Because as soon as she becomes his wife she will stop shaving all together (a bit of hyperbole)
Those American Girl dolls are premium products targeted specifically to a more affluent demographic than Barbie or Bratz. I don’t know if toys marketed for girls are really any more expensive than those marketed at boys. On Amazon I can get some Transformers toys in the $15-30 range and there are plenty of Barbie dolls with accessories within that same price range.
Fun fact: I received an Optimus Prime Transformers action figure from my parents for Christmas in 1986. Back then, Prime retailed for $20.99 which is equivalent to the purchasing power of $50.70 today.
Nah, she’s been my gf for >15 years and will likely remain my gf until I die (I’m 62).
Just goes to show, we have no “good term” for long term relationships that do not involve marriage. She often introduces me as her husband just to make it simpler.
I’m guess it’s because we strongly associate pink with femininity these days and in many parts of our society it’s not really acceptable for men to adopt feminine traits. But come on, you knew that.
Why yes, yes I did. Thanks, though!
Every place has their “default setting”. I’m taller than 99.9% of all Peruvian (I’m 1.83m/6’). Buses and mini buses just have no space for my knees. Lots of doorways were specifically made to hit my forehead, apparently Showerheads, when we travel and go to non-fancy hotels, point to my face or chest. I have difficulty finding clothes or shoes of regular brands. I’ve got some XXL clothes and I weigh 82kg.
As to why men’s stuff is default, it’s easy: we care less, our, common, products require less work. We have tougher skin and hair and we value practicality over fit (I’m genelizing here, of course.) Two of my “main” sweaters have been in constant use for 12 years, nobody cares.
We guy are happy at 95% and women at 99.5%, diminishing returns.
As to getting charged more for mechanics, it’s simply an “ignorance” tax. If that woman knew about mechanics a bit more she’d say “fuck you” and leave it there.
This is specifically false – men and women who knew what they were talking about got treated equally, but if the men and women were both clueless, the woman got charged more on average. I’m not going to present the cite again because I’ve already done it three or four times in this thread.
I really wish people would stop spouting just-so stories here. This non-pink non-tax has been shown over and over again in this thread, with cites and studies.
Being a woman is not belonging to a small group. It’s the majority of the population. And men are treated as the “norm” across the entire spectrum, not just in the areas where they may, hypothetically, have lower expectations/easier specs.
I agree that clueless women get charged more than men because of the expectation that they won’t know or won’t ask. There is also a numbers game, I’m sure that the number of clueless men is, poportionally lower than women.
I don’t really understand how your provisos affect the question at hand, but it seems like you’re agreeing that there’s a not-colored-pink something-akin-to-a-tax when it comes to mechanics, so I’ll accept that.
Yup. I think I addressed that, along with other reasons why that tactic doesn’t work for everybody:
Men’s clothes don’t really fit me right; but almost all women’s clothes don’t fit me right, either. Women come in more shapes than standard womens’ clothes do.
This.
We are the majority, after all; even if not by much.
Pointed out; not proven.
Some women dress to impress other women. Some women dress to impress men. Some women dress to impress specific other women, or specific men, and don’t give a damn about what the rest of them think. Some women dress to be comfortable. And a hell of a lot of women dress in the fashion expected of them by their workplace: they’re dressing for their paycheck. Women need clothes suitable for the job (and are likely still to be wearing them while doing errands), even if at home they live in sweatpants and torn tshirts.
– some of the tools with pink handles are serious work tools. A lot of them are junk. (Though admittedly a lot of the tools marketed to men are junk, too.)
You sure are generalizing.
If men care less and only value practicality, why wouldn’t it be practical for everything to be made default coded female, and the men could just buy all their stuff from the stuff aimed at women?
We’ve been wearing your tshirts for fifty years now. You could try wearing ours for a while.
There are an awful lot of men who are clueless about how modern cars work. For that matter, while I’m not all that much of a mechanic, I ran into quite a few men even forty years ago who knew less about cars than I did. The difference was often that they assumed they knew more and felt confident talking about what they thought they knew.
(Ritter Sport Hazelnut is my favorite chocolate)
There is “pink tax”, definitely, but it’s less of a concerted effort to oppress women and more of a “we’ll take what we can” one.
Coming back to this, past the edit time:
The second cite Dr Deth gave (post 110) wasn’t a study at all; it’s one random person’s opinion.
The first one is a story in the Daily Mail, with no link to the poll, about a poll of women between 18 and 30 commissioned by a skin care company, specifically about what they choose to wear when on a night out with friends. It says nothing at all about why women choose what they do to wear to work, [ETA or anywhere other than out on the town in that particular fashion; or why women of other ages or otherwise not in the selected group do anything at all]. And we don’t see the questions, so there may well have been no option for ‘I dress to please myself’, let alone ‘I’m often frustrated because I can’t find what I want to wear, so I had to settle for this instead.’ And even then, the study didn’t get results of 80 or 90%; they got 60/40.
I note, also, that it doesn’t occur to them to consider that this result
48 per cent of women polled actually prefer to get a compliment from a female stranger as opposed to a man.
may have to do with the fact that a compliment from a female stranger is less likely to be perceived as a potential threat than one from a male. (Did the study even ask whether they wanted compliments at all from strangers of any gender?)
Quite a lot of sexism isn’t “a concerted effort to oppress women”. It’s a matter of background assumptions; people often aren’t making a concerted effort to do anything, they’re just taking the wrong things for granted.
Results can be, if anything, nastier. Open enmity is open, and can be combatted in that fashion. Background assumptions are to many people invisible, and very hard to see even if they’re pointed out.
Good choice! Dark with marzipan is probably mine.
I agree that there’s no concerted effort to oppress women, no executives twirling their mustaches wondering how they can screw over women next. Maybe in the case of shady auto mechanics…
That can be said of a lot of racism, and a lot of other "ism"s. The bad outcomes don’t require evil intent.
Or, because men are historically engineers, chemists, CEOs, and decision-makers. Men are deciding what men want and what women want. It’s only recently that we’re pushing women to pursue careers in these fields and/or women are getting a glimmer of representation in these positions. So far it’s been an uphill battle.
The bodies of women aren’t even taken into account when it comes to automobile crash testing.
The cite are relevant as a poster requested them and i supplied them.
That is what we do here. Why not ask the poster why they requested the cites?
Because men in general prefer basic, utilitarian items. Men are more likely to choose an item for its function than its appearance.
Appearance separates the personalized item from the basic item more often than function. For example, a braided leather belt as opposed to a basic strap. A guitar with pink flowers painted on it as opposed to a plain black guitar. Shampoo that comes in a pink bottle with fragrance additives instead of a shampoo in a generic bottle that doesn’t include coconut scent.
Pink tax items cost more because they have additional manufacturing steps and processes to appeal to a specific demographic, in this case women.
It doesn’t matter that women are the majority, even if they were the majority 80 to 20. What matters is they are buying products that require more manufacturing steps to produce, and as such cost more.
It really makes sense.
Please provide cites that men prefer basic, utilitarian things more than women and also a cite that it costs more to make a pink razor or deodorant that smells differently. Thanks!