粉红税

粉红税（英语：Pink tax）是指专门针对女性销售的产品比针对男性销售的产品普遍更昂贵的趋势。这种现象通常被归因于基于性别的价格歧视，但研究表明，主要原因是女性更倾向选择边际成本较高的商品。^[1]^[2]^[3]^[4]^[5]^[6]^[7]这个名称来自于被观察到许多受影响的产品都是粉红色的。

背景

纽约消费者事务局在2015年针对女性消费者的成本进行的一项研究得出结论，女性产品通常比男性产品更贵，而且没有合理原因。^[3]研究得出的结论是，专门针对女性销售的产品的价格平均比针对男性销售的产品高出7%。这种差异适用于服装、玩具和保健产品等。在玩具领域，女孩玩具的价格平均比男孩玩具高出7%。在童装方面，女童服饰比男童服饰贵4%，女装比男装贵8%。差异最大的是个人护理/卫生产品，其中女性产品的价格比男性产品高13%。^[3]

原因

粉红税存在的原因有很多，包括关税、产品歧视与产品差异化。造成这种差异的原因有很多，包括价格弹性以及人们认为女性比男性更愿意支付更高的购买价格。^[3]^[6]^[8]^[9]其他报告表明，行销的目标是女性作为有道德的消费者会支付更高的价格。^[10]

根据《华盛顿邮报》的文章^[11]，女性更有可能花更多的钱来改善自己的外表，因为不这样做会带来收入损失的风险。一些研究表明，有魅力的人往往会获得更高的薪水^[12]^[13]、在学校获得更高的成绩^[14]、减少刑期^[15]以及更有可能在工作场所被雇用和晋升。^[16]

经济影响

活动人士和政界人士认为，粉红税的经济影响是女性的购买力较低，特别是考虑到基于性别的薪资差距。^[17] 粉红税进一步加剧了男女之间的经济不平等。也有人认为，为向女性销售的商品和服务支付更高的费用，而女性的收入普遍低于男性，意味着男性在经济中拥有大部分购买力。^[18]对男性不需要的女性卫生用品征税进一步加剧了这种差异。^[19]

批评

对粉红税的批评包括一个原则，即这种想法剥夺了妇女的自主权和选择权，因为其暗示女性很容易被行销洗脑，以至于她们无法选择价格较低但在其他方面“完全相同”的男性替代品。相反，批评者将定价差异归因于市场力量，^[20]并表示，如果女性继续购买更昂贵的粉红色剃须刀，那是因为她们看到了一些实用性或额外的美感，因此愿意为此付费。^[21]价格的实质差异可能表示不同产品的适销性有差异。批评者认为，虽然看似相同的产品和服务可能定价不同，但情感体验和感知价值却不同。^[22]

在一项研究指出了纽约市消费者事务部2015年颇具影响力的研究中的方法论缺陷：“首先，报告中考虑的产品占品类销售额的比例不到6%，而且并非随机选择。其次，虽然样本是透过主观配对男性和女性产品建构的，但我们发现样本中的大多数配对在成分上有所不同。”^[23]他们认为，对证据的系统分析表明，在将同一家公司生产的产品与其他公司生产的产品进行比较时，可以发现这一点。在主要成分相同的情况下，男士产品在5个类别中的3个类别中价格更高。“这些发现并不支持女性产品存在系统性溢价。”^[23]

参考资料

^ Barnes, Kayleigh; Brounstein, Jakob. The Pink Tax: Why Do Women Pay More?. November 4, 2022. S2CID 253833427. SSRN 4269217  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助). doi:10.2139/ssrn.4269217 –通过Social Science Research Network.
^ Moshary, Sarah; Tuchman, Anna; Bhatia Vajravelu, Natasha. Gender-Based Pricing in Consumer Packaged Goods: A Pink Tax?. December 16, 2021. S2CID 243416921. SSRN 3882214  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助). doi:10.2139/ssrn.3882214 –通过Social Science Research Network.
^ ^3.0 ^3.1 ^3.2 ^3.3 Bessendorf, Anna. From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being A Female Consumer (PDF). NYC DCA. [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2024-02-28）.
^ Pink Tax. Investopedia. [2021-11-13]. （原始内容存档于2021-11-12）（英语）.
^ Hoffman, Meredith. The Pink Tax: How Women Pay More for Pink. Bankrate. [2021-12-30]. （原始内容存档于2021-12-30）（美国英语）.
^ ^6.0 ^6.1 Hill, Catey. 6 times it's more expensive to be a woman. MarketWatch. [2018-05-23]. （原始内容存档于2024-02-24）（美国英语）.
^ Maloney, Carolyn. The Pink Tax -- How Gender Based Price Discrimination Hurts Women's Buying Power (PDF). December 2016 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2024-01-18）.
^ Barbaro, Michael. In Apparel, All Tariffs Aren't Created Equal. The New York Times. 28 April 2007 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2024-02-08）.
^ 'Pink tax' has women paying 43% more for their toiletries than men. Financial Post. 2016-04-26 [2018-06-07]. （原始内容存档于2020-03-05）（美国英语）.
^ Norris, Susanne. The Pink Tax: what you need to know. Red Online. 2021-06-14 [2021-11-13]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）（英国英语）.
^ Ana Swanson. The real reason that so many women have to spend so much time getting ready. The Washington Post. 19 May 2016 [22 November 2022]. （原始内容存档于2023-04-17）.
^ Jaclyn S. Wong; Andrew M. Penner, Gender and the returns to attractiveness, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 2016, 44: 113–123, doi:10.1016/j.rssm.2016.04.002
^ Daniel S. Hamermesh; Jeff E. Biddle, Beauty and the Labor Market, The American Economic Review, 1994, 84 (5): 1174–1194, JSTOR 2117767
^ Margaret M. Clifford; Elaine Walster, The Effect of Physical Attractiveness on Teacher Expectations, Sociology of Education, 1973, 46 (2): 248–258, JSTOR 2112099, doi:10.2307/2112099
^ Angela S. Ahola; Sven Å. Christianson; Å. Hellström, Justice Needs a Blindfold: Effects of Gender and Attractiveness on Prison Sentences and Attributions of Personal Characteristics in a Judicial Process, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 2009, 16: S90–S100, S2CID 144896854, doi:10.1080/13218710802242011
^ Lucy M. Watkins; Lucy Johnston, Screening Job Applicants: The Impact of Physical Attractiveness and Application Quality, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2000, 8 (2): 76–84, doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00135
^ 'Sexist' shopping tax targeted by Lib Dem MP's bill. BBC News. 2019-03-05 [2021-11-13]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）（英国英语）.
^ The narrowing, but persistent, gender gap in pay. Pew Research Center. 2018-04-09 [2018-05-24]. （原始内容存档于2019-03-19）（美国英语）.
^ Mosby, Tianna. Bill to remove 'Tampon Tax' in Virginia clears first hurdle. [2018-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2023-12-30）（英语）.
^ Brown, Elizabeth Nolan. The 'Pink Tax' Is a Myth. Reason. 5 January 2016 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）.
^ Worstall, Tim. The Pink Tax Is Nothing To Do With Public Policy, Women Can Solve It For Themselves. Forbes. 13 November 2014 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）.
^ Georgeson, Hunter. The Pink Tax is a myth. Adam Smith Institute. [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-10-05）. ^{[自述来源]}
^ ^23.0 ^23.1 Bhatia, Natasha; Moshary, Sarah; Tuchman, Anna. Investigating the Pink Tax: Evidence Against a Systematic Price Premium for Women in CPG. 2021. SSRN 3882214  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助).

延伸阅读

Hatch, Miranda. Is Trade Sexist? How "Pink" Tariff Policies' Harmful Effects Can Be Curtailed Through Litigation and Legislation. BYU Law Review. 15 October 2022, 47 (2): 651–683 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-12-03）.
Crawford, Bridget J. Pink Tax and Other Tropes. 7 March 2022. SSRN 4052085  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助). Yale Journal of Law & Feminism, Forthcoming.

[1] Barnes, Kayleigh; Brounstein, Jakob. The Pink Tax: Why Do Women Pay More?. November 4, 2022. S2CID 253833427. SSRN 4269217  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助). doi:10.2139/ssrn.4269217 –通过Social Science Research Network.

[2] Moshary, Sarah; Tuchman, Anna; Bhatia Vajravelu, Natasha. Gender-Based Pricing in Consumer Packaged Goods: A Pink Tax?. December 16, 2021. S2CID 243416921. SSRN 3882214  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助). doi:10.2139/ssrn.3882214 –通过Social Science Research Network.

[:0-3] 3.0 ^3.1 ^3.2 ^3.3 Bessendorf, Anna. From Cradle to Cane: The Cost of Being A Female Consumer (PDF). NYC DCA. [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2024-02-28）.

[4] Pink Tax. Investopedia. [2021-11-13]. （原始内容存档于2021-11-12）（英语）.

[5] Hoffman, Meredith. The Pink Tax: How Women Pay More for Pink. Bankrate. [2021-12-30]. （原始内容存档于2021-12-30）（美国英语）.

[:7-6] 6.0 ^6.1 Hill, Catey. 6 times it's more expensive to be a woman. MarketWatch. [2018-05-23]. （原始内容存档于2024-02-24）（美国英语）.

[:10-7] Maloney, Carolyn. The Pink Tax -- How Gender Based Price Discrimination Hurts Women's Buying Power (PDF). December 2016 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档 (PDF)于2024-01-18）.

[:6-8] Barbaro, Michael. In Apparel, All Tariffs Aren't Created Equal. The New York Times. 28 April 2007 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2024-02-08）.

[:11-9] 'Pink tax' has women paying 43% more for their toiletries than men. Financial Post. 2016-04-26 [2018-06-07]. （原始内容存档于2020-03-05）（美国英语）.

[10] Norris, Susanne. The Pink Tax: what you need to know. Red Online. 2021-06-14 [2021-11-13]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）（英国英语）.

[11] Ana Swanson. The real reason that so many women have to spend so much time getting ready. The Washington Post. 19 May 2016 [22 November 2022]. （原始内容存档于2023-04-17）.

[12] Jaclyn S. Wong; Andrew M. Penner, Gender and the returns to attractiveness, Research in Social Stratification and Mobility, 2016, 44: 113–123, doi:10.1016/j.rssm.2016.04.002

[13] Daniel S. Hamermesh; Jeff E. Biddle, Beauty and the Labor Market, The American Economic Review, 1994, 84 (5): 1174–1194, JSTOR 2117767

[14] Margaret M. Clifford; Elaine Walster, The Effect of Physical Attractiveness on Teacher Expectations, Sociology of Education, 1973, 46 (2): 248–258, JSTOR 2112099, doi:10.2307/2112099

[15] Angela S. Ahola; Sven Å. Christianson; Å. Hellström, Justice Needs a Blindfold: Effects of Gender and Attractiveness on Prison Sentences and Attributions of Personal Characteristics in a Judicial Process, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 2009, 16: S90–S100, S2CID 144896854, doi:10.1080/13218710802242011

[16] Lucy M. Watkins; Lucy Johnston, Screening Job Applicants: The Impact of Physical Attractiveness and Application Quality, International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 2000, 8 (2): 76–84, doi:10.1111/1468-2389.00135

[:18-17] 'Sexist' shopping tax targeted by Lib Dem MP's bill. BBC News. 2019-03-05 [2021-11-13]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）（英国英语）.

[:8-18] The narrowing, but persistent, gender gap in pay. Pew Research Center. 2018-04-09 [2018-05-24]. （原始内容存档于2019-03-19）（美国英语）.

[:5-19] Mosby, Tianna. Bill to remove 'Tampon Tax' in Virginia clears first hurdle. [2018-06-06]. （原始内容存档于2023-12-30）（英语）.

[20] Brown, Elizabeth Nolan. The 'Pink Tax' Is a Myth. Reason. 5 January 2016 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）.

[21] Worstall, Tim. The Pink Tax Is Nothing To Do With Public Policy, Women Can Solve It For Themselves. Forbes. 13 November 2014 [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-07-18）.

[22] Georgeson, Hunter. The Pink Tax is a myth. Adam Smith Institute. [2023-12-16]. （原始内容存档于2023-10-05）. ^{[自述来源]}

[:19-23] 23.0 ^23.1 Bhatia, Natasha; Moshary, Sarah; Tuchman, Anna. Investigating the Pink Tax: Evidence Against a Systematic Price Premium for Women in CPG. 2021. SSRN 3882214  请检查|ssrn=的值 (帮助).

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]