Pink tax refers to the phenomenon where women’s products are often more expensive than the same or similar products when marketed to men. Several factors have contributed to recognizing the pink tax, which has been a highly profitable practice for many companies.
Firstly, women are held to higher beauty standards when it comes to clothes, hygiene products, and make-up. So, businesses profit from women’s constant desire to improve and meet these expectations. Therefore, in practically every store, there is a considerably larger self-care section for women compared to men. While there are many options for women to choose from, it is at a higher cost.
However, this idea of categorizing and marketing certain goods and objects to certain genders has existed for a very long time. Clothing, razors, perfumes, and other self-care products are examples of this. Because there is a stark difference in the products and to whom it is marketed to, the difference in price is also made clear.
Early on, California’s legislature looked at pricing methods and found that women’s services and goods were more expensive than men’s, bringing the term “Pink Tax”. In 1994, the California Assembly Office of Research conducted a detailed research study on gender-based price discrimination in consumer services. In response, the California legislature passed the Gender Tax Repeal Act, which forbade companies from charging different rates for comparable services depending on the gender of the client.
While this law focused on services like haircuts, it was a precedent for further investigation into the pink tax on goods. More awareness about the pink tax was brought to light by consumer advocacy groups, as outlined in the 2015 report from New York City.
Razors are a common example of a product where “pink tax” is used because people found that pink razors intended for females were considerably higher in price even though there was no functional difference with the male razors. A 2015 study by the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs extended this research and discovered that pink scooters are around 67% more expensive than red scooters. Red scooters were marketed to men while pink scooters were marketed to females, establishing the main marketing tool companies use to this day, where male and female products are distinguished by color.
It seems like such a scam, so there should be regulations, right? One law that could contest the pink tax is Competition Law. Competition law in the EU regulates market behavior by preventing anti-competitive agreements and abuse of market power. Therefore, in theory, the pink tax should be prohibited by competition law. However, we still see it to this day despite so many consumer reports.
Certain nuances in competition law are bypassed while still following the rules outlined in the law, which is what happens in the pink tax. In theory, consumers are not monopolized because they have access to a wide range of products. Therefore, it is decided that there is no undue advantage as a result. Companies also claim that marketing, packaging, and other factors contribute to the difference in pricing. As a result, the pink tax is not a legal violation of competition law.
I visited Boots- a very popular health and beauty store- to focus further on the price discrepancies between male and female products. First of all, a large number of items and the surrounding shelf decoration were colored pink. Without even reading the signs, I knew that these products were exclusively for females.
I decided to compare hair care and coloring products for men and women. The price range for men’s hair coloring products was 7.99 to 11.99 euros. On the other hand, women’s hair care products ranged from 9.49 to 14.99 euros. There is such a huge difference even in the base price of hair coloring products. Additionally, while there is only one shelf of male hair care products, there is a greater selection of female hair care products. While most of the time we see products labeled as exclusively for women, I noticed some products being exclusively marketed for men. It is a different approach, but the target is the same- to highlight differences.
Although the pink tax may appear to be a minor problem, it can negatively impact women’s mental health. Numerous skincare and haircare trends on Instagram and other social media platforms are influencing women of all ages, encouraging them to buy products that could be beneficial but cost more. These expectations affect women of all ages and can especially burden women of the lower socioeconomic class. While some of the products are merely accessories, others are necessary for leading a healthier lifestyle. Maintaining beauty standards is only one aspect of it; healthcare is another. Thus, it is important to keep raising awareness and educating people about this problem.
So, what can we do as consumers? Female shoppers should purchase products promoted as male or unisex without hesitation if they verify the product’s safety for women. Do your own research because the gender gap between products is often artificially created, forcing women to spend more on their products. Don’t hesitate to speak out and take action, either through social media or other means, when you witness unfair pricing. Companies will respond when they receive enough criticism. There are also still consumers’ reports and advocacy groups are trying to raise awareness of this issue. You can take part and share your personal stories, so change can be initiated. Until then, go ahead and buy the black razor rather than the pink razor.
