Skip to content 
Overview:
- The term ‘Pink Tax’ was reintroduced in 2015, claiming women are charged more for specific goods compared to men.
- This global phenomenon affects women negatively, as it widens gender-based economic inequalities.
- Products marketed specifically towards a specific gender with an upcharge count as economic discrimination.
- Raising awareness and holding corporations accountable can potentially break the cycle of inequality.
‘Pink Tax’ was reintroduced after a published report by the New York City Department of Consumer Affairs (NYCDCA) in 2015. The study imparted statistics that showed women are charged an average of 7% more for specific goods and services. New scents, packaging, and marketing campaigns are rolled out to associate products with buzzwords such as ‘Better’ and ‘For Women’. This created a differentiation between pretty much the same products and services for women and men. Some examples are significantly more noticeable in the pricing of personal care products like razors and services such as haircuts. This issue, while having been prevalent for decades, has been brought back into public scrutiny following economic crises and inflation. Exploring the matter is the key to understanding how it creates economic inequality for women and addressing it.
Understanding Pink Tax
Since the 2015 report by the NYCDCA on gender-based pricing, the term ‘Pink Tax’ has been reintroduced into cultural awareness. It is not a form of literal taxing, but an upcharge of goods and services catered specifically to women. This phenomenon is prevalent globally, not limited to the United States and its surrounding countries. These surcharges are easily detectable in basic goods such as shampoo, body wash, and clothes that are marketed towards women. Feminine health products like menstrual pads, cups, and tampons are not spared from an upcharge. Though a basic necessity, women still have to pay more for hygiene products they require regularly for their menstrual periods. This creates a cycle where companies deem it profitable to charge more for products women need to purchase every month. Not to mention the services, such as healthcare, that subject women to pink taxing, even for specific ailments like fibroids.
These gender-specific pricing on products and services catered to women contributes to an unequal financial burden on many. Products marketed specifically towards a specific gender with an upcharge count as discrimination, promoting economic inequality. The subject of this discrimination–women– are marketed necessities at higher prices just to satisfy a primary need. The inequality stems from the fact that they receive lower salaries than men, making them struggle just to keep up. Many argue that surcharges in women’s products are due to higher production costs for different colors and packaging. However, evidence suggests the price difference cannot be attributed to aesthetic costs alone.
How Does Pink Tax Pose an Issue to Women?
Culturally, women are often held to a higher standard to be deemed ‘successful’ or ‘likeable’ in the eyes of communities. This has led them to be subject to covert economic discrimination, as they have few options but to spend more. Beauty becomes the gateway to success for many women, and this policy puts it behind a paywall. One that makes them pay an average of $2,381 more for the same products than men, per year. This adds up to a total of approximately $188,000 in ‘Pink Tax’ throughout their lives
The problem remains that many find this amount unaffordable, and the price much too high a paywall amidst financial crises. Despite the already tall barrier, the issue persists and worsens due to rising prices and the status quo. Bankrate states 41% of working women failed to receive a raise or a better-paying job despite high inflation in 2021. In addition to that, in 2020, women working full-time earned 82% of the median earnings of men. This raises the question of the ethics behind the upcharge for certain products. Especially considering its perpetuation of economic discrimination towards women who already struggle to keep up with their basic necessities.
Women’s Purchasing Power
According to Forbes, women make up over 85% of purchases across various goods and services in the U.S. alone. This exemplifies the significance of women’s purchasing power in the global economy, holding a great influence over consumer spending behaviors. Though with the prevalence of pink taxing, it is projected that women’s purchasing power will eventually whittle away. This, along with the financial burden on women as they continue to earn less than men, poses a significant challenge.
Upcharging for products and services marketed specifically towards women means that they are forced to spend more. This creates an endless cycle where corporations view ‘Pink Tax’ as profitable at the end of the day. Besides this, we continue to contribute to the existing gender pay gap and gender stereotypes, while limiting women’s resource allocations.
What Do We Do About It?
In an episode of Ellen DeGeneres’ daytime show, she discussed the issue by using an undercurrent of humor. In the segment, DeGeneres expresses disdain towards Bic pens when they released a product line specifically ‘For Women’. The products, which were released in shades of pastel, were priced higher than Bic’s regular pens. The segment effectively showed how ridiculous it was to ‘Pink Tax’ a writing tool. Eventually, Bic suspended the products shortly after their release.
This is proof that talking about the issue works. Bringing awareness to consumers on how companies are effectively charging extra for women-marketed products demands accountability. Advocating for women’s rights and how pink taxing is putting a strain on women’s financial strength is crucial. The more people are aware of how this puts women through economic discrimination, the more likely the cycle breaks.
Reintroduced in 2021, the Pink Tax Repeal Act prohibits the upcharge for substantially similar products and services in California. This marks a significant step for communities to fight back. A sign that they reject a decades-old policy that only seems to put more barriers of challenge for women. But the fight simply does not end here. There is more to be done and people to educate on women’s rights and the economic struggles they face. The world they live in limits their ability to afford basic necessities, something so fundamentally unjust.
Conclusion:
Since the 1990s, women have been subjected to paying extra for certain services and goods. No necessities are spared from the ‘Pink Tax’, including clothing, services like haircuts, and even personal hygiene products. While corporations continue to hide behind claims of upcharge from production costs in packaging design, this has been proven false. The issue remains that pink taxing continues to pose a challenge for women. Women, who, in the first place, make less in wages than men. This seems more prevalent following the global economic landscape and high inflation rates that threaten their ability to purchase necessities. Talking about ‘Pink Tax’ and holding corporations accountable for the act can serve to raise awareness of the issue. The more we point out how this puts women through economic inequalities, the closer we are to breaking the cycle.
FAQs:
1- Why does the pink tax exist?
Some believe that pink tax is fueled by societal expectations that women will buy more to conform to gender norms. Companies see this as a profitable opportunity for business, to be able to charge more for items branded ‘feminine’. Therefore, corporations can gain more profits by taking advantage of said perceived spending habits.
2- What are some examples of pink tax?
Women’s versions of products like shampoo, deodorant, and razors and often priced higher than men’s despite similar ingredients. Women’s clothing, makeup, and skincare products are also priced higher than similar products marketed to men. Women also pay more for haircuts, dry cleaning, and healthcare (reproductive health and cosmetic procedures).
3- How long has pink tax been around?
Pink tax has been around since the 1990s, but has only been discussed as an issue starting in 2015. Some assume this is due to rising prices in the market, while women still do not receive a pay raise.
