Until recently, I had never heard of the term “pink tax.” I stumbled upon it through a newsletter I subscribe to—one of the few places where the value of real information still shines through, compared to the noise of social media. The article I read focused on the U.S. market, but the concept was instantly fascinating: almost identical razors, one pink and one blue, priced differently simply because they’re marketed to different genders. And the pink one? Always more expensive.
The idea that women are subtly (and not so subtly) charged more for everyday products isn’t just a quirk of the American retail system. Is there any hard evidence of this happening in South Africa? I did some digging—and while I’m no expert, what I found was both intriguing and frustrating.
What Is the Pink Tax?
The “pink tax” refers to gender-based price discrimination where products marketed to women are more expensive than similar products marketed to men, despite similar production costs. Think of two t-shirts—one in the men’s section and one in the women’s section, identical in fabric and fit, but with a price gap. The difference? Often just branding, packaging, or colour.
Let’s take a closer look at what the evidence says, specifically in the South African context.
? Evidence Supporting the Pink Tax in South Africa
1. Sanlam Surveys (2018 and 2024)
Financial services group Sanlam found that women not only earn less than men, but often spend more—thanks in part to pink tax. In a 2024 update with over 400 respondents, 53% of women said they “sometimes” encounter pink tax, while 19% saw it “often.” Notable disparities were reported in personal care items (like razors) and even in car insurance pricing.
? Caveat: These are self-reported perceptions, not a systematic audit of product prices.
2. Business Insider SA Investigation (2018)
They compared prices across three retailers—grocery, clothing, and health & beauty. On average, women’s versions of similar products cost 18% more. Razors, face creams, and basic apparel showed the biggest differences.
? This is hard price data—but limited in scope (only three retailers).
3. Use Your Voice (UYV) Non-Profit Report (2018)
UYV found that women pay up to 13% more for personal care items. While the study was widely shared, it’s more anecdotal than academic.
? Helpful snapshot, but lacking large-scale rigor.
4. Social Media Evidence
In 2022, a viral X (formerly Twitter) post showed two identical lotions at Dischem—one for men at R65, and the women’s version at R80. That’s a nearly 19% markup, just for marketing it to women.
? Not a study, but the kind of real-world observation that supports broader trends.
? Evidence Questioning the Pink Tax in South Africa
1. University of Stellenbosch Law Clinic (2018)
Their research found no conclusive proof of widespread pink tax. Pricing appeared more linked to subjective factors like design, packaging, or specific ingredients.
? Their stance: price differences exist, but they aren’t necessarily discriminatory.
2. Contro Study (2023)
This wellness brand compared six similar men’s and women’s products. The results were mixed—women paid more for most items, but the gap had narrowed in some areas (like razors).
? Suggests improvements, or at least variability in pricing practices.
3. Global Context
A 2021 study by University of Chicago and Northwestern found that men’s products were more expensive in 3 out of 5 personal care categories when brand and ingredients were held constant. This was in the U.S., but worth noting.
? The takeaway? Not all pricing gaps are about discrimination—some are about how products are formulated or branded.
? So, What’s Really Going On?
The evidence suggests that while some products in South Africa are indeed more expensive when marketed to women, it’s not always clear whether this is intentional discrimination or a side effect of branding, marketing, and consumer behavior.
- Razors and personal care products are common culprits.
- Clothing, particularly basics like t-shirts, can show mysterious price differences.
- Financial products like insurance may also reflect gender-based cost differences.
But—there’s no sweeping, large-scale study in South Africa akin to the 2015 New York City Department of Consumer Affairs report, which looked at 794 products. Until we get something on that scale, we’re left with a patchwork of smaller studies, anecdotal posts, and limited investigations.
? How to Avoid the Pink Tax
Here are some tips women in South Africa can use to protect their wallets:
- Buy gender-neutral or men’s versions of basics (like razors or t-shirts).
- Compare ingredients, not just labels, on personal care products.
- Support awareness campaigns like #AxThePinkTax.
- Push for transparency and demand price justification when disparities are obvious.
Final Thought
The pink tax is not a myth—but it’s not fully proven as a systemic, across-the-board issue either, at least not in South Africa. It lurks in some shelves and product categories, occasionally surfacing in obvious price differences. In other cases, it’s buried in marketing fluff and brand strategy. Still, even marginal disparities—when multiplied across a lifetime of purchases—can cost women thousands of rands.
Until we have better data, staying informed and skeptical remains the best defense. Just because it’s pink doesn’t mean it should cost more.
