Gender biasedness is not a new problem in the society, but biasedness as measure of commodity price discrimination has come into recent picture. This uneven selling of same products to different gender is because of the difference in the demand by two opposites. Other factors which could preclude this discrimination is different consumer behaviour not just pertaining to consumption but due to reach of consumers. When the two groups are charged different for the same product it is called as price discrimination which often leads to dead weightless in the economy as surplus is transferred from consumers to producers. Government also participates in this through earning tax revenue which is imposed on the products thus elevating its price. But it can be seen that this different price mechanism is not same in all types of industries. So the main question that is asked is whether this opportunity captured by company's welfare improving?

New York department of country affairs has backed this belief which proved that women pay 43% more for their personal products than men. This type of discrimination is done because the firms receive the private information of the people by their behaviour (Ajzen,1991). So even when the final product has same value in terms of price, companies sell it cheaper to one and dearer to other because 1 unit of consumption is not equal to 1 unit of production for both genders. Products which are more inelastic to particular gender are priced high for them, like cosmetics, toiletries, etc. But this is not the scenario for all the sections because hair care takes more time for women thus expensive, Men drive car roughly so insurances are costly for them. This also includes some genuine monopoly producers which government themselves promote, because they are the ones who earn revenue from the tax imposed on the goods. If we consider the Bertrand model (Cournot v/s Bertrand, 1976), in which the price competition takes place in duopoly, consumers are benefitted in the price war but producers loose. But if we see in order to sell cheap the quality of the product is reduced simultaneously which is not good for the people. So can we say that paying higher prices is doing good for the people? One of the recent study at Université de Cergy-Pontoiseshowed that price discrimination in form of gender discrimination is very important for the welfare of the economy. The model by ("Thomas Trégouët",2015) showed that it is more likely to be harmful if the we post a ban on gender based price discrimination if the matching type market is more symmetric. Also companies we can say are acting rational by charging the segment which are more likely to buy. Though it's not right but still it is also the mentality of the people who have given the boost to these producers. Women using costly products are considered more sophisticated and fashion oriented.

Totally we can see that there is a trade-off and we cannot blame only one section of the society. So collective voice should be raised by women to encounter such a problem. On a lighter note we can say that men should start purchasing for women and vice versa.