Same price, worse quality: China’s women aren’t having it

The hashtag “Ugg same price, different materials” (UGG男女同价不同料) has gone viral in China, thanks to a fierce debate over gender fairness in retail pricing and product design. On January 22, Xiaohongshu account Black Cat Complaints (黑猫投诉) spotlighted a discrepancy in Ugg’s Tasman Lace casual shoes: while the men’s and women’s versions are priced equally at RMB 1,199 RMB ($173), they’re made with different materials. The men’s pair features sheepskin fleece, while the women’s uses a lyocell-wool plush blend — widely viewed as inferior in comfort and value. The dispute centers on identical pricing despite different materials. This discrepancy has sparked heated discussion around gender-based product differentiation. On January 26, 2025, Jing Daily contacted Ugg’s official customer service via its Tmall flagship store to clarify the material differences. The response: both versions use “premium” materials. The women’s model, they said, features a wool-blend Plush lining described as soft and durable, in line with Ugg’s comfort standards. The men’s version, by contrast, is lined with sheepskin fleece — fur side inward — for an even softer feel. As of this writing, the women’s version has been removed from Ugg’s official Taobao store but remains available on the brand’s WeChat mini program. Many consumers remain unconvinced, and the debate continues to unfold across Chinese social media. The Jing Take: Material differences Disparities in materials and construction between men’s and women’s products are hardly new. But with the rise of social media and increasing transparency, consumers and industry insiders alike are sharing these differences more openly — and pushing brands to account for them. Take Uniqlo, for example. On January 14, Xiaohongshu user @DuoduoFashion (@多多服装经) posted a video comparing men’s and women’s garments, pointing out that items priced the same often differ in quality. A pair of men’s jeans costing 299 RMB ($43.09) featured noticeably thicker pocket fabric, while the women’s version had shallower pockets and used lighter, less durable material. The video quickly gained traction, racking up around 22,000 likes and more than 2,100 comments. The conversation has continued to ripple across social platforms, drawing in consumers frustrated by unequal product standards. Consumer perceptions: A shift in product logic A widely shared sentiment is that the quality gap reflects ingrained assumptions: men are expected to prioritize practicality and durability, while women are seen as more trend-focused, prompting brands to funnel resources into design rather than construction. But as consumer expectations evolve, these long-standing product logics are being challenged — especially when the price tags are the same. With rising consumer awareness around cost-performance and transparency, these once-overlooked disparities are now under the microscope. When garments priced identically reveal obvious differences in materials or construction, consumers are quick to question the rationale — making such comparisons all the more viral in today’s online discourse. Notably, this growing scrutiny has led some female consumers to opt for menswear, both for perceived value and as a form of resistance against inequities in product design — a way to ensure they receive what they’re paying for. Beyond products: How gender bias shapes tag design While the Ugg and Uniqlo cases spotlight material disparities at the product level, differences in clothing tags between men’s and women’s apparel reveal a deeper divide in how brands handle sales and after-sales strategy. During last year’s Singles’ Day, the hashtag HangtagsAsBigAsA4 (#衣服吊牌和A4纸一样大了) went viral on Weibo, as shoppers shared photos of women’s garments arriving with oversized, rigid hangtags that overwhelmed the clothing itself. What might seem like a minor design detail has become a flashpoint in the online retail experience. Many merchants admit these oversized hangtags aren’t simply aesthetic choices but deliberate design tactics, especially for women’s garments and dresses — categories notorious for high return rates. Under China’s “seven-day, no-questions-asked” return policy, some consumers wear items briefly — for photos, events, or travel — before sending them back. The practice, known in the industry as “tag-wearing,” remains a persistent challenge for online retailers. To deter this, many brands have started enlarging tags and switching to rigid materials that make garments uncomfortable to wear without removing them — effectively discouraging short-term “use and return” behavior by making the clothes unwearable until purchased. Anti-fraud or anti-female? Tag design sparks debate The trend has even spawned a cottage industry. According to Sichuan Daily, in the three months leading up to last year’s Singles’ Day, one hangtag manufacturer in Sichuan received thousands of merchant inquiries, with orders for oversized tags reaching 900,000 units. Some brands have gone further, installing combination locks on down jackets’ zippers — revealing the code only after the customer confirms receipt. Industry data underscores the scale of the problem. The China Live E-Commerce Industry Report shows that women’s clothing return rates typically hover between 50% and 60%, while men’s average around 30% to 40%. In the impulse-driven world of livestream commerce, the gap is even wider — with some women’s stores seeing return rates soar past 80%. While oversized hangtags may protect merchants, they also reshape the customer experience. These tags act as visible symbols of mistrust, implying that female shoppers are more likely to exploit return policies — a practice some critics have called “humiliating design.” In contrast, men’s clothing is often treated more leniently. Hangtags are kept minimal or even detached entirely. In some cases, brands go a step further, turning them into gifts — mousepads, ashtrays, socks, or underwear — and allowing buyers to choose their preferred option before purchase. Rules of thumb are failing From material disparities to the hangtag debate, these seemingly isolated issues reveal a consistent pattern: gender is embedded not only in marketing but also in product design, pricing structures, and risk management. On the sales side, women are perceived as higher-risk consumers — resulting in defensive tactics like oversized tags — while men are offered convenience and even perks. Though these practices play out at different stages of the retail journey, they share a common logic: that women’s value, and trustworthiness, is somehow lower by default. On the product side, women are assumed to prioritize style and trends; on the sales side, they’re treated as more likely to “cause trouble.” These tactics may differ in form, but they’re rooted in the same logic: a consistent undervaluing of women’s trust, expectations, and consumer power. Why gender fairness is the new brand metric This disparity isn’t necessarily rooted in malice — it reflects long-standing “rules of thumb” that the industry has relied on for decades. But in a market increasingly driven by women, and amplified by social media, that logic is rapidly becoming outdated — and risks backfiring. As consumers grow more attuned to product quality, pricing logic, and fairness, any design that assumes women will accept less becomes more than a cost-saving tactic — it signals a brand’s values. Controversies rooted in gender bias are volatile and reputationally damaging. Once seen as dismissive or discriminatory, a brand risks losing not just one sale but long-term trust. In today’s luxury market — especially one shaped by social media-savvy, values-driven buyers — the greatest threat is no longer returns or refunds. It’s the quiet erosion of emotional loyalty. Ultimately, how a brand treats fairness speaks louder than any campaign. The price of bias isn’t monetary — it’s whether consumers believe you’re worth paying for. The Jing Take reports on a piece of the leading news and presents our editorial team’s analysis of the key implications for the luxury industry. In the recurring column, we analyze everything from product drops and mergers to heated debate sprouting on Chinese social media.

Sectors

Insights

Company

Same price, worse quality: China’s women aren’t having it