The Price of Pink
Uncovering the Truth behind the Global Practice of Gender-Targeted Pricing
Perfumes, toothbrushes, razors, toys — these are some of the daily-use products purchased regularly by and for males and females alike. These are also those products, among several others, that target specific genders through colour-coding: the classic “masculine” blues for boys/men and “feminine” pinks for girls/women.
But superheroes and princesses are not the only points of difference among such products; the colour pink, it seems, asks for a higher price.
The World’s Worst-Kept Secret: The Very Apparent Hidden Tax for Women
For years, gender-targeted pricing has been imposed on products including personal care and hygiene, clothing, services like grooming, dry-cleaning and transportation, loans and more. The infamous Pink Tax (which isn’t really a tax but a system of unequal pricing based on the consumers’ gender-based preferences) is an additional charge levied on “female products” or products that are designed specifically for women. In contrast, the male equivalent for the same product is cheaper.
This globally active phenomenon indirectly increases women’s cost of living, solely due to the everyday items they purchase. Considering how the average income of women is anyways inferior to that of men, this further has the capacity of depleting their purchasing power (Mint Article, 2021). A 2021 article by Meredith Hoffman for Bankrate states that the pink tax costs the average woman $1351 extra per year. A significant hike often goes unnoticed due to insufficient awareness and education on the consumer’s end and complex notices/tactics on the retailer or manufacturers; this is also why it’s known as the “hidden tax.”
What makes the Pink Tax successful?
Economists and researchers believe that the pink tax is a marketing tactic fuelled by price discrimination. By setting gender-sensitive prices for the same products, in favour of one gender over another, the pink tax is based on certain assumptions about female buying behaviour.
Firstly, the female market is less price-sensitive than the male. Considering most of the products in question are part of the beauty or grooming industries, it can be inferred that women are pushed to pay extra to meet the societal beauty standards to a greater degree than men. Secondly, the overall functioning of the pink tax points to a belief that women are more likely to spend on normatively “feminine” products like clothes, cosmetics, skin and body care, haircuts etc. despite having to pay a higher price for the same; this further builds on the narrative of price-insensitivity among women.
Marketing techniques like product differentiation supported by varied gender styling and packaging techniques indirectly influence the target customers of the pink tax to pick the pinker box, the flowery shirt or the perfume they know is used by their favourite female celebrity. Clubbed with the charm of targeted advertisements, this often leads women to conform first and focus on discriminatory prices second (or perhaps never).
Two Sides to the Pink Tax Story
Are there any justifiable reasons for the pink tax? Some economists have reasoned that the pink tax is not just a result of gender disparity, and in fact, it can persist due to profits and precedents.
Through product differentiation, sellers make changes in the manufacturing process in terms of colour, smell or additional materials requiring a higher cost, ultimately increasing the selling cost of the product. It is believed that a small quantity of pink material is more expensive than a huge amount of blue or black colour used (Lafferty 62).
But not all blame falls on the marketing and production industries; some of the other probable influences include tariffs, duties and imports. In most countries, the tariffs (or tax on imports) are generally higher for women’s products- “On average, clothing imports for women are taxed at 15.1% compared to 11.9% for men, according to the Joint Economic Committee: U.S. Congress (2016).
Way Out?
You’re probably wondering if there is a way out of this problem. At the ground level, we all can start by indulging in conscious, self-selected shopping. Although it may sound strange, if you are convinced that a product will not differ by gender, then it could be wiser to go for the blue packaging instead of the pink one- it will most likely be cheaper.
The pink tax is a direct outcome of gender disparity against women and it persists in our daily lives and activities. While awareness about this hidden tax is increasing, true change still needs to take place; cultural norms and expectations from women need to be rationalised so they can maintain their purchasing power; legislators globally and locally need to provide sanctions against gender-discriminatory pricing and as citizens, we need to do our due diligence and make informed decisions about our daily purchases.
References
