TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

This article claims women face a "pink tax." What do you guys think?

genderegal

January 4, 2016
0 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.upworthy.com/ever-heard-of-the-pink-tax-its-real-and-cutting-into-womens-finances-in-a-big-way
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title This article claims women face a "pink tax." What do you guys think?
Author

genderegal

Upvotes 0
Comments 34
Date January 4, 2016 9:25 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3zgr2n/this_article_claims_women_face_a_pink_tax_what_do/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/this-article-claims-women-face-a-pink-tax-what-do.963924
https://theredarchive.com/post/963924

Comments

[–]KrisK_lvin 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

This helpful and informative video may help clarify matters.

[–]hackableyou 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

This video is 30 minutes long. Do you mind giving a TL;DR?

[–]KrisK_lvin 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The relevant part is that while e.g. deodorants and razors are functionally very similar, they are actually subtly different - for deodorants and shampoos, while they often share the same active ingredients, women’s products tend to have a number of additional items that increase the price.

The video also gives the example of dry-cleaning and hair-cuts where prices differ - it’s not an arbitrary decision but based on the fact that the services are different. Women’s blouses have a tendency to be more complexly designed and shaped than men’s shirts hence men’s shirts can be dry-cleaned using machines whereas women’s blouses often need to be taken care of by hand and so it costs more.

Ultimately - and as others have points out ITT - there is nothing obliging women to use women’s products*. If they would prefer to save money by buying men’s razors and do not notice any discernible difference, then they are welcome to do so. No one will care (or even notice) apart from themselves.

*Edit - tampons being an obvious exception.

[–]hackableyou 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That is a good point. They are not the same products. They are different. If this were a man centric society, we would have videos saying men are inferior and they expect us to use inferior products to women. But since people care more about women, here we are with pink tax videos. Anyone who understands the market would think the pink tax is ridiculous even without knowing all of the gender politics behind it.

[–]KrisK_lvin 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If this were a man centric society, we would have videos saying men are inferior and they expect us to use inferior products to women

Heh. Good bit of reversal there.

Anyone who understands the market would think the pink tax is ridiculous …

Nail, hit, head etc.

It really is that simple, isn’t it? The companies can charge that much because apparently women are prepared to pay those prices. If the majority of women really were to switch to paying for and using men’s products as a ‘life hack’ as that article linked to suggests, then women’s products would eventually shrink and disappear from the shelves altogether. The fact that this hasn’t happened says a lot.

[–]genderegal[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

You make good points, though realistically many "women" or "male" products/services are used partly due to the necessity of gender roles (especially in regards to clothing).

Women would have a hard time being successful if they didn't buy clothing and haircuts that support their femininity.

[–]KrisK_lvin 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

... partly due to the necessity of gender roles … Women would have a hard time being successful if they didn't buy clothing and haircuts that support their femininity.

Firstly, for one thing, surely this very much depends on the actual job role they perform?

  • Male nurse’s uniform; female nurse’s uniform.

  • Male police officer's uniform; female police officer's uniform - side by side here and here and here.

  • Male bus driver's uniform; female bus driver’s uniform - side by side here, where one woman has a skirt, but the other trousers, here and here(F) and (M).

  • Male first responder's uniform; female first responder’s uniform- side by side here

  • Male postal worker’s uniform; female postal worker’s uniform.

Well, anyway, you get the idea.

A second thing is I’m assuming you perceive "gender roles” to be in some way harmful or detrimental to society, especially to women? I’ve heard many arguments before along these lines and many explanations as to why this should be so (i.e. detrimental and especially to women), but that doesn’t mean I would be unwilling to listen to another (even if it’s just to see (edit =) whether or not it is the same as before).

[–]genderegal[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm not referring to work uniforms, I'm referring to literally the way people need to present themselves in order to be happy and successful in both work and in love.

In all those photos the women had longer hair than the men. It's very hard for women to look conventionally beautiful without doing this. Ditto with wearing makeup. Men almost never wear makeup unless they're on television or trying to hide something glaring like acne.

A better example would be to compare how women politicians and male politicians dress. Most people would agree that women politicians face tougher issues finding appropriate clothing to wear compared to male politicians. (Though men's suits are not cheap, when tailored well they are conventionally quite easy to get right.) Compare a news story like this that's interviewing plenty of women/male politicians and you can see the gender differences (particularly in how different they dress): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OoYRPcg9n_w

E.g. Hillary Clinton. I guarantee you she has a team of makeup professionals doing her face every day. I highly doubt Obama does unless he's going into major television studio.

Finally I should clarify that I don't actually think gender roles are necessarily detrimental. However, I am cognizant that they do exist and that they can affect our welfare as persons differently. E.g. men face pressures as success objects, women as sex objects. Acting like these pressures do not exist does not do anyone any good.


This is all a round about way of saying that while men and women certainly could choose to avoid gendered practices, if they want to be conventionally successful they will most likely need to conform to some practices that are specific to only men or women. If I want to be a President as a man that mean's generally wearing suits, keeping a short hair cut and shaving. As a women that means wearing makeup, wearing somewhat more form fitting clothing and spending likely more money on beauty treatments, longer hair cuts and probably even plastic surgery.

[–]KrisK_lvin 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm not referring to work uniforms …

Just to clarify, neither was I: my point was not the uniforms in themselves but to demonstrate that there is no necessary relationship between professional success and an ability to conform to gendered expectations of "clothing and haircuts" in order to express "femininity".

In doing so, I was also alluding to the oft-noted remark that when Feminist commentators make demands for more equal representation in the workforce, they overwhelmingly focus on white-collar and other prestige occupations and tend to only acknowledge blue-collar occupations when discussing part-time and/or low pay occupations, such as cleaners (the latter, incidentally, is a curious one to choose because night-time and early, i.e. 5 am, industrial and office cleaning crews are dominated by men whereas daytime and early evening cleaning staff of office and domestic residences tend, conversely, to be dominated by women – and are therefore apparently more visible to the Feminists that write about them.)

Although my intention is not to be antagonistic, I'd nevertheless like to suggest that there appear to be one or two contradictions in your comment that – even if you don't reply to me – you might nevertheless want to reconsider (as it's likely you'll want to make similar arguments to people other than me in future, you might as well take the opportunity of some constructive criticism to make them that bit more robust).

For instance, you say the following:

Most people would agree that women politicians face tougher issues finding appropriate clothing to wear compared to male politicians […] I am cognizant that [gender roles/gendered expectations] do exist and that they can affect our welfare as persons differently. E.g. men face pressures as success objects, women as sex objects.

Is it possible that you're contradicting yourself here? Your basic argument is clear: that while both men and women face gender-related pressures, those for women are harsher, more intensely felt.

However, later on you appear to be saying that, on the contrary, gender-related pressures are different, but equivalent i.e. success object (M) vs. sex object (F).

Added to this, I'd also point out the rather obvious flaw in suggesting that men don't feel any pressure to make themselves sexually attractive or, for that matter, that women feel no pressure to succeed in their studies or careers – both of those suggestions are canards surely?

This is already developing into far too long a response, so while there are other things I wanted to say, I'll just leave you with this: in order to make the claim that women do have a harder time than men, while at the same time acknowledging that men also have gender-conforming pressures (though ones different to those impressed on women), you must surely be in need of some kind of reliable instrument by which you can measure this "toughness". But no such instrument exists (I'm sorry, but I will not accept an appeal to "Most people would agree (that) P (is true)" as that's functionally no different from saying "I think P (is true)").

That being the case, there is simply no sound basis for arguing that women have a substantially tougher experience than men (at least not in respect of the modern, anglophone Western world, which I have assumed we have been talking about all along and not, e.g. Uganda or North Korea etc.).

This is not to say that women face no inconveniences and injustices of any kind – of course, they do and some of them are severe. But the claim that these inconveniences and injustices are woven into the very fabric of legal, social and institutional life (of Anglophone Western societies) to be blunt is absolute rubbish.

By contrast, there are a number of discrete areas of modern day life which can be pointed to in which men face discrimination enacted and enforced legally and formally by the state which simply do not affect women. That such a statement is completely counter-intuitive in no way makes it untrue.

You're likely feeling indignant now, but again it is genuinely is not my intention to offend. But I would add also that the differences between us are (in all likelihood) a manifestation of much older disagreements between Cartesian deduction and Baconian induction. But that's for sure for another time …

Edit minor grammar / typos

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What's stopping a woman from buying a man's razor? Is that illegal?

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

What this comes down to is what we are and are not willing to pay for an item and how you perceive yourself in reference to that item.

Pink razors: they are more expensive and, from what I've heard, not as good as men's razors. Some women will perceive that because it's pink it has to be for them, and they will pay as much as it costs to have them.

It's not a tax - you don't have to have razors and you won't go to jail for not having them or for not shaving. They are a luxury, and as such you have to make a decision as to what you want to buy. Basically you have options and are not being forced to buy them.

Saying there is a "girl tax" for paying more for an item just because it's pink - and not for the name brand Pink of breast cancer or Vitoria's Secret brand Pink - is a victims mentality that the world is out to get you, especially over something as silly as the color of a razor.

So, if you don't want to pay more for an item, then don't buy it.

[–]SchalaZeal01 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Men's hair dyes, the "just for men" kind, costs about 30% more for 2x less quantity of dye, and 100x less color choices.

Fortunately, men can also buy the hair dyes with a woman on the box. Hair is hair.

Edit: Unfortunately, for the beard dye, they're forced to go with the expensive less color choice kind. The scalp dyes are too bad for face skin.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

As a guy who will eventually need hair dye, this is very good information.

[–]SchalaZeal01 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

My boyfriend has long hair, down his back. So he always used the "woman's" dye before, the man one simply has shitty quantity for long hair. I have long and thick hair and need 1.5-2 boxes of the woman dye. My boyfriend has less thickness, 1 box is enough.

[–]cymrich 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

this was addressed pretty recently by TL;DR and razors was one of the items he went over... it essentially boiled down to research and development costs for a men's razor and a women's are different due to the areas each shaves and the razor shapes were a bit different to accommodate. i.e. men shave their face mostly where as women tend to shave armpits, legs and frequently the bikini line, and if most recent porn is an indicator, everything else in the groin region.

coincidentally however, that same week the consumerist had an article about the pink tax too and had a few items where something like R&D was definitely NOT the case... one I remember was a kids scooter... the red one was like $39.99 and the pink one was like $59.99 (I might have the specific prices wrong but you get the gist). the only difference between them was the color. I'll see if I can find that article and post it once I'm at my pc and not on my phone.

[–]cymrich 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the link... as promised:

http://consumerist.com/2015/12/23/study-shows-woman-pay-significantly-more-than-man-for-virtually-the-same-products/

[–]Rockbottom503 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Women control a massive proportion of household expenditure. This idea that women are discriminated against in the shops is just ludicrous! A retailer is there to make a profit - they will charge whatever people are willing to pay. The reason the men's versions of stuff cost less is because we don't want the frills and the pretty colours - we want a functional product that's reasonably priced, of good quality and that does the job. Which do we think takes less time to design, manufacture and bring to market???? Which do we think will be cheaper at the checkout as a result???

[–]genderegal[S] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm not talking about the broader issue of women controlling the budgets of families (which is increasingly not the case as relationships become more equal). I'm referring directly to this odd (apparent) phenomenon of women products being more expensive to equivalent male products.

On your later point: I don't think the argument that a women's razor costs more money to make or market really holds water. Marketing campaigns for men's razors arguably dwarf those for women, and men's hygiene products still have a lot of attention in branding given to them just like women's products do.

Like really you think this is cheaper to design, manufacture or bring to market than a women's shaving product?

[–]SchalaZeal01 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

For razors, the women's version has more plastic (slightly bulkier so it looks curvy), a easier-to-touch handle, and more moisturizer.

At least if you compared Venus vs Shick, both by Gillette, no idea about the throw-away kind.

[–]genderegal[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'll give you that. Though with the ridiculous markup already you have to wonder what the marginal cost difference per unit is.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I think there should be an actual pink tax. Women consume more of the services provided by taxes so they should pay more tax. Seems fair to me.

[–]mwobuddy 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

There should be a fat tax too. Imagine all the obese Americans churning up the publicly paid for roadways with their "gross" tonnage.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I had a good laugh at this one thanks haha

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I manage every once in a while.

[–]genderegal[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm sorry but this is exactly the kind of overreactive crap we call out radical feminists for that we need to be above doing.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Do you have an actual argument as to why those taking a bigger slice of the cake should not have to put up a bigger percentage of the money required to buy the cake? If i eat half the cake and you eat a tenth, does it seem fair to you that we both put $1 in the kitty?

[–]genderegal[S] -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Needs will vary of course, but you know that's not actually true. If a women uses more medical resources than a man because she needs to see a doctor during a pregnancy, can you really chalk that up to her using more?

I would love to hear an objective takedown proving that women eat half "the cake" while men only eat a tenth of "the cake."

Keeping score is not healthy, not in relationships, and not in society as a whole when we all share a common purpose.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, because i wasn't using 50% and 10% as an example about myself and someone else -- i really meant that women use 50% of the "cake' and men use only 10%...

As for pregnancy, it goes beyond that. Women live longer, on that alone they use up more tax-funded services. Duh.

As for "common purpose," i can only assume you mean using male money to finance female privilege.

[–]ghebert001 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nobody is forcing women to buy the pink version and also, many of these products, like razors, look similar but are designed differently and may havena justifiable reason for the higher price.

[–]blueXcat 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm a woman and those kind of complains are one of the reason I want to bitch slap other women.

I have a menstrual cup : 30$ over 5 years.

I use men razor. I use non gendered soaps and stuff like that.

I buy the cheapest deodorant that still smells nice. With coupon, the last time, they cost me like 30 cents

The rest is a choice. If I wear perfume or use make up, it's my problem

[–]mwobuddy 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Change the name to "bad consumer tax" and its correct.

[–]DavidByron2 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Privileged demographic complaining. compare with "the war on Christmas'

[–]CrustythePrawn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think more expensive razors don't amount to zip in terms of the higher costs faced by men for other things - see http://www.fighting4fair.com/uncategorized/weve-all-heard-of-the-gender-income-gap-but-is-there-an-expense-gap-working-draft/

[–]mikesteane -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

The duties on alcohol are applied because it is an intoxicating substance. However it requires a lot more, about 50% more, of it to get a man intoxicated than a woman. The fact that alcohol is taxed at the same rate for men and women is a disgrace which needs to be rectified.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter