BANNED - Man Size Tissues...

Avenged7Fold said:
Its just a re-branding, happens all the time.

I am astonished we have a new thread for every time there is some minor sexism thing in the media but we have a general 'another mass shooting' thread.

Genuine question, do any of you actually care that they have renamed the product?
Click to expand...

No, but I do care about the sexist hypocrisy that caused the renaming. If the people who objected did so equally for all gendered things, I wouldn't care. But they don't - they are sexist, hypocritical and, crucially, have power. That's something to have some degree of care about.
 
h, a spokesman for its parent company, Kimberly-Clark, said the firm was registering "a consistent increase of complaints on gender concern".

He added: "Kimberly-Clark in no way suggests that being both soft and strong is an exclusively masculine trait
Click to expand...

Really people needed clarity on the fact that a tissues ability to be "soft and strong" is not a comment on human genders....
 
Yadda said:
Ok, but if they're for everyone, why call them mansize? Extra large is a much better name.
Click to expand...


Because in the 50s when they were invented they were about the size of a large cotton handkerchief that men used to carry.


But "men's handkerchief sized tissues" probbaly did not fit on the packaging.

They were not "extra large" in comparison to the product they were competing with if they had been labels extra large people would have been expecting something much bigger than a handkerchief
 
Tefal said:
Because in the 50s when they were invented they were about the size of a large cotton handkerchief that men used to carry.


But "men's handkerchief sized tissues" probbaly did not fit on the packaging
Click to expand...

"Extra large" fits quite well and seeing as things have moved on a fair bit since the 1950's, I'd say it makes more sense too. Wouldn't you agree?
 
B@Th*nG said:
wrong.

https://www.quora.com/Why-are-manholes-called-manholes

B@
Click to expand...

Most manholes are far larger than would be necessary for only a hand. It's possible that originally they were far smaller and the larger ones are named by extension from the smaller, but it's also possible that they were named rather more directly and obviously from their purpose - a hole in something to allow a person to enter. As Tefal correctly pointed out, "man" was a sex-neutral word until very recently. It was a sex-neutral word for a very long time, since it's a Germanic word that predates the divisions of proto-German into the various Germanic languages. So it was definitely sex-neutral for millenia. It didn't become sexed in English until less than 50 years ago! You can see this extremely clearly in older English translations.

For a famous example, consider the Magna Carta. It was written in Latin, which is a much more clearly gendered language. The introduction describes, amongst other things, who the terms of the charter apply to. In Latin, there are clearly different words for "person" depending on whether you're referring to a female person, a male person or referring to a person without making any statement about their sex. The word used in the introduction of the Magna Carta is, clearly, explicitly, deliberately and absolutely unequivocally sex-neutral. English translations translate it as "men" because that was sex-neutral.

Off on a tangent, the "man" in words such as "manual" has no connection at all with the word "man". "Man" is Germanic and meant "person". The "man" part of some words comes from the Latin word "manus", meaning "hand". The common syllable is coincidence - there are only so many syllables that are convenient for human speech.
 
Yadda said:
Are they "man size"?
Click to expand...


Well unless the original mars bar was modelled on a specifically male object or body part that wouldn't apply would it?


You seriously dont find it strange that "standard size" is now extra large.

That other tissues aren't micro, mini, pocket etc?
 
Tefal said:
Well unless the original mars bar was modelled on a specifically male object or body part that wouldn't apply would it?


You seriously dont find it strange that "standard size" is now extra large.

That other tissues aren't micro, mini, pocket etc?
Click to expand...

I'm just talking about daft names for tissues not the shrinking size of chocolate bars or other products.
 
Avenged7Fold said:
Are you arguing that they weren't marketed for everyone or that they should have always been called extra large?

It's just marketing, I don't see anything odd about it
Click to expand...

I'm saying that it may have had a purpose back in the 1950's, to persuade hankerchief-using manly men to switch to something they previously considered feminine. Since most men stopped using hankerchiefs a long time ago, this is no longer the case. The marketing was obviously successful.

Fast forward to the present day. Times have changed and marketing changes with it. This rebrand is just a reflection of that.
 
Is anyone going to ditch tissues and return to using handkerchiefs in response to this?

They're much better for the environment.
 
Yadda said:
I'm just talking about daft names for tissues not the shrinking size of chocolate bars or other products.
Click to expand...


But you are.

They were named man sized because they're the size of a typical man's handkercheif.

The fact most tissues are now much smaller, same as chocolate bars are, doesn't make them "extra large" Theyr e the same.size they've always been other things just got smaller
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom