Expanding on the previous post, another reason for the prevalence of gender marketing is the theory of gender contamination—the idea that some products belong to men and some belong to women, and that the brand or product commonly associated with one gender deters the other.
In the words of Libby Copeland, this gender contamination concept is defined as capturing the "cultural disapproval that takes place when objects seen as having a strong gender identity are used by the wrong gender.” Marketers have historically used gender contamination to their advantage by expanding their product lines with both a “for men” and “for women” version and in contrast to the growing conversation around gender fluidity, this theme has been showing up more and more in ads.
This is likely due to the concept of fragile masculinity. According to Jill Avery, a professor at Boston's Simmons School of Management, when a cultural hierarchy is threatened, it’s natural for those at the top to cling all the more tightly to symbols of their old rank. In other words, as women become more empowered, men start to feel threatened about losing their top dog status, so they can’t help but desperately hang on to the ‘traditional’ markers of masculinity.
However, gender contamination only flows in one direction. Marketers often believe that there is no risk of alienating female consumers with an explicitly male message, because while men would consider it ‘emasculating’ to buy products that women buy as well, women are happy to aspire to the higher status, power and ‘sensibility’ associated with men.
Although there is a need to acknowledge the physiological differences between the two biological sexes, the problem lies with the implications that these products have on gender roles, and the belief that men and women cannot use products marketed to the opposite sex. For example, unnecessarily gendered products, such as toothpaste. Also, while most people say that girls prefer fashion and dolls and boys prefer violent video games and action figures, that is mostly a product of social conditioning rather than innate preferences. Most gendered products have the same function and could be equally used by any gender. Moreover, gendered products are actually more expensive. Coined the “pink tax”, items “for women” tend to be higher in price than those “for men.”
In light of that, brands should look towards more gender ambiguous marketing. For example, Ruth Bernstein, co-founder and chief strategic officer at Yard says that “when crafting an effective brand strategy, marketers should begin by sketching out a brand muse: a personification of the brand where the company's values meet the consumer's aspirations—aspirations that are not limited to gender. A brand muse takes you beyond a demographic to create gender-neutral marketing. It allows marketers to develop a voice that resonates with an entire lifestyle rather than being confined to the limitations of gender.”
To fight against gender stereotypes and moving towards a more gender-fluid society, products across gendered categories should become increasingly more inclusive and marketed based on personality. Consumer behavior is now a function of personality rather than gender and brands should reflect that by restricting gender marketing.