Talk:Pink tax

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 January 2021 and 21 April 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Shetty.in.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 26 October 2021 and 15 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Leyan du.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 02:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Suggested Changes

• Make clear that the "Pink Tax" IS a literal and actual tax. It is referenced [1] in the Federal Register. As an example, Men's, boy's and youth's shoes are assessed an import duty of 8.5% compared to Women's shoes which are assessed a 10% duty. Even when the shoes are made on a men's last and using a men's sized outsole, IF the product is sold to only men, it gets 8.5% but if it is sold to more than 5% women, then the duty is 10%. This is true for many items being imported to the US including Apparel, Shoes and other items. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lauraoden (talk • contribs) 18:56, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
• Make clear the "Pink Tax" is not an actual tax in any referenced tax code. Indicate that it is more of a general umbrella phrase used to discuss the price imbalance between men's and women's products.
• Discussions of the European VAT with respect to taxation of female hygiene products should be within its own sub-section. (to prevent confusion for US readers)
• Discussions of taxation of tampons in the US should also be balanced with the information that other hygiene products such as toilet paper and toothpaste are also taxed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.10.93.66 (talk) 15:04, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

This article needs to contain a more neutral substance, as it seems to cast a particularly biased view. Explain the characteristics of the "pink tax" and how it disproportionately affects women's products. Even consider highlighting the fact that items such as tampons are considered to be a luxury article, which is why the extra tax is allowed. Give background to the issue, but do not take a biased view on it. Bricci13 (talk) 03:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

untitled section

What subtitles should I add?

Organization with Jackie Speier section good?

• Talk more about legislation, bring in more representatives
• Look up rep from Virginia
• Say Representative or Congresswomen

Is the economic impact part neutral enough?

• Lead sentence becomes combo of first 3 sentences
• Lot of info and stats in the lead and could move them down into the body
• Cite more of the causes section and economic impact section
• Rephrase the intro sentence to the Tampon Tax section and elaborate on the last sentence. Turn into more of a paragraph
• Add opposing view section (elaborate on what I already have as well)
• Add citations to causes section to seem more neutral (specific example in "people who..."

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jacksonoreilly (talk • contribs) 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Merge into "Gender-based price discrimination in the United States"

The article is written like pink tax is a global phenomenon, but I checked all the sources and they all come from USA (except one from Canada, but that is sort of close enough). We should either find more global sources to prove pink tax is an issue everywhere (or at least in the Western cultural area), or merge this article into the US-specific article and make this a redirect. --Šedý (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Oppose merge; it does seem that this is now an international concept; since the merge was proposed, more international content has been added (from Australia and the UK). A web search suggests that there is more than could be added, so suggest that this page continue to discuss the topic from an international perspective. Klbrain (talk) 15:22, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I have added in some more UK content and agree that the article would benefit from a more international review. Melissa Highton (talk) 16:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Stop lying

Womens products cost more because....... They are made out of different ingredients Sigge Nygren (talk) 01:36, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

Oh? Do women's razors use different grades of polycarbonate and steel? What about women's clothing,presumably made from the same or similar textiles, which cost more, yet often contain less material overall? Don't let your grudges get the better of you critical analysis. ~~Mattevt | Hit ^{me up} 20:05, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I would like to edit this page, please let me know if you have any suggestions and comments.

I am interested in revising pink tax on Wikipedia because pink tax, including tampon tax and different pricing/marketing strategy for women. The current Wikipedia page on pink tax is good on explaining the general concept but lacks credible sources that could prove and advance the claims about pink tax in many sections. The language and tone used in this article is also not objective and encyclopedic enough. I would revise the structure of the entire article, add more references to support claims on pink tax’s economic impact on women, and try to merge this article with the similar article “Gender-based price discrimination in the United States”. Detailed plan on editing will be posted in the following weeks. Please let me know if you have any suggestions. Here are the academic sources I've found.

Bibliography

• Auster, Carol, and Claire Mansbach. 2012. "The Gender Marketing of Toys: An Analysis of Color and Type of Toy on the Disney Store Website." Sex Roles 375-388.
• Blasio, Bill de, and Julie Menin. 2015. From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being a Female Consumer. New York: New York City Department of Consumer Affairs.
• Duesterhaus, Megan, Liz Grauerholz, Rebecca Weichsel, and Nicholas A. Guittar. 2011. "The Cost of Doing Femininity: Gendered Disparities in Pricing of Personal Care Products and Services." Gender Issues 175-191.
• Howard, Ella. 2010. "Pink Truck Ads: Second-Wave Feminism and Gendered Marketing." Journal of Women's History 137-161.
• Jantzen, Christian, Per Østergaard, and Carla M. Sucena Vieira. 2006. "Becoming a ‘woman to the backbone’: Lingerie consumption and the experience of feminine identity." Journal of Consumer Culture 177-202.
• Liston-Heyes, Catherine, and Elena Neokleous. 2000. " Gender-based pricing in the hairdressing industry." Journal of Consumer Policy 107-126.
• Stevens, Jennifer L., and Kevin J. Shanahan. 2017. "Structured Abstract: Anger, Willingness, or Clueless? Understanding Why Women Pay a Pink Tax on the Products They Consume." Creating Marketing Magic and Innovative Future Marketing Trends. Springer, Cham. 571-575.
• Stotsky, Janet G. 1996. "Gender Bias in Tax Systems." IMF Working Paper, 1-22.
• Tomlinson, Alan. 1990. Consumption, identity, and style: Marketing, meanings and the packaging of pleasure. Routledge.
• United States Congress Joint Economic Committee. 2016. "United States Congress Joint Economic Committee." The Pink Tax: How Gender-Based Pricing Hurts Women’s Buying Power. December. Accessed September 11, 2019. https://www.jec.senate.gov/public/_cache/files/8a42df04-8b6d-4949-b20b-6f40a326db9e/the-pink-tax---how-gender-based-pricing-hurts-women-s-buying-power.pdf.
• Williams, Christine L. 2006. Inside Toyland: Working, Shopping, and Social Inequality. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Yazıcıoğlu, Alara Efsun. 2018. Pink tax and the law : discriminating against women consumers . Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Xli1218 (talk) 14:58, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Jennysaensouk (article contribs). Peer reviewers: May.mach.

— Assignment last updated by WGST320 (talk) 01:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC) Hi! I will be adding more information on international relations to the pink tax. Adding more on VAT and how other countries tax sanitary products. — Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 20:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-02

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 20 August 2022 and 9 December 2022. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Cmanzflo (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Bree624.

— Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 18:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Congresswoman Jackie Speier

This section sort of reads like an advertisement for Speier, especially when it says she's a "fearless fighter". Neutral tone where? Auror Andrachome (talk) 10:47, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-01

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 January 2023 and 8 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): AnesaM (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Abbeeee.

— Assignment last updated by ACHorwitz (talk) 20:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Incongruous lede

The lede paragraph currently says "This phenomenon is often attributed to gender-based price discrimination, however research shows that the primary cause is women sorting into goods with higher marginal costs." The article then goes on to show the many and varied ways in which price discrimination does appear to be gender based, and only a couple examples of marginal cost differences, which are mostly immediately argued against by their own sources.

I'm not going to edit it myself because frankly I'm not sure what "women sorting into goods" actually means, and googling the phrase to find out just came up with a lot of pages that seemed to be copy-pasted from here or vice versa. 67.183.192.152 (talk) 17:32, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

One observation is that the "Background" section uses the % symbol, while the section below it, "International prevalence" writes out percent, which causes some inconsistency. Hcn27 (talk) 20:36, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

-Hcn27 (talk) 20:37, 8 September 2023 (UTC)