The pink tax theory is a theory about gender-based marketing strategies that says products marketed toward women are often more expensive than their alternatives. Not only is this another way of discriminating against women, it’s a way to take power away from us.
If you’re here to roll your eyes and say that pink theory isn’t real and it’s just another way to victimize women, you are wrong. Numerous studies prove that women are frequently charged more for basic necessities. Have you ever noticed how you’ll often see a pack of men’s razors in the personal care aisle in stores, yet right next to it, you will be a similar pack of pink razors for women that is more expensive?
A Master Thesis in Economics by Matilda Kardetoft from Jonkoping University states, “Women tend to pay more for initially the same product than men, where seemingly, the only difference between the two is packaging and/or fragrance.”
In her research Kardertoft also notes that female marketed soap is charged 0,081 kronor per millilitre of soap (Roughly $8.10) , while the male correspondent is charged 0,074 kronor per millilitre of soap (Roughly $7.40).
Now let’s look closer to home, the United States Congress released a study in December of 2016 stating that women tend to pay 13% more for the same personal care products that men purchase. The study also states that female children’s clothing is 4% more expensive than their male counterparts.
Now that you’re enraged with the price differences for your personal care items, you stumble around your local target and decide to go into the office section. It turns out that even pens, pencils, and a computer mouse that are targeted toward women will be more expensive than those targeted toward men.
If you’re asking the question, “Why don’t women just buy male products then?” Here is why that’s more of an outrageous question than you might think. The basic fact that there are products made specifically for men that are cheaper and more accessible than for women justifies the continuing existence of a male-dominated society. Women shouldn’t have to resort to buying products for men just to avoid being overcharged. Even if the formula for a product is exactly the same, branding and packaging continue to reinforce societal expectations of how women should consume products.
Even when women try to get away with not paying the pink tax, companies find a way to disadvantage them. Take shrinkflation, a term coined in 2009 referring to how companies reduce the product size or quantity while maintaining the same price, which increases the cost for consumers without a price hike. Women’s products are more likely to be affected by this, meaning that women will still be paying more for a product per unit than men.
Saying this problem is simply about economics and consumer behavior is an understatement; this is still about men maintaining economic power over women. Not only do women pay more for the same products, but they also earn less than men. On average, women still make 84 cents for every dollar a man makes; the wage is even worse for women of color. So now, women are earning less than men and paying more for their basic necessities.
The work for gender equality is still not over in any aspect of daily life. Unfortunately, this problem won’t be solved by individual consumers making different purchasing choices; it’ll require a bigger systemic change that protects consumers and maintains corporate accountability.
