From bike helmets for little kids to razors, the gender-product price gaps can be seen in many goods and services — I’ve been aware of them since middle school — but why such a difference for nearly identical products?
Not only are women not getting as much bang for their buck, but in a lot of circumstances, products are directly marketed towards women so they don’t pay attention to the price difference.
As a person with not much traditionally-feminine energy, I was never really drawn in by that marketing. My go-tos are products that aren’t directly targeted towards women, but in lot of instances, to men. Not because I find the packaging more appealing, but because I generally have had a better experience with men’s products. For two years, I wore men’s deodorant because I thought it simply worked better than women’s — and it shouldn’t be looked at as a bad thing to do.
I’m not the only one with this mindset. All over social media, I’ve seen women who live by men’s razors, soaps, etc. Some brands like Dollar Shave Club have even started to target female audiences with their traditionally male-targeted products as a way to show that they are different from other companies, because their product actually gets the job done at a low price.
Known as the “Pink Tax,” products with pretty pink packaging and good marketing can hike their prices up and most people won’t bat an eye. Lots of women don’t notice this or don’t care because of the way it’s marketed towards them. In an interview with U.S. News, Ian Parkman, Assistant Professor of Marketing at the University of Portland, states, “[With razors], the blue version [might be] $1.99, and the pink razor [might be] $2.50, but pink plastic versus blue plastic can’t explain the price difference.”
In a study conducted by New York City Department of Consumer Affairs, they found about 42% of the time women will pay more than men for basically the same or similar products. But, taking into consideration legitimate reasons for similar products to have price differences, some of this can be explained.
No two products are going to be perfectly the same, especially when it comes to functionality across sexes. Fabrics and fits are going to differ, scents in soaps and perfumes will vary and uses for razors won’t be the same. It’s understandable to see differences in products in correlation to prices, but a simple color change and repackaging does not constitute such a massive disparity in price.
In several situations, the retailers are not the ones to blame for prices. You never know what occurs in manufacturing or in shipping. Same with dry-cleaning, you have to consider the fabrics and construction of clothes before you jump to the conclusion that you’re being scammed. Then again, this doesn’t explain the potential thousands of extra dollars women could be paying.
Marketing is the biggest beast to tackle — using simple marketing tactics to appeal to a targeted audience can cover up the small inconsistencies that can make a huge difference. Being aware of the methods that are used to target certain audiences in marketing is key in deciding what brands work best for each individual.
The great question of this is, what can we do? On the most basic level, buying men’s products would be the cheapest way to solve the problem in time and money. For some people, however, this could be an unsustainable and pride-breaking option.
On a long-term scale, start talking about it. That’s always the first step in reversing societal issues, make it known to people. Bring it up to your friends, hairdressers, store managers and men. Get them to rise up and be on your side in the battle for equality.
You can even go as far as to email the marketer of the brand you feel charges too much with Pink Tax. You can contact local, state and federal elected officials to let them know that Pink Tax is an issue that needs to be directly looked at. A great place to look at to see more that can be done and answers to frequently asked questions is pink.tax.
The Pink Tax is another part of a huge movement of equality among all genders, and though not a very prominent one, it is extremely important in representing economic inconsistencies in gendered price grouping.
The master of laying on her bedroom floor and looking at pictures of Jensen Ackles instead of working — senior Sophie Lindberg — is geared up for her third and final year on staff. Sophie is wired for her new position as Editorial Section Editor and the opportunity for change that comes with it, and she’s overjoyed to continue her legacy of writing exclusively opinions (to the dismay of the editors and advisor). While she would hands down spend every waking moment on Harbinger or her IB and AP coursework, she also enjoys swimming and weightlifting, playing one of the several instruments she’s attune with and loving her pup Sunny more than any dog needs. »
Leave a Reply