Video & Multimedia

Maraya1969

(22,464 posts) Mon Aug 1, 2016, 12:22 AM Aug 2016

A 1995 T Shirt saying "Someday a woman will be president" was removed from Walmart because people

complained! It went against "Family Values"

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A 1995 T Shirt saying "Someday a woman will be president" was removed from Walmart because people (Original Post) Maraya1969 Aug 2016 OP

Against family values? sakabatou Aug 2016 #1

A common excuse to discriminate and keep people down IronLionZion Aug 2016 #3

Yes, and I wrote to the Walmart CEO along with thousands of sinkingfeeling Aug 2016 #2

Oh cool! Great job! Maraya1969 Aug 2016 #6

I remember when this happened! DemonGoddess Aug 2016 #4

The same people who got this shirt removed are probably the same people who... ck4829 Aug 2016 #5

sakabatou

(42,141 posts)

1. Against family values?

Reply to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Mon Aug 1, 2016, 03:11 AM

Aug 2016

IronLionZion

(45,380 posts)

3. A common excuse to discriminate and keep people down

Reply to sakabatou (Reply #1)

Mon Aug 1, 2016, 09:25 AM

Aug 2016

sinkingfeeling

(51,438 posts)

2. Yes, and I wrote to the Walmart CEO along with thousands of

Reply to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Mon Aug 1, 2016, 08:30 AM

Aug 2016

others. It was put back in the stores and I still have mine.

Maraya1969

(22,464 posts)

6. Oh cool! Great job!

Reply to sinkingfeeling (Reply #2)

Thu Aug 4, 2016, 08:13 PM

Aug 2016

DemonGoddess

(4,640 posts)

4. I remember when this happened!

Reply to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Mon Aug 1, 2016, 09:42 AM

Aug 2016

Many of us wrote Walmart expressing our displeasure at the sexism behind the removal of the shirt.

ck4829

(35,039 posts)

5. The same people who got this shirt removed are probably the same people who...

Reply to Maraya1969 (Original post)

Tue Aug 2, 2016, 08:41 AM

Aug 2016

Burned Dixie Chicks CDs during the lead-up to the Iraq War but today are always looking out for those liberals and that government trying to "take away their freedoms".

Reply to this discussion