The fact that most women spend more time and money on beauty products than men do isn’t just a reflection of the two sexes’ different priorities — it’s now being called a “makeup tax” and “another form of pay inequality.”
The discussion began when Facebook staffer Libby Brittain asked about it during Hillary Clinton’s July 20 Facebook Q&A:
Every morning, as my boyfriend zips out the door and I spend 30+ minutes getting ready, I wonder about how the ‘hair-and-makeup tax’ affects other women — especially ones I admire in high-pressure, public-facing jobs.
Clinton attempted to look really cool in her reply (it literally began with “Amen, sister!”) but she didn’t actually answer the question about whether or not she considered it a “tax.”
Since then, however, there have been think pieces aplenty about the subject, with some women going even further than Brittain in characterizing how harmful makeup might be.
For example, one piece titled “Women’s health is taxed by makeup, too,” in a liberal blog called Treehugger, explains that the burden goes beyond time and money.
#related#“There’s another way that women pay the makeup tax, one that’s much harder to quantify,” the author, Margaret Badore, continues. “I’m taking (sic) about the price women pay with their health in the pursuit of looking ‘put together.’”
She then lists off a bunch of chemicals that are in makeup that are harmful or something, but concedes that it is “difficult to say how bad for our health many cosmetics really are, because most of the exposure involves very small amounts over long periods of time.”
Sure, the fact that it takes me longer to get ready than a dude is annoying. But, like with many of these types of activist issues, I have to ask: What solution are you proposing, exactly?
— Katherine Timpf is a reporter for National Review Online.