User:Leyan du/Pink tax

Background
The pink tax is considered as gender tax. The pink tax reflects a capitalist stance, in which interest is the primary motivation in the market. To maximize benefits, the manufacture of goods is to cater to the masses and show the social atmosphere. In this case, the individual's choice is irrationally evaluated, and the thought is instilled for a long time. The discipline of different genders leads men and women to have different consumption values. For example, men and women have different attitudes towards body hair. So people will make some changes to meet the expectations of society. In the process of consumption, products containing pink tax appear. Pink tax not only comes from people's pursuit of favorite goods but also reflects the consumption mode domesticated by the social atmosphere.

History
In 1994, the pink tax was first proposed in a study of California's assembly office. In 1995, California released the state wide gender tax repeat act. Act includes that eliminating gender discrimination requires men and women to work together. In 2020, congresswoman, Rep. Speier resubmitted the pink tax repeat act. After the act is passed, state attorneys can sue companies containing pink tax.

Invisible pink tax
Except for the visible differences in the colors and prices displayed by commodities, the pink tax also exists invisibly in some goods. Spending the same money to buy men's shampoo can have more products than buying women's shampoo. Besides, women's shampoo is often less functional than men's shampoo. This form of sales induces women to buy more products to get some effects. Because society has different requirements for the appearance of different genders, which has more strict requirements for women. As a result, women are willing to pay more than men for goods to dress up themselves. To ensure the balance between consumers' purchase and output, women's clothes in the market usually use low-quality materials. In this way, women can quickly discard the broken clothes and buy new ones. The rapid change of women's fashion trends is also the pink tax display. Women's clothing keeps changing according to the season, which leads to the fact that women's clothing can not be reused many times. Women are often forced to buy fashion items of poor quality and discard them in the change of seasons.

Tampon tax
Except for the pink tax, women also have an additional tampon tax, including items used by women during menstruation, such as menstrual cups, tampons and pads. Tampon tax is usually called luxury tax, but tampon belongs to ordinary sales tax. Women consume $13.25 in menstrual supplies a month on average. Woman has menstruation every month for 40 years of the life. A woman consumes an average of $6360 in menstrual supplies. Menstrual supplies are a fixed and expensive expense for women. In this regard, some countries have made adjustments to the price of menstrual products, tax reduction or even tax exemption. Among Asian countries, Malaysia chose to cancel the menstrual supplies tax. China maintained a 13% menstrual supplies tax. The highest tax on menstrual supplies in the world is Hungary, which is 27%. Sweden, Denmark and Norway were followed by 25%.

Commercialization of feminine products
The bra is part of many women's daily wear. Women often wear a bra to support their breasts. With the commercialization of the bra industry, bra design began to develop for fashion and beauty. Bra, which is mainly aesthetic, restricts the breast through different functions. The bra has been commercialized for a long time, but its design still has defects. Improper shoulder straps, bra cups and steel rings are harmful factors to breast health. These inappropriate bras can lead to breast deformation, skin rash and other diseases harmful to health.

Commercialization of public welfare projects
The most easily diagnosed cancer among women is breast cancer, which accounts for 25% of the female cancer population. To raise concerns about breast cancer, pink ribbons have become a breast cancer care symbol. Pink is regarded as a feminine feature, so it was chosen as pink ribbons. The first appearance of pink ribbons was at the fund-raising event of Susan G. Komen foundation in 1991. In 1992, Estee Lauder participated in the publicity of pink ribbons. Pink ribbons are also known as cultural symbols. The appearance of pink ribbons in advertising guides the audience's view of the product. The pink ribbons in the advertisement lead the audience to fantasize about the goods like clues. For example, consumers may think that they are doing public welfare while buying goods containing pink ribbons. In addition, the actual profits gained by some companies through pink ribbons are larger than those for breast cancer donations. The survey found that the world's largest breast cancer foundation Susan G. Komen Foundation, donated less than 20% of total revenue. The improper use of pink ribbons is called pinkwashing.

Against pink tax
With the emergence of various forms of pink tax in the market, some people and enterprises have taken some measures to resist pink tax. Burger King is an example. Burger King made a promotional video to make people aware of the pink tax based on gender differences in life. In the video, a woman and a man bought the same chicken fries. But the woman was asked to pay $1.40 more because her chicken fries box was pink. This video collected different reactions from customers, some expressed shock, and some expressed anger. This video has been broadcast on youtube and in various stores under Burger King's line, which has attracted people's attention. Besides, some celebrities have expressed their attitude towards against pink tax. In March 2019, comedians Desi Lydic and Trevor Noah produced a video for the daily show. This video shows Lydic's anger that products purchased by women often have higher prices. This video has more than 1 million views.