General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis message was self-deleted by its author
This message was self-deleted by its author (Triana) on Mon Jan 4, 2016, 05:54 PM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
jonno99
(2,620 posts)- less complicated clothing/jewelry
- less complicated "plumbing" (does it need to be explained?)
- less complicated responsibilities at home (women assume the larger share of raising children)
- etc.
One could argue too that (at least in my experience) women are (again, generally) more "choosy". Women will pay more for the better quality mac & cheese, or bread products, etc. Send a man to the store for a bag of apples he is more likely to pick from among the cheaper varieties, whereas women are more likely to be health-minded and pick from the organic section. And marketers know all this - and exploit it.
The one difference that I can see is when it comes to "toys". As children, there might be parity, but as adults men seem to have more complicated and expensive toys.
Again, all the above is a generalization - and my two cents...
pnwmom
(109,031 posts)Or razors. Or a multitude of other products. Making something pink instead of gray doesn't make a product cost more.
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)They prefer the smell and it's cheaper.
linuxman
(2,337 posts)Or the "men's" unscented deodorant?
What a cruel country in which cashiers wont let people make their own rational and informed decisions.
Nobody forces women to buy products marketed to them. If women don't want them, they won't buy them.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)Women should simply purchase the less expensive men's tampons...
linuxman
(2,337 posts)Things cost money. How terrible. I guess since men don't use them they should be free.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
The2ndWheel
(7,947 posts)pnwmom
(109,031 posts)One product exists and has a price, and the other product does not exist and has no price. Razors and deodorant, ok. What is society supposed to do about the lack of male tampons to compare prices to?
pnwmom
(109,031 posts)jonno99
(2,620 posts)than mine - cause it's got "special stuff" (I call it marketing hype).
I'm not trying to be snarky, but is anything stopping a women from using the cheaper "men's products"?
Again, the smart consumer will look past the marketing hype - and simply buy what YOU need - not what THEY want you to buy...
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)Retailers set their prices according to what people will pay.
pnwmom
(109,031 posts)they will likely be more expensive.
We need articles like this to inform women that they have to be on their guard about purchasing things that appear to be aimed at them. But the fact that products marketed to men are usually cheaper, even when it's the exact same product in a different color, is part of institutionalized sexism. Why shouldn't the blue or gray thing cost more than the pink thing?
jonno99
(2,620 posts)however, that we need to do a better job educating our kids - of both sexes - to understand marketing hype.
One simple way - take your kids shopping for goodness sakes...
zazen
(2,978 posts)I agree with educating our children to be critical consumers.
However, I don't think it's fair to expect female consumers to spend all of their free time (beyond doing the additional housework, child care, elder care, and personal grooming expected of them compared to men) to go from one section of a store to another for every product to determine if there is a male equivalent that meets our needs.
And we can't do anything on an individual level about dry-cleaning bills for women's clothing vs male clothing, or female products like tampons that might be much more grossly overpriced relative to net cost than a similar non-gendered product that uses the same amount of paper product, like bandages or something.
I'm really grateful for studies like this. These marketers exploit our exhaustion, information overload, and trust.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)- price fixing (parity), leading to less choice, leading to higher prices.
As a side note: some folks wouldn't mind having fewer choices. For me it's always easy when I go to find something and there is only one brand. Is that the "best" way? Hmm...different strokes...
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)Same goddamned mfr, absolutely IDENTICAL to the pink ones. But the pink ones cost from 1 to several bucks more. It's just bullshit.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)In that sense, nothing is marketed to men - even if they're the intended user.
http://www.businessinsider.com/infographic-women-control-the-money-in-america-2012-2
Women shopping for men's razors have only one bit of information; price.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)She cuts her own hair, shops for clothes at Value Village, and will spend hours on the internet researching how to take care of her hair and skin for less money. And yet, she is still very stylish. She definitely does her homework, and it pays off.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)(at least in part) a reflection of the parenting she received.
Good job!
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)My husband went on disability my daughter's junior year of high school. It has been hard on the whole family, but it has taught the children the value of money. Thank you for the compliment though.
jonno99
(2,620 posts)
Bonx
(2,088 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)And I didn't change it and I'm not going to.
Bonx
(2,088 posts)snooper2
(30,151 posts)Triana
(22,666 posts)
EX500rider
(10,898 posts)You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jan 4, 2016, 03:49 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I initially voted to leave but based on the alerter's comments about the poster's dismissive history on this topic I have changed my vote to HIDE. I will be surprised if this is hidden, though. Just being honest.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Meh. I don't think it's meant to be anti woman. Maybe it could have been said better. Leave.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Poster is correct-it does suck to be a woman there
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Huh? Misogynistic?
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)It's not a perfect place, but it doesn't "suck".
Warpy
(111,529 posts)I remember years ago, a friend came here from the UK with a baby. She almost turned around and went back when she discovered a major international airport didn't have a mothers & children room and that she was expected to nurse the baby while sitting on a toilet.
This has also not changed.
This country was designed for men and female appendages are supposed to be glad to be allowed to live here. Access to healthcare is declining and some of that might be a good thing for us since medical treatments have only been tested on men and are now being found to work very differently on us, sometimes not at all, and sometimes killing us. Pregnant? Well, that's your own fault, slut, no prenatal care for you if you work for a living, no child care after the kid is born, no maternity leave you can afford to take while your insides heal and you're supposed to nurse the kid every 2 hours ATC. Men don't need this stuff so we can't have it, either.
Work for a living? Do the same job as all the guys? Honey, you sure won't be paid the same. You've got a smaller body and squeaky voice and that means you must be some kind of a child and that means low wages and never being consulted on anything.
Hubby follows his dick into the sunset while you've got 3 kids in diapers? Well, forget living decently, you'll lose everything and the youngest won't be out of diapers when the TANF stops.
Other developed countries and even many third world countries are not like this. Women are shafted all over the place, anywhere men in charge see a way to do it since they have wives to do all the icky stuff so they ASSume it's the way things should be for women. It's like they think we should live on nothing and be grateful they haven't put a price on oxygen in the air.
All US working people are getting robbed. Women are getting robbed most of all.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Last edited Mon Jan 4, 2016, 05:15 PM - Edit history (1)
And childcare? Forget it.
All this adds up to hundreds of thousands of dollars over a lifetime.
And when retired, women are of course the poorest.
Warpy
(111,529 posts)You'll get used to cowflop brown plastic, I guarantee. It's so much cheaper.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Women pay more for just about everything all over the world, with the exception of "Ladies' Night".
But when it gets to pregnancy, babies, single moms: USA is lagging far behind!!!
Triana
(22,666 posts)Never implied that and I don't think the article does either. US has less excuse to do it though, IMO.
And yea, pregnancy, child care, babies, maternal care, US is far behind - shamefully so.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)The USA is similar compared to western nations, judging from my experience, and from what I hear from reports. It's all cool for women as long as you aren't a single mom trying to get by on a shit wage. I live in Sweden, and Sweden tries its best to convince the world they are so progressive when it comes to sexism. Meh, I say. Mostly a bunch of hot-air. Mostly it's little roosters strutting around in front of the hens, in whichever western culture you are.
But, life is so much better for babies and children, no matter if the parents are poor, in most of europe. Which means it is so much easier for babies and parents in other developed countries, and for single moms, especially!
Another thing, is that most of europe is over the family planning, contraception, abortion issue. Unlike the USA, which is still backwards in that aspect.
Triana
(22,666 posts)
DFW
(54,587 posts)She was fed up with being a woman in Germany. She still loves coming home to visit, but I'm not sure you could triple her salary and benefits and get her to leave New York City.
My other daughter, who lives in Frankfurt, makes literally five times as much gross salary as her sister, gets six weeks paid vacation (the one in NYC gets 15 days) with full, comprehensive health insurance thrown in, and she STILL envies her sister for living in Manhattan.
Warpy
(111,529 posts)She'll change her tune really fast if her job transfers her anywhere else.
DFW
(54,587 posts)She works in the fashion/clothing industry, and her outfit's head office is in Manhattan. There's nowhere else she could go, and nowhere else they could send her. They are considering sending her on a few business trips to Germany for them, as her native language is German, but that is about it. She will change her tune when SHE wants to, not when her current employer wants her to.
Warpy
(111,529 posts)The glitter and glam of LA is far less impressive, far more banal than that in NYC.
DFW
(54,587 posts)First two years of college. She finished up her BA in NYC, never looked back.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Marketing is done through segments of a population. Prices and demand is determined by the data of the segment.
Men tend to spend less time in stores. Therefore retailers focus more on price since men tend to focus on that more than quality. Men just want to get in and out of a store and are far less complex shoppers. Therefore men are more motivated to buy based on price than women are. That's one big reason.
Another reason is women's items are not always in equal demand. Women's designer shoes are in much higher demand than men's designer shoes, for example. So the men's designer shoes are cheaper.
Triana
(22,666 posts)There's one hell of a lot more to this issue than that - but I can't post more than a few paragraphs from the article w/o violating copyright. I'd suggest reading the WHOLE thing at the site linked in the OP.
I would like to see someone address the UN's report on the treatment of women in the US:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16872&LangID=E
It's about more than overpriced pink razors. The denial, minimization, mockery, and "you're just too sensitive" attitude here is overpowering evidence of the problem rather than evidence of non-existence. It's testimony to why the UN wrote what it did about treatment of women in the US, nevermind what they do in Sudan.
And yea I know men don't give a shit about any of this and don't even believe it's a problem because THEY don't have to live with it. The dismissive and grossly ignorant "too bad, so sad, sucks to be you" attitude is quite apparent.
Pfft.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)buy into it. If we buy cheaper products the marketers and distributors would have no choice but to lower prices.
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Charging women more for a pink razor is a bigger atrocity than women being killed in Sudan? No wonder people laugh at the UN.
Women get cheaper car insurance than men and cheaper life insurance. Funny you don't complain about that.
Triana
(22,666 posts)Posting more than 4 paragraphs because it's public domain...as you can see it's about more than overpriced pink razors and deodorant or even badly designed and inconveniently located women's restrooms and Hillary's lateness back to the debate stage . . . .(80+ percent of architects and a similar percentage of legislators are male and don't have to wait in long lines).
The global economic crisis created a serious challenge for the realization of economic and social rights in the United States and had a significantly adverse impact on women. As noted previously by other UN independent experts, the subprime mortgage market had disparately targeted the poor and, in particular, poor women. Subsequent government policies to boost the economy resulted in decreased expenditures on critical social protection programs, many of which are essential for women. These cuts had a disproportionately negative impact on minority women and single mothers.
Women constitute nearly half of the US labour force, at a participation rate of 57.0%, and have been an important factor in driving the last decades of US economic growth. Furthermore, working mothers account for two thirds of household earnings. Our expert group is concerned that this crucial labour force participation by women is not accompanied by equal economic opportunity and we are shocked by the lack of mandatory standards for workplace accommodation for pregnant women, post-natal mothers and persons with care responsibilities, which are required in international human rights law.
The gender wage gap is 21%, affecting women’s income throughout their lives, increasing women’s pension poverty. During the last decade little improvement has been made in closing it. Education increases women’s earnings but does not eliminate the gap, which is in fact largest for those with the highest levels of educational attainment. Women’s earnings differ considerably by ethnicity: Afro-American, Native American and Hispanic women have the lowest earnings. Despite the existence of the 1963 Equal Pay Act and Title VII, federal law does not require equal pay for work of equal value. However, California has now set a precedent with its 2015 California Fair Pay Act thus applying for the first time in US legislation the right to equal pay for work of equal value, which is required by international human rights law. Minimum wages have lost value as a living wage and the majority of minimum wage earners are women. Many are working full time and are the sole breadwinners for their families. Interlocutors regard the raising of the minimum wage to the level of a living wage as one of the most appropriate ways both to reduce the wage gap and reduce poverty amongst working women.
The estimated 2.5 million domestic workers in the US are overwhelmingly women, frequently immigrant women many of whom are undocumented. We learned that many of these workers are vulnerable to verbal and physical abuse and to wage theft. We welcome the initiatives taken by the CSOs to improve conditions for domestic workers through a domestic workers’ bill of rights. The Group calls for the US to ratify the ILO Domestic Workers Convention and apply its provisions to ensure that domestic work is decent work. This does not capture the situation of other informal economy spaces, such as tip employees and seasonal jobs, where minimum conditions of employment should also be regulated.
An additional severe problem is lack of enforcement. Wage theft, particularly in manufacturing, construction, and some service jobs impacts low-income and migrant workers, in particular undocumented women. Our group welcomes the recent increase in the budget of the Wage and Hour Division (U.S. Department of Labor) to support investigations and urges the government to increase supervision and to hold employers who violate the rights of these particularly vulnerable women workers to account.
The 1993 Family and Medical Leave Act provides employees with the right to take unpaid, job-protected leave of twelve workweeks in a 12-month period, including for the birth of a child and to care for the newborn child within one year of birth; A significant number of employees are not covered by the Act because it is restricted, amongst other things, to employers who have more than 50 employees. However, even for those employees whom it covers, this provision falls far beneath international human rights standards, which require that maternity leave must be paid leave, with best practice being the provision of additional paid leave for fathers too. The US is one of only two countries in the world without a mandatory paid maternity leave for all women workers. As of 2014, paid maternity leave is provided by legislation in 3 states and in Federal government employment but it is only for six weeks, which is beneath the international minimum of 14 weeks. The Group regards it as vital that 14 weeks paid maternity leave for pregnancy birth and post natal related needs be guaranteed for all women workers in public and private employment and advises that best practice is payment from a social security fund which does not impose the direct burden on employers.
Caring responsibilities fall primarily on women and women are reported to be far more likely than men to work only part time for family care reasons. Our expert group considers that the public budget should provide childcare, after-school and also elder and disabled facilities, which are affordable and accessible, to allow adults with care responsibilities, women and men, to work in full time employment.
The percentage of women in poverty has increased over the past decade, from 12.1% to 14.5%, with a higher rate of poverty than men, affecting predominantly ethnic minorities, single parent families and older women. We suggest that both Federal and state governments address this problem urgently, by promoting employment for women, raising the minimum wage and eliminating the wage gap. Residual poverty should be addressed through the social security system and, given the country’s economic strength, there should be a policy of zero tolerance for the relegation of people to poverty.
Poverty may result in homelessness which exposes women to higher levels of violence and vulnerability. Furthermore, interlocutors pointed out that victims of domestic violence are often numbered amongst the homeless, either because they have been evicted as a result of the violence or because they have fled from their violent partner. Solutions should include effective protection orders, increased availability of shelters, housing support, prioritizing eligibility particularly for single mother households and those facing heavy unpaid care burdens.
We were informed that women own over one third of US firms, mainly in small and medium size businesses. These businesses face greater barriers in obtaining low cost capital from sources such as the Small Business Administration and clearly need support in order to achieve equal economic potential. However, the Small Businesses Administration has a stated goal of awarding only 5% of federal contracts to women-owned businesses. Furthermore, it is reported that this goal has never been reached in practice.
- See more at: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=16872&LangID=E#sthash.u0b0frLw.dpuf
Triana
(22,666 posts)Well. What a surprise.
KentuckyWoman
(6,701 posts)I know NO women who buy the "women's" razors. It's not just the per razor cost....men's razors just seem to last longer.
Also nearly all the women I know wear handmedown and thrift clothes all the time. Women's clothing tends to get cycled over with less wear so thrifting is viable. Men's styles change less often and they tend to keep clothes until it's just worn to a shred and can't be fixed anymore. So buying new is almost a necessity, which costs more.
Also, if spending on women in nursing homes is only 8 percent more than for men that kind of surprises me. Especially if you have someone with incontinence. Women will wet every time they cough or sneeze a zillion times a day and will need changes more often than men, who generally tend to have trouble going at an older age. Adult diapers are dang expensive. Not to mention older men are more likely to be bald or can get a buzz cut and women would want an actual trip to the beautician that comes around. Plus add in the women tend to live longer than the men.
Anyways, I'd think in a real life scenario in younger days the actual expenses would even out and in old age women would be far more expensive than 8%.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)As for the health care comments: you might want to wait and listen to people who actually work in health care before commenting. Males get sicker earlier, on average. Incontinence is just one small detail in what can go wrong, in terms of healthcare costs.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)Quantess
(27,630 posts)At least, to you.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)I am the only male in a household of 6. Need I go on?
Quantess
(27,630 posts)I don't judge people because of one comment. 
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)How do you explain that?
Or is that not sexism?
Triana
(22,666 posts)" In addition to the fact that women tend to drive less than men, accident and DUI statistics consistently reflect that male drivers, on the whole, take more driving risks than their female counterparts. And insurance companies price policies, in part, by predicting risk."
https://www.esurance.com/info/car/why-women-pay-less-for-car-insurance
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)But feminists said it was sexist to charge women more for health insurance.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)Nothing is off limits for discussion.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)more than most. Go ahead, call them up and question their statistics. "Hey, hold my beer and watch this" is why males have shorter lives than women, on average.
I also fully understand why womens haircuts cost more than mens'. That should be fairly obvious. Womens haircuts are generally more complicated and detailed.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)If a savvy businessperson knows that wives are buying their husbands razors, deodorant underwear and socks, they would make, market and price their products as cheaply as possible.
In fairness, the same would be true if men were the primary purchasers of feminine hygiene products; we don't know good from bad, we only know cheap.
http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2013/u-s--women-control-the-purse-strings.html
Elmergantry
(884 posts)So we are told women make less than men, but spend more than men...So where does the difference come from?....Yep it all evens out in the end doesn't it?
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)It has to be under their terms and cherry-picked.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)including sons and husbands. Just the fact that women do the majority of shopping shouldn't play into it. Plus, I don't see male frequented stores in that chart such as sports stores and video game stores.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)When you're buying men's razors, what criteria do you use to make a purchasing decision?
Elmergantry
(884 posts)Do they work?
Not considered:
"Age Defying"
"Color"
"Matches the towels"
Segmentation can up prices.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)country are going to be paying close attention to price. I always buy the store brand men's razors for everybody in the family including the women in the family.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)Of course not - but you'd only have your own experience to guide you.
The same is true with all men's products; the cheapest stuff sells while the expensive stuff sits on the shelf waiting for a guy who does his own shopping.
liberal_at_heart
(12,081 posts)Other than rent, insurance, and electricity I have no higher bill than groceries. There is not much I can do about those bills. There is a hell of a lot I can do about my grocery bill.
Elmergantry
(884 posts)Darn kids wont shut off the lights! So now I am putting in slight switches with dial timers....
Elmergantry
(884 posts)Couldn't help myself....
Quantess
(27,630 posts)What else, then..?
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)If he isn't notably complaining, then the $1.00 ones are the go-to choice for him.
Quantess
(27,630 posts)and I don't even get how you think. You must really resent the women you have had in your life.
Triana
(22,666 posts)
Kick in to the DU tip jar?
This week we're running a special pop-up mini fund drive. From Monday through Friday we're going ad-free for all registered members, and we're asking you to kick in to the DU tip jar to support the site and keep us financially healthy.
As a bonus, making a contribution will allow you to leave kudos for another DU member, and at the end of the week we'll recognize the DUers who you think make this community great.
