Discriminatory gender gap in product prices must end

Like a virus, the quest initiated by the “superior” powers to marginalize perceived “inferior” groups in society, is always manifesting its prowess in various, subtle forms — like price discrimination.

This is clear in the discrimination levied against women due to their gender, mostly observed in the sale of items and services like deodorants, shaving supplies and haircuts. Women pay more money for some reason. While some jurisdictions such as New York City have outlawed price discrimination based on gender, no laws in Canada prohibit the practice.

Both men and women experience the burdensome act of shaving at some point. The purpose of razors and shaving cream are essentially the same for both genders, but the prices surprisingly differ. Men pay considerably less for the same equipment. Some companies blame the price difference on packaging and manufacturing costs, though the basic technology for manufacturing shaving razors are the same.

A few differences, though, exist between the two. Razors produced for women have a more rotund and much larger head to account for the larger surface area being shaved, like a woman’s legs. Also, an inclusion of extra casting on the blades of razors designed for women reduce the incidence of casualties while shaving. Furthermore, the blades on women’s razors are at less of an oblique angle, and designed with a different contour of handle to facilitate greater visibility of scope, so men can see better what they are shaving at.

Furthermore, another area of profound price discrimination how women often get charged more than men for the same haircut. Many professionals have argued that the reason behind the price difference is anything but gender discrimination. They argue that women have longer hair requiring more cutting, and require other activities such as blow-drying and styling, which is time-consuming. On the other hand, other opinions state that the services rendered in hair cutting of both sexes may be the same, and still different prices would be rendered to both sexes. Women may possess a gamine pixie style shorter than her husband, but will still be charged considerably more for a cut. A suitable solution for this inequality can be obtained in going to salons that charge by the hour, and not by the sex of individuals.

Some have pointed out that companies are encouraged to exploit the female sex since women are programmed to depend upon these materials due to societal pressures and perceived standards of beauty. A man isn’t necessarily pressured into shaving his legs or getting a haircut — it’s merely a chore. But there’s an immense amount of pressure on women to shave their legs and armpits or wherever there is a large emergence of hair. This lends itself as an avenue for exploitation as women are now placed in position where they’re willing to spend more money on these services or items then their male
counterparts.