He remind me about a decision a US company took a few years ago. They removed the feminine symbol from their packages of tampons after receiving a polite request from a group of trans and non-binary people. The package redesign was very small, something most people would never have noticed. The company's marketing people said they simply did it out of kindness and respect, not thinking it would be a big deal. The company didn't use it universally on their feminine-hygiene lines anyway.

And then. All hell broke loose. All the usual suspects raised outraged choruses of, "You're erasing women."

I covered the story in a column after talking to some of the nonbinary people and trans men who had contacted the marketing department, and I corresponded with some of the marketing people too.

The general reaction seemed to be shock that the issue blew up. It was not as if the package design — as you write about — had any practical impact on anyone. In fact, you could look at packages before and after redesign and have to squint to spot the difference.

One of the trans men I spoke to told me he never expected the company to act on his request. He was pleasantly surprised when they did, but had never considered the matter to be a big deal. Until all the outrage ensued.

He and his friends then tried to tailor their reaction by stressing they had requested only a very minor change and did not consider their request practically significant — while at the same time signaling that backing down would be giving in to forces of, well ... they didn't use the words hatred or bigotry but their meaning came through.

I'd be curious on your thoughts on how best to handle uproar over inclusive language or symbology.