Sex may be taxing but should it be taxed? Certainly it may please some to make all life's pleasures subject to charge, but is it allowable? Of course I refer to what some retailers call "gender charging" - but a serious point is made. Is it really fair that one sex in effect pays more for its shopping than the other simply because gender specific products are not tax exempt (e.g. tampons)? One New York pharmacy thinks not and has now introduced an extra charge for men to make the point. In reality it is a discount for women and whilst this could still be regarded as unlawful direct discrimination they say most men have taken it in good spirit. Interesting. They missed a trick though - they should of course have called it a "Sir-charge" (sorry)!!