Op Ed: Hate Pink

A New Roads sophomore explores the “pink tax” and reality of feminist bystanders.

The difference in pricing for women’s products compared to men’s is painfully obvious to any consumer. This is an issue many ignore. This is an issue the average Joe ignores. Many people assume the difference in pricing is a result of one of the products being made better or containing different ingredients. 

But,  what if I told you such pricing changes are due to simple details, such as the color of a product that’s “designed for women”? 

I know, I’ll say what we’re all thinking: pricing products due to color is a ridiculous way to capitalize on basic gender stereotypes, yet businesses capitalize off of products specifically marketed towards women and profit off of a simple love of the color pink.

Many people, including women, don’t know what the “pink tax” is or how it affects them. The pink tax describes the markup on products marketed to women with those same products being cheaper for men;  day-to-day products that both genders use have higher prices according to what gender they’re targeted towards. This could be girls’ bikes being more expensive than boys’, which have a 4-dollar margin between them, shaving cream, and even stool softeners.

The “pink tax” even extends to stool softeners

Small price adjustments may not seem like a lot at the cash register, but by adding together all the items you have bought throughout your whole life, you’ll realize how absurd these differences really are. You’ll also notice such differences if you begin to look out for products targeted toward girls or women versus almost identical products that are either gender-neutral or marketed directly to males, despite all of these products being of the same quality. 

A main argument when discussing the pink tax is that women can just buy male-oriented products. But, the advertising industry has made it difficult to do this. The way items are marketed toward women digs deep into the societal standards that have been set for women in our culture. With face washes and lotions promising a youthful and flawless face, there is an undeniable emphasis on appearance with any products geared towards women, and when you’re bombarded to buy what people tell you you need to look fabulous, you will spend a few extra dollars to achieve that look.

Looking at different markets such as the automobile or utility industries, we see how the pink tax is hidden in other ways, but is very visible in the wallets of women who are taken advantage of because they’re not “aware” of how much certain motors or sinks should cost because that is not a “feminine” thing to learn about. Women are taken advantage of in the automobile industry when buying a product that isn’t geared toward the average mom on  Mother’s Day. “Cars are designed for speed—not utility, which is what really matters to women. No SUV is built to accommodate a mother who needs to load two small children into it,” states an article about automobile consumers from Harvard Business. 

This price discrepancy can be seen in children’s items, too; girls’ toys and clothes cost 4% to 7% more compared to those marketed toward boys. This four percent may seem insignificant when buying one item, but it can equal an average of around $1300 a year..

So, while women earn 82 cents for every dollar that a man gets paid, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (and this statistic worsens in marginalized groups, with black women earning 63 cents and Hispanic women earning 58 cents for every dollar a white man earns, according to the U.S. Government Accountability Office), they also end up paying thousands more to get the same products as their male counterparts.  

A 2015 study by New York City’s Department of Consumer Affairs titled “From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer” found women’s products cost 7% more on average compared to similar items available for men. From childhood onesies to canes for seniors,  items marketed towards women cost more, imposing an unnecessary financial burden on the gender. 

So, then, how should women address this issue? 

I reached out to anyone I could find under the category of “feminists,” which is how they choose to identify on their LinkedIn or on websites advocating for women. It’s concerning to see how women who claim to advocate for this issue on their socials have nothing to say when faced with questions about the pink tax, losing all sense of the profile they show the world. 

Without their constant feminist outreaches, we would be able to focus on the fact that they have no real care for this matter at all, and they choose to see it as something that has no real effect on them, so trying to advertise their care for this issue is easy because they honestly don’t find it to be a big problem. They advocate to show they care about a problem without responding to the real issue that puts women across the world at financial risk, without their realizing it.

As I went on this mission to engage with women who claim to do anything with their power to champion these causes, what I encountered was not just disappointing, but deeply disillusioning. Despite reaching out to what felt like hundreds, the response was silent. And when a lone voice did offer a reply, it lacked any real commitment to the cause, only giving me lousy statistics. The experience of scouting these people’s emails to ask them about the care they claim to have has left me frustrated and questioning the sincerity of these “feminists.”

The pink tax is not a dumb inconvenience; it’s a show of gender-based discrimination that disproportionately affects women. The lack of response from people who claim it’s their job to advocate for these people speaks volumes about their priorities and commitment to real-life change. It’s easy to identify as a feminist, but we see it as much harder to tackle the real issues in everyday life. 

Don’t be boring and ignorant.  Avoid falling into the self-proclaimed “woman-loving,” “burn the patriarchy,” t-shirt-wearing, couldn’t-care-less-about-women poser pipeline. Start using your voice, and not squandering any opportunity to talk about this inequality, even if that means answering emails from random high-schoolers. 

Your silence is complicity and by recognizing your own gender disparity and not speaking out against it, you’re no better (and I argue, worse!) than the businesses putting us in these places. I know, “use your voice” isn’t truly earth-shattering advice, but despite the clichéd connotation this piece of wisdom has, it really does work. 

Don’t shut up about what you care about. Don’t shut up about the Pink Tax!