it. The UK spends vast amounts on their military, including nuclear missiles.

Much like the free school meals for poor kids, the money is there, but a certain section of society are fine with kids starving while their government spends billions on an army. Because, you know, if their parents are **** and wont provide for them, **** them.

Guy:Incognito

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Honestly that remark just shows a level of cluelessness as to the reality of people’s circumstances besides your own.

Its not cluelessness for a large portion of people with that attitude, its very much deliberate.

SEPT 23 1989

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Ehh, for all the other reasons which make people good parents?

Honestly that remark just shows a level of cluelessness as to the reality of people’s circumstances besides your own.

There are a whole multitude of circumstances to explain why parents may not be able to afford the basics for their children, and sanitary products aren’t cheap when you can’t afford them in the first place and are dependent upon charity from other people and organisations which provide these kinds of services for women and girls.

The HSE also provide a range of ideas products for mothers and their children too and there’s no judgement of whether they have the capacity to be a good parent or otherwise just because they can’t afford nappies or other products.

How much are tampons and how much is breakfast cereal and a couple of pints of milk?

Basic dole is two hundred a week over here

Not counting children's allowance etc

Why can't they provide the basics for their children on that money?

El_Duderino 09

CtevenSrowder wrote: »

The cheapest. It'll likely be put out to some sort of tender. Shops may or may not but be good PR if they did, Pharmacies likely would, and toilets and schools covers a vast area regardless.

Yeah they’ll surely be the cheapest ones. The luxury brands will still be on sale like always.

nullzero

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Again, why is it worthy of attention? A few people getting some free tampons they might not technically "deserve" because they can afford to buy them is nowhere near a spending issue worth the cost of getting a civil servant to spend time even thinking about.

People in need will get the products they need. Some people may take advantage of that and grab themselves a few tampons. There isnt a "meh" big enough for that.


What are you finding hard to reason with? This is government spending. A very small amount of it. The UK spends vast amounts on their military, including nuclear missiles.

Much like the free school meals for poor kids, the money is there, but a certain section of society are fine with kids starving while their government spends billions on an army. Because, you know, if their parents are **** and wont provide for them, **** them.

You'd have to reason that if there are a significant number of women in Scotland that require access to free products that in my experience (through buying them for my wife) have a monthly cost less than a meal from McDonald's perhaps this isn't the major poverty issue in the country, rather just a symptom.

I do think it's a good idea for those who need it, but the notion that there is a legal requirement to supply said products to everyone across the board has probably taken the budget up a notch or two where it could have been used elsewhere.

strandroad

One eyed Jack wrote: »

There are a whole multitude of circumstances to explain why parents may not be able to afford the basics for their children, and sanitary products aren’t cheap when you can’t afford them in the first place and are dependent upon charity from other people and organisations which provide these kinds of services for women and girls.

Period products are super cheap though, you can have a large box of own brand tampons for literally one euro and that's a two or three months' supply. If you can't give your daughter 50c a month you shouldn't be seen as fit to receive her child benefit...

Makes them really easy to fund too. No reason for not stocking them in schools or public facilities.

Guy:Incognito

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Why can't they provide the basics for their children on that money?

Because they are ****ty parents and ****ty people. Its really not that outlandish a concept.

eviltwin

strandroad wrote: »

Period products are super cheap though, you can have a large box of own brand tampons for literally one euro and that's a two or three months' supply. If you can't give your daughter 50c a month you shouldn't be seen as fit to receive her child benefit...

Makes them really easy to fund too. No reason for not stocking them in schools or public facilities.

You’re assuming the parents will bother to buy them or give their daughter money. Sadly that’s not the case for some families. We’re talking a tiny amount of families here. Why would anyone begrudge it?

igCorcaigh

Why are people so hostile to the idea that such an essential thing be provided to people without condition?

Are people so conditioned by the money system that they see something like a tampon as a tradable commodity only?

biko

nullzero wrote: »

It's not free if taxes are paying for it.

I was just going to post this.

They just forced men and women alike to pay for something only women use.
Razors would have been more equal but of course has less feminist impact.

That said, I don't mind paying for them to have it.

cannotlogin

This is a real thing for a lot of women. I remember a friend in school, who had a very difficult upbringing, once ask me where women got sanitary products. She wasn't sure if you had to go to the pharmacy or what, she knew very little about periods and had no access to these products as a young teenager.

Father was an alcoholic, don't know about the mother but certainly away with the fairies. I remember distinctly a few months later the Tampex lady came to the school & 3/4 of us give her all of our samples. Myself & another girl used to fake needing to go to the supermarket every month just so we could get her a packet too when there. It was never discussed between us, she knew why we did it and had little option but to take the ones we gave her unfortunately.

It's not a huge cost but a very important change for some.

strandroad

eviltwin wrote: »

You’re assuming the parents will bother to buy them or give their daughter money. Sadly that’s not the case for some families. We’re talking a tiny amount of families here. Why would anyone begrudge it?

Oh I'm completely in favour. I was referring to comments about parents having legitimate reasons not to fund them. 50c a month out of €140 benefit?

One eyed Jack

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

How much are tampons and how much is breakfast cereal and a couple of pints of milk?

Basic dole is two hundred a week over here

Not counting children's allowance etc

Why can't they provide the basics for their children on that money?

Because what money they get doesn’t stretch far enough to be able to afford the basics for their children, even counting in the children’s allowance. If they were able to afford the basics themselves, they wouldn’t need help from the State in the form of sanitary provisions, clothes, breakfast clubs or any of the rest of it. They’re not all in identical circumstances either - some families have greater needs than others, but under no circumstances is their inability to provide financially for their children a reflection on their abilities as parents.

I know just as many parents who are raising children who will contribute nothing to society as they expect they should be waited on hand and foot, because they get everything they want and there’s never a question of whether or not their parents can afford it.

strandroad

biko wrote: »

I was just going to post this.

They just forced men and women alike to pay for something only women use.
Razors would have been more equal but of course has less feminist impact.

That said, I don't mind paying for them to have it.

Trust me you could have all the free tampons you want if you took my periods with them!

nullzero

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Because what money they get doesn’t stretch far enough to be able to afford the basics for their children, even counting in the children’s allowance. If they were able to afford the basics themselves, they wouldn’t need help from the State in the form of sanitary provisions, clothes, breakfast clubs or any of the rest of it. They’re not all in identical circumstances either - some families have greater needs than others, but under no circumstances is their inability to provide financially for their children a reflection on their abilities as parents.

I know just as many parents who are raising children who will contribute nothing to society as they expect they should be waited on hand and foot, because they get everything they want and there’s never a question of whether or not their parents can afford it.

Somebody else said it's down to them being ****ty parents and ****ty people. Obviously that's not the situation in all cases, but what you're outlining above is at the other end of the spectrum. The truth is somewhere in between.

Wibbs

Deleted User wrote: »

Reading the first few replies filled me with despair, the latter half thankfully rectified that.

Maybe you missed this part of my post R:

Wibbs wrote: »

I can certainly see very good logic in subsidising period products, but free to everyone?

Can’t understand how anyone would suggest that a woman should be forced to go without sanitary products for lack of income or otherwise.

I agree, but free to all is issue I'd have. Free supplies in school? Hell yes. Free to those on social welfare? Damned right. Free to any woman in need? No debate here. Things like public access machines that women can get their period products from? Yup. Make no mistake R, all that I am 100% behind. However also free to everyone? No matter how well off they are? That's the part I don't get. And how is this going to be implemented?

Deleted User wrote: »

18-24 £57.90 max rate
25+ £73.10 max rate
18+ Couples get £114.85 between them.

Aye, Irish people often forget how crap the social safety net is in the UK. And not just for "lifetime dole scroungers!!!" that a few here get the horn over. Disability allowances are a pittance, as are carers and cared allowances. If they can access them in the first place.

Blud

Stop gap measure at best.

Blud

Blud wrote: »

Stop gap measure at best.

to what? Are Scotland planning to eradicate periods?

nullzero

[Deleted User] wrote: »

to what? Are Scotland planning to eradicate periods?

I think it was a punctuation pun (using the American terms for a full stop plus the posters username seems oddly apt).