Tag Archives: Marketing

Pink is for Girls

12 Thursday Oct 2017

Posted by in Discovery, Observations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

I recently shared a post called Blue is for Boys. This is the follow up to that post. I have been listening to the radio program called Under the Influence.  It’s about marketing, advertising, sponsorship and how these things impact our world.  A two part episode in their last season concerned gender marketing. I encourage you to check out their site and listen to the whole episode.

In my last post, I shared how the blue for boys and pink for girls is an arbitrarily chosen, marketing concept to sell more and more product.  The argument is, this has also given ride to the so called Pink Tax.

The Pink Tax is the documented higher prices, really overcharging for products and services marketed to women that are essentially the same as “men’s” products. In the US, there are a few states that have outlawed Pink Tax but there are not consumer protections like that in Canada.

Here are some specifics quoted in the Under the Influence episode:

  • Girls toys cost more than boys toys 55% of the time.
  • Girls clothing cost more than boys clothing 26% of the time.
  • Women’s clothing costs more than men’s clothing over 40% of the time.
  • Drycleaners tend to charge more to service the same sized, same material blouse than for a man’s shirt.
  • Senior home health care for women costs more 45% of the time.
  • Women routinely pay over 25% more for haircuts than men.
  • Vehicle repairs: women are generally quoted higher estimates than men for the exact same work.
  • Women pay up to 48% more for shampoos, 11% more for razors and lotions, and 6% for body washes.

Why do women allow themselves to be manipulated this way? The argument is, people like and will spend more for products and services they perceive to be made just for them. The thing is, almost all of the time, it’s all just marketing smoke and mirrors.

Now here’s the insult to injury: Under the Influences notes women tend to purchase these products and services more often than men and they are doing so often with less money because of pay inequity!

When I see this, it’s like a whole system designed to be oppressive to women – but that would be crazy, right?

Blue is for Boys

09 Monday Oct 2017

Posted by in Discovery, Observations

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

I’ve recently shared how I have been enjoying a radio program called Under the Influence.  It’s about marketing, advertising, sponsorship and how these things impact our world. I binge listened to all their seasons over a long drive. So far, I have noticed no ill effects from doing so.

A two part episode in their last season was really fascinating. The topic was gender marketing. I encourage you to check out their site and listen to the whole episode. There was one part that really jumped out at me.

Did you know that the blue for boys and pink for girls is a manufactured concept to sell more product?  The story goes, a hundred years ago kids clothes up to seven years old were white. With the development of department stores, boy and girl departments were introduced and not long after, colour was used to define gender. Arbitrarily, pink, a “strong colour” was for boys and blue, a “gentle colour” was for girls.

Yes, you read that right: Boys = Pink, Girls = Blue.

It’s suspected that the introduction of gendered colours was to make hand me downs between boy and girl siblings unattractive and thus promote the purchasing of more and more stuff.

Here’s the twist, decades later, the colours flipped to the now familiar blue is for boys and pink is for girls. Again a completely arbitrary decision.

But people are funny. We like things that we perceive are made for us. Manufacturers, stores, and marketing discovered that “the more stores individualized products, the more they sold.” Remember “It’s strong enough for a man but made for a woman”? Ka-ching!

Of course, if you own a manufacturing business, run a store or make money in marketing, this is good news for you because it generally helps you make more money. For the rest of us, we have to deal with the realization that we are being played.

So next time you’re taking away from/giving something to a child in your life be aware if your actions are based on these arbitrary colours or because they are marketed for boys or girls. It’s possible that you have been programmed to select the “right” item to profit those selling it to you. Even more importantly, you also might want to ask if those programmed choices are helping or limiting your children’s potential.

Check in next time for the follow up post: Pink is For Girls.