Red, White and Inequality
In a mildly controversial act, California Governor Gavin Newsom implemented a law banning the “pink tax” this September, a economic price trend causing products with a female target audience to be massively overvalued compared to male counterparts. More specifically, Assembly Bill No. 1287 prevents differences in pricing due to gender of the intended audience, and only allows price differences between goods with substantially more costly methods of production, such as requiring more labor force, materials and time. Newsom stated that No. 1287 will end California’s price discrimination, stopping necessary expenses adding up quickly over a lifetime (Sacramento Bee).
The ban has not been without backlash and controversy. According to Psychology Today, many economists argue that the products are naturally more expensive due to simple supply and demand. They claim that due to women’s alleged willingness to pay more for their necessary products, the price difference is justified as a way for companies to maximize their profits. Senior Omar Eltawil, president of the Business and Economics club, disagrees, noting that profitability does not equate to being ethical, nor does free market justify the wild west of corporations.
“Many corporations [make] the “free market” argument, but they fail to realize that the concept of free market does have restrictions [such as with] weapons and narcotics,” Eltawil said. “In addition, the government does have legal authority to stop corporate inflation. Therefore, it is perfectly moral and legal for the government to abolish any law that would raise prices on products for one gender over another.”
Many conservatives, on the other hand, argue that the pink tax is not even real. A prominent example is the YouTube channel “Don’t Walk, Run! Productions,” which has made three separate videos attempting to debunk the existence of the pink tax. The videos attempt this by claiming that men and women pay the same price using local data found from the content creator’s state of origin, New York. National data contradicts his many comments: according to Capital Counselor, women are charged as much as 42% more than men for the same number of goods, and certain products such as shampoos, which can cost up to $2.50 more per product for women. Business Insider noted similar price trends as well, stating that the average cost of female-marketed products such as razor cartridges had a markup from 6% to as high as 48%. While shaving cream was found to be 4% more expensive for males, Business Insider states that it is the exception, not the norm, as female-marketed versions of care products are on average 11% more expensive than for males. Senior Jennifer Lee, a Speech student, agrees that the difference in cost of care products is outrageous.
“[Because] of markups in tampons and menstrual [products,] women [across the country] stand to pay an additional $150 million per year compared to men,” Lee said. “[We are] in tampon shortage, and in [January of] this year, one box of 18 tampons cost $114 on Amazon. Women are paid less than men by 17%, but [are] expected to pay [on average] 13% more than men. The pink tax is disgusting and while it is a good start to end it in California, it should be abolished on a national level.”
Financial woes are not the only problem caused by the pink tax that Assembly Bill No. 1287 aims to address. The increased strain on money has also caused enlarged stress for many women, especially women of color who typically earn less than white women (Business Insider). According to junior Renata Lopez Vicencio, co-president of the Period Project, a club seeking to improve the lives of women who are financially and psychologically affected by their menstruation cycles, her founding of the club came as a natural response to woes experienced by low-income menstruators.“I do know of people that have felt the effect of [high-cost menstrual products] and that is one of the reasons I started my club,” Vicencio said. “As a woman I felt it was wrong to even [put] a price on feminine [products,] let alone put a tax on it, considering women were born with [menstruation] and [menstruation] is natural to our bodies. [Especially] for people with low income, a basic need for a pad or a tampon should not be something a woman has to worry about being able to afford.”
