At the neighbourhood Guardian pharmacy, the price of a deodorant marketed to men is SGD 4.25. The same deodorant, marketed to women, is priced 30 cents higher at SGD 4.55. Both deodorants are exactly the same, the only difference is in the packaging. The men’s deodorant is blue and women’s is pink. This differential pricing is not unique to deodorants but is seen across several product categories.
Over their lifetime, women pay upwards of 135,000 dollars more than men on similar products and services. This well documented discriminatory practice is known as the ‘pink tax’, named after the pink packaging commonly used for these products and to reflect the stereotypical connotations of pink as a feminine color. Pink tax is a system of discriminatory pricing based on gender. Certain everyday products and services marketed towards and for women and girls tend to be more expensive than their generic or male alternatives. Contrary to popular belief, this phenomenon exists across developing and developed regions ranging from India to California. For example, the female version of the same shampoo and conditioner is priced 48% higher than the generic one. Other examples of this would be the fact that women are often charged higher rates for dry cleaning services and interest rates for mortgage.
It is no secret that in the United States, white women make on average 79 cents for every dollar a white man makes. This disparity is even greater for many women of color. Compared to white men, black women earn 62 cents for every dollar, and Hispanic women earn 54 cents. On top of this, having to pay more for basic products deepens the wealth disparity between women and men significantly. The pink tax costs women more than $1,500 yearly due to women paying as much as 50 percent more than men do for similar products. Paying more for goods and services marketed to women while earning less than men means men hold the majority of the purchasing power in the economy.
Most would think that in the digital age, this disparity is easier to recognize, quantify and mitigate. However, this ‘tax’ is becoming increasingly entrenched in society, and becoming difficult to challenge. Despite saying this, there have been some advancements on a legal level to abolish pink tax. Last year, the state of New York enforced a ban on charging more for products and services that are ‘substantially similar’ yet marketed to different genders. Similarly, Boxed, an online retailer, took efforts to reprice items for men and women towards ensuring price parity. Both these actions are a clear first step in the right direction, and it is my hope that other countries and corporations follow their lead in introducing laws and policies to tackle the pink tax. However, while it is crucial to combat this issue through legal action, it is equally as important to address it at a social level. Legislation will only take us so far. Society needs to change its gender norms towards becoming more egalitarian. This can only be done through educating men and women on this practice.
Comentarios