Misguided feminism
Misguided feminism... there are surely plenty of examples of it, some major ones with serious consequences, others just minor, even possibly irrelevant. This post is surely in the latter class, which makes me wonder why I chose to talk about this, but here we go…
I was inspired to write this post by this article on the BBC, which kind of irritated me. Here is the thing:
Surely one of the fundamental laws of the market is that if the client is willing to pay more, sellers will take advantage of it and prices will go up.
So, the reason that women's products are more expensive than men's is not because sellers are sexist, it's because women are stupidly willing to pay more than they should. This is just one more of the many examples of sexism, if you want to call it that, created by women and not men.
Take for example, razors. In a still recent past, razors were just razors. Men and women used the same ugly razors that men still use today. Then, one fine day, a razor manufacturer had a brilliant idea, let's make "pretty" razors and charge more for them. "Women's razors" were born. From then on, women and men had the choice, cheap dark grey razors or expensive bright coloured ones. You choose. The first time I went to buy razors, I noticed the prize difference, checked the blades were identical and, without hesitation, bought the ugly dark grey ones, and I've been doing the same ever since.
Sexism is not that bright colours items are more expensive than dull ones. Sexism is that they're arbitrarily labelled as for women or men.
I'm sure that there is plenty of men who like pink a lot more than I do and the only reason they don't pay extra for a pink razor is that this would be so gay.
Take this obsession with pink for women. I hate pink, it was always one of my least favourite colours. My favourite colour as a child happened to be navy blue (not baby blue which I dislike almost as much as baby pink). I consider myself extremely lucky that I happened to be a child at a time before this imposition of pink and fuchsia on small girls. Today, when I go shopping for my nephews (all boys, lucky them) I'm absolutely appalled at how horrendously ugly girl's products are.
So the examples discussed on the article, from turquoise razors to pink and flowery baby car seats, are definitely of the unisex class. You like turquoise and flowers?, you can pay extra for the luxury, it shouldn't matter whether you're a boy or a girl.
Another example are clothes. If women's clothes are more expensive than men's, it's mostly because of production's costs, as they often have more complex shapes and fabrics. But, if this is still true when you compare similar quality, then it must be because women are willing to pay more. And that's not all, when one considers that, not so long ago, up to my mother's generation, it was mostly wives and mothers that bought men's clothes (this is still true in part), one must suspect that selfishness might have played a role here too. It all started because women were not willing to pay as much for someone else's clothes as for themselves... just saying.
My major complain is not even about women's clothes being more expensive, it is that they're often of worse quality than men's (and the lack of pockets in women's clothes, even sport ones, so irritating!). And the hard truth is that this is because women are stupidly willing to pay more for uncomfortable, flowery, pink low-quality-fabric clothes. Don't blame men for it!!!
To conclude, in my not so humble opinion, what feminists should be campaigning against is not the difference in price, but that nearly identical items are labelled differently only based on less relevant details like colour or pattern. This is a minor problem when speaking of products for adults, but has been blown up over the last couple of decades when you consider children's products. It is a shame and a scandal that today's children are effectively receiving an education that is even more sexist than the one we received in our time (yes, I still remember how I'd to beg my brother to let me play with his Legos, instead of my boring dolls, and I've to consider myself lucky to have a brother). Why is it that girl's toys are ugly, of bad quality, and stupid, while boy's toys are not only of better quality but more veered to develop the intelligence of the child?
I was inspired to write this post by this article on the BBC, which kind of irritated me. Here is the thing:
Surely one of the fundamental laws of the market is that if the client is willing to pay more, sellers will take advantage of it and prices will go up.
So, the reason that women's products are more expensive than men's is not because sellers are sexist, it's because women are stupidly willing to pay more than they should. This is just one more of the many examples of sexism, if you want to call it that, created by women and not men.
Take for example, razors. In a still recent past, razors were just razors. Men and women used the same ugly razors that men still use today. Then, one fine day, a razor manufacturer had a brilliant idea, let's make "pretty" razors and charge more for them. "Women's razors" were born. From then on, women and men had the choice, cheap dark grey razors or expensive bright coloured ones. You choose. The first time I went to buy razors, I noticed the prize difference, checked the blades were identical and, without hesitation, bought the ugly dark grey ones, and I've been doing the same ever since.
Sexism is not that bright colours items are more expensive than dull ones. Sexism is that they're arbitrarily labelled as for women or men.
I'm sure that there is plenty of men who like pink a lot more than I do and the only reason they don't pay extra for a pink razor is that this would be so gay.
Take this obsession with pink for women. I hate pink, it was always one of my least favourite colours. My favourite colour as a child happened to be navy blue (not baby blue which I dislike almost as much as baby pink). I consider myself extremely lucky that I happened to be a child at a time before this imposition of pink and fuchsia on small girls. Today, when I go shopping for my nephews (all boys, lucky them) I'm absolutely appalled at how horrendously ugly girl's products are.
So the examples discussed on the article, from turquoise razors to pink and flowery baby car seats, are definitely of the unisex class. You like turquoise and flowers?, you can pay extra for the luxury, it shouldn't matter whether you're a boy or a girl.
Another example are clothes. If women's clothes are more expensive than men's, it's mostly because of production's costs, as they often have more complex shapes and fabrics. But, if this is still true when you compare similar quality, then it must be because women are willing to pay more. And that's not all, when one considers that, not so long ago, up to my mother's generation, it was mostly wives and mothers that bought men's clothes (this is still true in part), one must suspect that selfishness might have played a role here too. It all started because women were not willing to pay as much for someone else's clothes as for themselves... just saying.
My major complain is not even about women's clothes being more expensive, it is that they're often of worse quality than men's (and the lack of pockets in women's clothes, even sport ones, so irritating!). And the hard truth is that this is because women are stupidly willing to pay more for uncomfortable, flowery, pink low-quality-fabric clothes. Don't blame men for it!!!
To conclude, in my not so humble opinion, what feminists should be campaigning against is not the difference in price, but that nearly identical items are labelled differently only based on less relevant details like colour or pattern. This is a minor problem when speaking of products for adults, but has been blown up over the last couple of decades when you consider children's products. It is a shame and a scandal that today's children are effectively receiving an education that is even more sexist than the one we received in our time (yes, I still remember how I'd to beg my brother to let me play with his Legos, instead of my boring dolls, and I've to consider myself lucky to have a brother). Why is it that girl's toys are ugly, of bad quality, and stupid, while boy's toys are not only of better quality but more veered to develop the intelligence of the child?
Comments
Post a Comment