'The Pink Tax'

@glitterbag,

Another irritating piece of unfairness towards women at dry cleaners is that for the most part, their clothes are of smaller size, so why do the get charged more?

1 Reply

@roger,

I've tried to point out that she ain't cuttin' all of 'em, but I still don't get no discount.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

I tried to tell mine she should charge less cuz there's not much left to cut. She asked if she should charge more because she had to spend her time looking for them.

0 Replies

@Sturgis,

Have you tried asking? Maybe women's clothes are more delicate so they require extra care, or something like that. Maybe they just know they can get more money out of women because they'll pay and keep coming back.

0 Replies

As long as you get good sax.

0 Replies

I don't know why people make stuff up when statistics are so readily available. I guess the saying fits; never let the facts get in the way of a good ideological narrative.

Single men spend more on dating than women, including costs like haircuts and manicures ($1855 a year to $1425). Men also spend 65% more on Valentine's day gifts than women.

https://lifehacker.com/the-cost-of-dating-in-america-1794336431

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

How is a haircut or manicure spending on dating? If you start counting everything people spend on their own images as dating-spending, then you could start considering purchases of things like cars and suits as things men spend money on to impress women.

Spending on gifts is direct spending on someone else. Spending money on your own self-presentation to impress dates is not the same kind of spending. It is money spent on yourself.

If you claim that money spent on manicures is a gift to a dating partner, then a man who pays for a manicure or spa treatment for his gfriend/spouse would be spending money on himself.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Why argue the point? The fact is the even taking these preparation costs into account, men still pay more.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

I argued it because someone was responding to my point that men spend more on women by arguing that women spend on preparing themselves for dates more. That implies an equivalency between gift giving and preparing oneself as a gift to give.

Ever heard the expression, "he thinks he's God's gift to women?" Well, maybe there should be a corresponding expression about women who think they're God's gift to men. This may be what the Bible says, but I don't think that translates into justifying spending money on date prep.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

That implies an equivalency between gift giving and preparing oneself as a gift to give.

This called "courtship" and it has been part of human cultures since the stone age. Men have always given gifts, things of value of one type or another, to win the affection of a woman.

This is part of human nature, and it makes evolutionary sense. Female sexuality has an intrinsic economic value, males have to offer something of value in return. Sometimes it is money, sometimes it is devotion, sometimes it is defense or social status, but it is part of human history from the beginning of time until today.

Quote:

According to this analysis, sex is essentially a female resource. In other words, female sexual activity is much in demand and has high social value, in contrast to male activity, which is plentiful and easy to come by and therefore worthless. A woman’s sexual consent is a valuable asset that may command a high price. Because his sex has no value in the market, the man, seeking to 'purchase' female sex, is required to bring other valuable social resources to the transaction, such as attention, time, love, respect, commitment, money, status, etc.

What makes female sex so valuable? The ultimate reason lies with evolution. Evolutionarily speaking, man's investment in the sexual act and the risk he is taking are minimal. On the other hand, his pleasure (orgasm) is guaranteed, and each sexual encounter increases his chances for more offspring. The female’s investment in a sexual act and the risk she is taking are in contrast very high (the risk of death from complications of pregnancy or childbirth), her pleasure is not guaranteed, and having sex with multiple men does not increase her chances of getting more offspring. Therefore, sex for men is a no-risk/high-profit investment. For woman, the equation is reversed. Thus, the supply of female interest in sex is reduced, and since male demand is high, the price rises.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/insight-therapy/201305/the-price-sex-women-rule-men-drool-the-markets-cruel

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

If you normalize gift giving 'courtship' asymmetry between men and women, why wouldn't you also normalize paying men and women differently for the same work, charge them different prices for the same goods, etc.? After all, isn't the traditional reason given for paying men more than women that men have to support their wives and families and women don't? Nowadays, gender equality is saying that women can bear the same support burdens as men and thus should get paid equally for equal work, so doesn't that mean they should also have the same courtship burden?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

The phrase "pay men and women differently for the same work" makes no sense outside of modern Western culture. In many indigenous cultures neither men nor women were paid at all. And in many more cultures men and women had different responsibilities.... they didn't do the same work.

Go to any other culture throughout human history and explain that men and women should be paid the same rate for the same work.... they are going to look at you like you are crazy.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

That's skirting the question. Are you implying that you just reject the whole idea of gender equality, period? Is that why you're making a case for courtship asymmetry as natural, etc.? If so, why don't you just say that paying men more for the same work is fine? E.g. if you have a male and female teacher, or manager, etc. you can just pay the man more because he is supposed to support a family and you pay the woman less because she is expected to receive support from a man. Is that valid within your logic of natural differences and asymmetries between genders?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

There are relatively few trends that span across cultures; the economic value placed on female sexuality is one of them. The easiest way to understand economic value is to look at the marketplace. I have yet to hear of a culture where women pay men for sex.

If you look at cultural practices, literature, mythology art there the portrayal of female sexuality as valuable is fairly constant. Women are to be protected, valued. In any culture, a man who protects women and wins her love is a a heroic figure . This is true for modern day feminists. It was true for Puritans. It was true in Victorian England, and imperial China, and ancient Rome and indigenous American cultures.

You can't define the same sort of trend for the value of work. In most cultures, specific roles were defined for men and women. Often the woman's role was valued, but they were distinct. Comparing pay doesn't make any sense in these cultures.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

You already said that. Now what I'm asking you is whether you consider it legitimate to pay men more that women so they can practice this traditional masculine role of paying for female sexuality, as you so eloquently describe it.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

No, it is not legitimate to pay men more than women.

What is "legitimate" can only be defined for a specific culture in a specific time, what is legitimate for modern Americans may be illegitimate for aboriginal Australians and vice versa. The answer I gave you was based on the fact that I am a modern American (and likely you are too).

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

I disagree with your relativism, but you can chalk that off to my culture of universalism is its own cultural standpoint, if you want.

So if you don't think it is right to pay men more than women, do you think it is right for an asymmetrical culture of gendered gift-giving to persist alongside a culture of equality in pricing of gendered products, equality in pay, etc.?

Do you think women should be able to have their cake and eat it too? Or should they accept that with equal pay comes equal support responsibilities and equal sacrifice in not expecting/accepting gifts and to be taken out?

1 Reply

All of this bullshit is predicated upon an undemonstrated claim that all men are paying the way for all women, all the time. That is certainly not my experience, and I feel like I've been sucked into some idiot culture vortex which has dragged me back to the 1960s. This sounds like the whiny bullshit you'd hear from guys who couldn't get a date if their lives depended on it. My first date in university was with a woman who asked me out and who paid for everything. That was in 1968. Join us in the contemporary, real world, 'K?

1 Reply

@livinglava,

If you believe that other cultures should be judged by Western standards, or that Western standards are some "universal" standard, then it will be difficult for us to find agreement. I can answer these questions from the standpoint of Western culture. I don't see any value in discussion mythical "universal" culture.

Our culture is changing. The way Americans saw roles of women and men in 1818 is much different than 1918, or 2018. Of course many other things have changed, the way we view work, raise children and spend leisure time are all markedly different. Our society functioned in any of these time. But people in 1818 are going to answer this question about "gendered gift giving" in 1818 (when I believe there were courtship rituals) quite differently than people will answer in 2018.

Our ideas of the roles of men and women are changing pretty radically. This corresponds with other drastic changes. The way we work is changing, we are in the information age. The way we view marriage has dramatically in both the temporary nature of marriage and the people who are allowed to marry.

This question can only be answered by looking at the needs of our culture, right now in 2018. There is no universal absolute truth here.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

No one is saying anything about all men and all women. Hopefully everyone understands culture is heterogeneous by now. It is a cultural pattern/tradition, however that men pay for women more than vice-versa and that conflicts with the ethic of equal pay, equal burden, and equal responsibility, does it not?

1 Reply

'The Pink Tax'

Quick Links

My Account

able2know