Discourses in the Tampon Tax Campaign

The Tampon Tax Campaign is a global social movement that aims to abolish consumption tax
on menstruation hygienic products and provide free universal access to them as the ultimate
goal. In the campaign, there are different discourses supporting abolishing the tampon tax and
discourses casting doubts on the campaign. Discourses supporting the campaign center around
breaking the menstruation taboo, including eradicating menstruation poverty, ensuring
menstruation health, pursuing human rights, and ending tax discrimination. Doubt-casting
discourses include the revenue reduction and economics inefficiency in the market after
abolishing tax on menstruation hygienic products. These doubt-casting discourses talk about
money. I will use Foucault’s discourse analysis approach, not only to analyze discussions from
scholars, but also to compare legislation records of Australia, California and Scotland between
2017 and 2020 that are in response to the tampon tax campaign. The comparison demonstrates
that all these conflicting discourses exist in all three jurisdictions. Furthermore, this essay also
analyzes less-heard of or less-discussed discourses in response to the tampon tax campaign.
These discourses are produced by non-profit organizations that receive subsidies from the
tampon tax fund in the UK and by major hygienic products manufacturing companies in
Australia via submitting their public consultation opinion. This essay argues that menstruation
inequality is an intersectional issue, as well as the discourses around it. Focusing on ‘tax’ is a
smart strategy for a movement, but there should be continuous efforts to address the
menstruation taboo. The tampon tax campaign is not only about tax nor about tampons, but the
power relations underlying the socially constructed menstruation taboo.