For some reason on Monday night, Washington, D.C. ABC affiliate WJLA reran a story from 2016, called The cost of being a female consumer.
It was a lament right out of the Women’s March on Washington where some of the participants tastefully argued that women should not have to pay taxes for feminine items they need, in particular hygiene products.
Did you know that in California, pads and tampons are taxed because they are not deemed “necessities” by state law? Other items like food, are excluded from sales tax, because they are necessary for most people to live comfortably. But people who have periods know that menstrual products are absolutely necessary. That’s why we are asking that California stop taxing tampons and pads. Will you sign our petition and join us?
— change.org petition, 2016
Of course, there are products that are exclusive necessities for men but that reality doesn’t fit the agenda.
And if one were to be intellectually honest, there is NO comparison between the costs incurred by women on items they NEED and the costs incurred by men for women some EXPECT because it’s a entitlement of pressure and the more expensive the better.
Men are expected to spend hundreds, if not thousands of dollars on engagement and wedding rings, Valentine’s Day, Mother’s Day, birthdays, anniversaries, Christmas, as well as those occasional cheer and/or make-ups. Advertisers guilt men, ramp up the expectations of women and no one ever suggests men get any kind of relief with regards to some kind of tax break.
It’s also suspicious how gender inequality is now coming up as a Republican is in the White House. The implication of pay inequality wasn’t so stark years ago….
In Obama’s White House, men earn 16 percent more than the average woman, according to The Washington Post. In 2014, The Post did an article on the White House pay gap titled “Male-female pay gap remains entrenched at White House.” Two years ago that gap was 13 percent, they reported.
So in a span of two years, the pay gap has grown by 3 percentage points, not narrowed.
— Washington Times, 9/14/16
But back to the Pink Tax. Both genders have to buy things exclusive to themselves, however the cost men incur to have some women in their lives is severely disproportionate.
Like most things progressive, this is NOT about equal treatment. This is about special treatment and men treat women pretty special.
Just ask Jared.
Leave a Reply