Tackling the ‘pink tax’ in Target

You know how a box of condoms is roughly $4? What if they were $7 but only if you were a woman? Slap on “woman” in front of the word condom and you pay an extra $3 for latex because of the “pink tax”, and now all of the sudden pulling out sounds less like Russian roulette and more like God’s one true birth control.

When Rachel Evans, 21, goes into her local supermarket, she doesn’t expect to be the victim of financial discrimination. She isn’t barred from buying her boxed wine or told she cannot shop at certain stores; she is however, implicitly told what aisles are for her and which products she can buy. The all pink toy section and isolated beauty department play a role in teaching women that the only way to identify with their gender is to buy gendered products. This is the concept of the “selective marketing” where companies target a specific customer group (in this case women) and create products exclusively for them.

Selective marketing isn’t a new concept, but the rise of products “for women” in tandem with the second and third waves of feminism, while empowering due to the ability of women to buy products made specifically for them, opened up the Pandora’s box for “femvertising”, which is feminism + advertising in case you didn’t get the hint. This is where opportunity arises for “blue” companies – companies that typically target men – to slap “for women” on a product, color it pink and charge more for it as “‘God’s way’…of saying women should be at home”. That’s not me imitating a demon, a real person with real people hair actually said that – Gavin McInnes, Fox News guest, in response to why the pay gap exists.

God doesn’t have anything to do with the marking up of items just because they are for women, but that doesn’t mean you won’t take her name in vain when you see the disparity. For clarification, I do want to acknowledge that I am speaking from a place of privilege given that I am male, but as an outsider to the problem looking in (with a strict avoidance of a “savior complex”) the difference is simply appalling. After all, while some may argue “women should just buy blue razors instead of pink ones,” the federal government’s responsibility to promote gender equality extends to female consumers as well.

To shed light on this issue, I went to my neighborhood Target and here is what I found:

Despite having the same active ingredient as the men’s Rogaine© , the women’s not only costs more but the men’s packaging warns women not to use it because they want to reinforce the cost disparity.

Both of these products are for sensitive skin, but the women’s is smaller and nearly a dollar more expensive…

These both use the same swivel technology from the same host company but the women’s refills are a dollar and a half more expensive.

This is the most egregious example. Yes, Midol© does have Caffeine and an Antihistamine and (as I am told) is slightly more effective at treating the symptoms of menstruation, but the most significant active ingredient is Acetaminophen but the price per caplet is way different.

One of the biggest issues regarding the pink tax is visibility. When women’s and men’s products are placed in different sections it’s easy to miss the subtleties in prices.

In a random survey of 25 shoppers:

However after explanation, two more people did know what this tax but that isn’t nearly enough especially when the New York City Department of Public Affairs exclaims “on average, that women pay approximately 7 percent more than men for similar products” and a study from the University of Central Florida found “gendered pricing costs women almost $1,400 a year”

This is what people had to say about the Pink Tax:

“[Companies are] taking advantage of their women…why not milk them for all they’ve got?”

Christina Estrada, 33

Do you think it is right for companies to sell similar products at a cheaper rate to men than to women?

“Do I think its right? No. Do I think it’s true? Yes.”

Keith Kneeland, 39

What do you think about the price difference created by the pink tax?

“It’s not fair. Women get paid less and men get paid more but y’all charge them more for their stuff? That’s not right. Companies are taking advantage of their women ’cause they know they’re going to be out shopping anyways. Why not milk them for all they’ve got?”

Chad Thompson, 44

What do you think about Gillette© selling razor cartridge refills at a higher rate to women despite using the same technology?

“Really? So it’s exactly the same product?”

Well it’s the same swivel ball technology, the only difference is that one is marketed for women and colored pink or purple.

“If they’re absolutely no difference in production cost or anything…they can control, it’s terrible.”

The consensus is clear, the pink tax is awful and ought to be ended. This isn’t just a financial fight, it’s a civil rights one as well.