15
I. Introduction
Report Objectives
This study establishes the rst-ever look at gender pricing of goods in the New York City marketplace across
multiple industries. DCA investigated gender-based pricing disparities in toys and accessories, children’s
clothing, adult clothing, personal care products, and senior/home health care products.
The goal of the study was to determine the frequency and extent to which female consumers face higher
prices than male consumers when buying similar products. Using the study’s ndings, DCA aims to inform
consumers, as well as raise awareness about the issue of gender pricing.
Inherent in the study design is an understanding that male and female versions of products often differ from
one another in branding, construction, and ingredients. However, individual consumers do not have control
over the textiles or ingredients used in the products marketed to them and must make purchasing choices
based only on what is available in the marketplace. As such, DCA selected products that had similar male and
female versions and were closest in branding, ingredients, appearance, textile, construction, and/or marketing.
In this way, the ndings of the study represent a female consumer’s experience in the marketplace, which
includes unavoidable higher prices for women’s products.
Historical Context
In 1992, DCA conducted an investigation of “price bias against women in the marketplace,” and issued a
report with the ndings titled Gypped by Gender. The study concluded that women paid more than men at
used car dealers, dry cleaners, launderers, and hair salons. A major obstacle in helping consumers avoid
pricing bias, the study reported, was a lack of information about the prices paid by other consumers.
Twenty-three years later, and with more information readily available than ever before, it may be that this is
still the case—price conscious female shoppers may not know that, for discounts, they need look no further
than the men’s department.
The 1992 study found that when women bought used cars, they were twice as likely to have been quoted a
higher price than men. Based on a survey of 80 hair salons across the ve boroughs, the study found that,
on average, women paid 25 percent more for the same haircuts. Similarly, on average, women paid 27 percent
more for the identical service of laundering a basic white cotton shirt.
13
DCA’s research on gender pricing started a national conversation, and soon states were following New York
City’s example by conducting their own research. A California study in 1994 estimated that women effectively
paid an annual “gender tax” of $1,351 each.
14
Other states, such as Florida, Connecticut, and South Dakota,
began to research the topic and began publishing ofcial reports of their own.
15
16
In 1995, California became
the rst state to enact a bill to protect consumers from price discrimination for services; soon Massachusetts,
Washington D.C., and some Virginia counties followed.
17
In 1998, relying on DCA’s research, the New
13
New York City Department of Consumer Affairs. Gypped by Gender: A Study of Price Bias against Women in the Marketplace, 1992. Print.
14
http://articles.latimes.com/1995-10-14/news/mn-56735_1_gender-based-pricing
15
http://leginfo.ca.gov/pub/95-96/bill/asm/ab_1051-1100/ab_1100_cfa_950831_152302_sen_oor.html
16
http://legis.sd.gov/docs/referencematerials/IssueMemos/im96-22.pdf
17
http://www.csmonitor.com/1998/0109/010998.us.us.5.html