I was at my parent's house and I was reading a Consumer's Report magazine.
I ran across a term I never saw before: "Pink Tax"
Consumer's Reports assured me that they were in the vanguard in stamping out this horrible injustice.
The "Pink Tax" is a concept that posits that women are charged higher prices for products that are specifically marketed toward women.
This may come as a surprise but I am fully in alignment with the concept. I get it.
|If forced to choose, I would select a generic 1911 with John Moses Browning's original design tolerances over a race gun with closer tolerances. Given my druthers, I want one assembled on Wednesday by folks listening to music from their smartphones.|
Apparel is a cut-throat business. Prices relentlessly reflect costs.
As a guy I walk into Walmart. I go to the rack of cheap jean and buy a pair of jeans with my waist size and inseam. I put a belt in them and wear them until they wear out. Rest assured, I take them off occasionally and wash them.
My daughters and wife visit three separate stores and try on countless pairs with the same nominal waist and inseam, looking for the cut that most flatters their figure.
The logistics model for the second scenario incurs a massive amounts of fixed costs. Where Walmart carries six pairs of jeans (black, blue, carpenter...) a store that specifically markets to women must carry dozens, even hundreds of pairs of jeans.
The "Pink Tax" is 100% self induced. I buy into the concept but see it as a voluntary contribution rather than a social injustice.