Are big corporations really aiming for inclusivity by challenging the binary division between the biological sexes? Or have they simply spotted an opportunity to cash in? We must be on our guard against the latter, warns Jennifer Bilek.

In September, Tampax corporation rolled out an advertisement for their menstrual products attempting to be what they call ‘inclusive’ of all people, which erased females from their ads (both in language and visually). The advert garnered nearly 17,000 likes and 25,000 comments.

This language obfuscation is part and parcel of the burgeoning gender identity industry which seeks to obliterate sexual dimorphism from language. Purportedly this is to make people who think they are, or wish to present themselves as, the opposite sex, comfortable. These individuals make up approx. .06% of the population. It is really interesting that Tampax does not mind making women, who make up more than 50% of the population, and 100% of their consumer base, uncomfortable. Many of the 25,000 comments under the initial ad were by women furious at their erasure and the dehumanizing language used to describe them. Several suggested it was time to boycott Tampax. Why doesn’t women’s fury at their erasure from adverts for products made for their specific biology bother Tampax? Why is it happy to alienate its consumer base by calling them ‘menstruators’ and ‘bleeders’ to be ‘inclusive’?