The gender-divide in our wallets as well was our workplace.

The news this week has been dominated with stories of ‘the pink tax’ how cruel, unfair and downright overpriced female targeted products are but where is it going to stop? The tampon tax set by Europe means that a 5% tax on sanitary products is charged. It has been the case since the 1970s but its only been shouted about recently. Taxes are charged to ‘luxury’ items. Periods are by no means a luxury for women; it’s a biological happening that is genuinely unavoidable. The UK now gives its tax gains from feminine hygiene products to female charities which I am all for. I am also a firm believer that if this story had been the one spun to the press nobody would have opposed it let alone protest about it. A headline of “Every product you buy helps someone else” is much better than “The Tampon Tax”. It’s a similar set up to being charged for a carrier bag. The money goes to charity but that doesn’t make the front page.

Photo from

But it’s not just about taxation on daily necessities. The news this week has decided to talk about ‘rip-off practices’, the same products aimed at men and women are substantially more expensive with a pink label. Retailers are being called to parliament to explain the price difference but I can tell you right now why the do it. We are stupid enough to let them. Watch the video of the ‘Beauty Patch’. Women will buy anything. Which i think is quiet sad. All of these women are beautiful but think that wearing a placebo patch on their arm will make them ‘beautiful’. There is nothing in the patch. Beauty is a state of mind!

Boots have now admitted their pricing is gender-squed after research looked into women razors and eye creams. Research by The Times discovered disparities across hundreds of gender-specific items, including toys, clothes and beauty products. Those marketed at women were priced  on average 37 per cent higher.

The body lotion in your bathroom doesn’t know if a man or a woman is going to be using it. The shampoo in the shower doesn’t know the different between a mans hair and a women’s. These stores are seeing the gap in the market of merchandising, fuelled by the beauty industry telling us our hair is frizzy, our face shouldn’t be wrinkled, we need aloe vera soaked blades on our razors. It’s all nonsense. Gender-neutral products don’t sell. Do you know why? Because they have plain packaging. Now I’m not talking about cheaper alternatives, I’m talking about gendered alternative. I do believe that you get what you pay for, I’ve tried cheap and I’ve tried high-end and middle of the range.mens-and-womens-razors-difference-pa I know what I’d rather be putting on my face. But the needs of products are genderless, there doesn’t need to be female razor for smooth legs when there are male razors for smooth chins. There is no need for it to be gendered. The only difference in ‘King of Shaves’ range is the price relating to the colour of the stick. The blades fit both, the shape, design and grip of the razor is identical barring the pink or black plastic and the price tag. Oh and in line with the ‘Tampon Tax’ as earlier mentioned, razors have a 20% tax on them. Which one could argue women are being taxed for having a uterus and taxed for having hair, of which the media demonises. Us women really are getting a rough deal!

We are moving into a de-gendered society, slowly, as Ms. Miller stated in a comment to the Telegraph but issues like this are often overlooked when discussing gender equality. Lets take it one step further, women are paid on average 25% less than men, yet products aimed at women come in at nearly twice the price. I don’t believe the comments of ‘additional’ or different ‘performance’ features. We are told we need them so we buy them.

A worthy note and beauty tip for the ladies, you don’t need to only use products marketed for women. For example men’s deodorants come in stronger strengths and my super tip of the day; men’s aftershave balm is a fantastic make up primer as it smooths and soothes skin as well as closes pores. Boom! Bet ya didn’t know that! Ok so you probably did.

Who really is to blame? The manufactures? The Brands? The magazines? Or the people buying them?



3 thoughts on “The gender-divide in our wallets as well was our workplace.

  1. > Periods are by no means a luxury for women; it’s a biological happening that is genuinely unavoidable.

    So is men’s natural requirements for about 30% more calories per day than women. Therefore men deserve an equivalent discount at the supermarket (and bigger portions than women in restaurants). Have I done social justice right? 😉

    > Which one could argue women are being taxed for having a uterus and taxed for having hair, of which the media demonises….

    I think being labelled as society’s sociopathic oppressor class, as rapists, as oafs, as savages who threaten civilised society counts as demonisation. A thousand billboards and adverts with women flicking their glossy hair and being portrayed as goddesses is not demonisation. If anything it it the opposite of that.

    > Us women really are getting a rough deal!

    Men in the west are still genitally mutilated at birth. Men still have no reproductive rights. For a man consenting to sex (or even a man being raped) means he is consenting to parenthood under the law. Men have less rights of access to children. Men are given 60% longer sentences than women for the exact same crimes. Men are expected to do the majority of the grunt work in society which is why men are killed at work 20 times more often than women. The list goes on and on……

    Men’s lack of legal rights relative to women, men’s lower life expectancy, men’s higher chances of being assaulted in public or blown up on the battlefield, or killed at work ….. and the 18 years of child support he is forced at gunpoint to pay even if the woman got pregnant from his own spent condom all represent the ‘tax’ on men’s balls.

    But obviously the tampon tax and expensive scented shampoos full of expensive natural ingredients mean women have it worse.

    I agree that tampon tax should probably be abolished… but let’s be honest, all that will happen is the money will be obtained by raising taxes on something else. No actual money will be saved. Nobody’s standard of living is going to noticeably improve.

    Every time feminists and social justice warriors demand another ‘he for she’ policy be imposed on society they are taxing all of society. The recent manspreading campaign on NYC subways cost New Yorkers $70,000. That’s money which could have been spent feeding the homeless, who are mostly men.

    The fact that shopping malls are full of over priced, unnecessary, frivolous, impractical trinkets, lotions, accessories, clothing, shoes, and other LUXURY goods for women is actually a sign that women in the west are privileged, not oppressed. The western woman is the most privileged, pampered, safe, comfortable and protected demographic to have ever existed in all of human history – apart from royalty.

    The endless rows of shops selling luxury pampering items speaks of women’s disposable income. Far more of men’s earnings ends up in women’s pockets than the other way around. Men financially support women directly (men almost always contribute more to a relationship than women – a woman who financially supports a man is still a rare thing)… and men also support women financially via taxation which pays for all the ‘free’ services and welfare women enjoy (far more than men are entitled to).

    Women’s collective financial support from men/ the state is why women can AFFORD to go for less stressful, less demanding, less dangerous jobs which pay LESS financially, but MORE in terms of flexibility, comfort, safety, convenience, a pleasant working environment, job satisfaction etc etc.

    Women’s extra financial support is also why women have five times more clothes than the average man, and ten times more luxury beauty products and pampering products than men. And most of these items are designed to help a woman exaggerate her beauty, youth and perceived fertility in order to compete with other women for men … and (it has to be said) their wallets. High maintenance women and high earning men go together.

    Nobody forces women to play this game, so it is unfair to imply it is some kind of oppression or inequality. If women spending time and energy on their appearance in order to attract men is oppression, then so too is men spending time and energy on their careers in order to attract women.

    Women are free to walk about in sweat pants with no make up, with their natural mousy brown hair in a low maintenance hair style if they want, just as men are free to get an easy low paid job and play computer games all weekend in their one bedroom apartment….. but most men and women choose to promote themselves in ways that the opposite sex (and society in general) finds attractive and appealing.. and that generally costs money. And yes everyone feels pressured to participate in this competitive behaviour to some extent, just to avoid being looked down on for having scruffy, frizzy hair … or for being a pathetic man with a crap job and an car no woman would want to be driven about in.

    Boo hoo to everyone! Life is cruel!

    If you research the subject of men’s vs women’s toiletries you actually find men’s toiletries almost always have A LOT LESS expensive ingredients in them – either cheaper ingredients or less percentage of the expensive ingredient. This is why they are generally a bit cheaper.

    Women are perfectly free to buy these cheaper, lower quality products if they want – and some women do! But a lot of modern women LIKE to buy expensive, luxury shit because it makes them feel WORTH IT. It boosts their feeling of self worth, which is why women will often ‘treat themselves’ with a quick luxury purchase whenever they feel a bit down. If the products on offer are of low quality, have no fancy packaging, and are dirt cheap then these women will not feel so much like princesses when they buy them – which defeats the whole point of these ‘pampering’ shopping indulgences which these women crave.

    In many ways these brands are selling ‘an experience’ (a service) just as much as an actual product. The service is to make women feel like pampered princesses. This is the service they are offering to women.

    As with all things this pampering of women is now being defined by feminists and SJW’s as a form of oppression of women. This is mostly because women ran out of actual rights inequalities about 40 years ago. Now that women have all the rights men have (and then some), they could turn their attention to all the right men lack but which women enjoy (I listed a few above).

    But fuck that. Let’s moan about the price of shampoos and tampons instead! 🙂


    1. What a fantastic comment! Thank you for taking so much time to write such an in-depth responses (clearly more time than I spent writing the article!
      You make a fascinating point on the calories front. Women are genitally mutilated at birth too and in some cultures as adults not as children either. Men do have reproductive rights; men don’t have to have children, just like women don’t. You can call child maintenance a tax on ‘mens balls’. They don’t have to have children, there are procedures to prevent that from happen. Planned Parenthood in America for example is a joke, if a women chooses to abort her baby she shouldn’t be stopped or attacked because of it. Everyone has a choice and a right to govern their own health and if men don’t want to ‘pay for accidents’ then let women have abortions.

      Women using medical services more than men, thats pretty much unavoidable when you consider the make up, design and function of a woman body. Its not a free service that ‘women enjoy’ as you put it and in many cases women care more about their health than men which can explain why men seem to access it more than men.

      I do agree that if you scrap the tax in one place it will only end up being added to something else but that’s unavoidable. I am totally with you on the unnecessary costs of the campaigns. There are a lot of unnecessary costs when it comes to campaigns like that. I think the money should go into school to educate the youth who are willing to learn not the adults who are not.

      Women aren’t beautifying themselves for the benefits of others. The female body isn’t a merchandising stand. We are not a product designed to be high cost. We should pay for the quality of ingredients of the product we are buying. Lots of items on our shelves contain the same ingredients but the price mark up is a lot more. How you can even begin to argue the case of women having a more expendable income in obscured to me. When your paid less, work more hours/jobs, and have to tend to a family (because men are more likely to walk away from that responsibility), what income you do have left shouldn’t be swallowed up by unnecessary costing related solely to your targeted gender.

      The only point I’m getting from what you’re saying here is that women aren’t intelligent enough to know that they don’t need the ‘extras’ but that’s obvious when you so nicely put it that women don’t have stressful jobs or jobs that require too much intellect. Women tend to do the jobs that men cant/don’t want to due to lack of patients or understanding, this doesn’t mean their job is less important, less stressful or worth a lesser wage. Women in society are controlled a lot more than men who have the freedom to do pretty much whatever the hell they want. Its not the fact that women can ‘afford’ to take these jobs it’s the fact that they are the only jobs flexible enough to work in amongst the million other responsibilities they have away from the shop floor. I’m pretty sure if you told a woman she could live like a teenager for the rest of her life having the washing, cleaning, child rearing and cooking done they would bite your hand off to do a 9-5 job.

      Thanks for such a fab comment though and taking the time to read and respond. I would have liked to check out your blog but it appears there isn’t one, or maybe I’m just not intelligent enough to find it.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s