AS many women will no doubt be aware, they are routinely charged more than their male counterparts for a whole range of products and services, including toiletries, clothes, hairdressing and even dry cleaning.
And it would appear the so-called pink tax extends into every sphere of society - even our prisons.
A recent report by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Prisons for Scotland into facilities at Polmont, where Scotland’s female prison population is currently housed, noted a lack of affordable toiletries - such as shampoo and conditioner - available for sale to women prisoners. All those in custody can buy certain products on “canteen lists” using money given to them by family, or earned from work in prison.
The Fawcett Society, which campaigns for equality for women, has long been highly critical of what it calls “sexist” pricing, and is particularly dismayed that the phenomenon has seemingly made its way from supermarkets into prisons. It has urged the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) to lead the way by making the pricing structure the same for male and female prisoners.
For its part, the SPS says its pricing structure simply reflects what it is charged to buy in the products, and thus any higher prices for “female” products must be passed on to women prisoners.
No doubt there are many more serious issues in our prisons than the cost of shampoo. But the situation does highlight a wider issue in society that surely needs more examination, particularly since the gender pay gap still exists and persists across employment sectors.
An investigation last year, meanwhile, highlighted that on average women pay 37 per cent more for “gender-targeted” items ranging from beauty products to toys. Prices for women’s razors were found to among the most inflated, simply because the products were pink. Following this, Tesco reduced the price of its standard razors by half to match that of its men’s range.
Perhaps it’s time more big companies took similar action, and encouraged their suppliers to do the same. Until then, women will continue to be ripped off.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here