Moving this video to RFlagg's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.

*promote

Promoting this video and sending it back into the queue for one more try; last queued - promote requested by eric3579.

As ridiculous as some of this is, there are some valid reasons why products are gendered (at least in the standard hetero-normative fashion).

There are different aesthetics for genders. Most women do actually want to be perceived as soft and feminine and pretty, and most men do want to be perceived as tough and competent. Hence different fragrances in deodorant, for instance.

But pens for women are just ridiculous...

*downunder

Adding video to channels (Downunder) - requested by ant.

This video is specifically marketed towards women!

Ok. Women want to be perceived as soft (they do? - I'd be careful with that generalisation, your straying into damsel territory there) and feminine (Surprise! ...but what is feminine? - is it soft and pink or something else?). And who doesn't want to be seen as competent and why should it be seen as a masculine trait?

Wait, Let me guess the guys. Do most guys want to be perceived as..masculine...and...*insert positive gender role stereotype here!*.

Oh well, I was close I guess.

So liek. Yes. Your average guy or gal wants to fit into their associated gender role, or gender aesthetic if you like. But it seems to me there is sort of an element of carts before horses here. Are those gender aesthetics a preexisting difference between the sexes or is it an arbitrary divider created by our society through cynical marketing campaigns that have exploited our desire to "belong" to make more money?

Aside from that, what exactly makes a fragrance "tough" or "competent"? I've never thought to describe a smell as competent in all my life. It's all as arbitrary as pink for girls, blue for boys and...pens for women.

Well, first of all, I said "most", not all. Second, I'm not making any value judgements, simply stating my experience. Most women I know spend varying amounts of money on products designed to keep their skin soft and hair free etc.

Who doesn't want to be perceived as competent? Plenty of people. I know lots of women who profess proudly to not being able to change a tyre. To be fair, I also know plenty of women who are extremely competent, but I know almost no men who would admit to not knowing how to change a tyre.

Again, I'm talking in broad generalisations, and that's how marketing works. I'm not saying women can't be tough or competent or that men can't have soft skin, but that is not the norm and marketing is targetted at a wide demographic (unless you are specifically marketing to a nice audience).

As to the question of whether these distinctions are ingrained or not, it's largely irrelevant. It's not about some genetic marker that makes men want to smell like trees and women smell like flowers, it's about centuries of built-up cultural aesthetics. I don't really have to explain where this comes from, do I?

Again, I'm not saying this is right, merely that there are reasons that marketers do this. Where I have a problem is when it becomes exclusionist. When girls are told they can't play with "boys toys", I say screw that.

.

*controversy *money

Adding video to channels (Controversy, Money) - requested by MrFisk.

*news

Adding video to channels (News) - requested by MrFisk.

So we agree that the "valid reasons" for gendered marketing are to sell more things?

I think it's hypocrisy to balk at the idea of fem-pens but not his and hers conditioner. I think it's almost all exclusionist - that's how it works, no? Don't buy them pens girlie, buy these instead!

If your job is marketing, then "selling more things" is a completely valid reason.

FYI saggy boob at 1:11

NSFW?

As the video shows, the basic gender defining trait for this marketing is pink for girls and blue for boys, even though 60 years ago it was the opposite. I agree that most of us grew up in this era and so those defining marketable traits are believed simply because we grew up with that definition.

Another example is the idea of not being clean unless you us soap, shampoo, shaving cream, deodorant, etc. Many people (myself included) have stopped using such items and found that, after an adjustment period, there's really no difference. My hair is healthier and fuller since stopping using shampoo and my skin isn't as dry without soap. I shower with just water and the only time I stink is after a work out. Most people believe you'd become Pig Pen if you didn't use these items but that is simply because they grew up in an era where they've used them as long as they can remember and cannot imagine ever not using them.

There's certainly a cultural element, but I feel that if there simply wasn't this marketing divide just a few short generations ago, that culture alone plays a small role.

Sure it's not a moob?

Enhance!