This could end up being a shit yarn, but you’re lucky – all five of you who read the editorial – that there’s one at all given it was written through post-Hyde fog. Anyway, here’s why 2-in-1 shampoo and conditioner isn’t an ick.
Last year, for Anna’s article ‘How To Know If You’ve Got the Ick’, her “preliminary research” was asking everyone at the weekly writer’s meeting what our icks were. It was like the floodgates opened. Chaos ensued. She was inundated with content – we didn’t get much else done that meeting. It goes without saying that not all of them could make the cut, but a small (huge) part of me was bothered that the one I shouted the loudest wasn’t among them: “2-in-1 shampoo and conditioner!”
Among my circle of gal pals, 2-in-1 has always been one of those immediate icks – up there with chasing the ball during beer pong or a frameless bed. When I came home from my first sleepover with a boyfriend in third-year, the first thing I said to my flatmates was, “He uses 2-in-1,” to a chorus of groans. To us, it was the classic example of how clueless men can be.
But I’ve been thinking: What is it about 2-in-1 that we’re so put off by? “Grow up is why,” was the reply from my board of advisers (girls’ group chat). “Pure laziness.” They couldn’t give me much more beyond that, though. Looking for anything to do other than work (but this counts, right?), I continued my consultation. Hugh threw a curveball from across the office, saying he didn’t reckon guys use 2-in-1 – they only use shampoo: “Who uses conditioner?” Um.
I’d need to go further afield. OUSA Prez Keegan brought algebra into the equation (don’t ask me how), saying that while she could get behind 2-in-1, 3-in-1 was where she drew the line: “Conditioner and body wash just don’t go together.” Across the hall, Lily at Radio One was a staunch 2-in-1 hater. Meanwhile, Iris says she can tell if a guy uses 2-in-1 and has bought every one of her exes conditioner. The standards are high.
My wandering continued to New World Central. Looking for the product with the highest ratio of product type to bottle – thought I’d hit the god-tier with a 5-in-1 before it turned out to be “benefits” not product – I realised that probably 99% of the aisle was marketed towards women. Please don’t get the impression that I think this is a new discovery, but it really sunk in as I squinted at the hundreds of products for women marketed toward every square inch of our skin. Meanwhile, the handful of men’s products (that frankly looked like car wash) boasted their efficiency in terms of how many types of product they’d fit into the bottle.
I’m aware I’m talking in very binary terms about men and women’s products – soap is soap, regardless of the bits you’re washing with it. You’d think, anyway. But if you’re standing in the beauty aisle of a supermarket, it’s hard to deny how aggressively marketing targets women compared to men.
So what I'm wondering is, if women hadn't been brought up in a world where the norm is a seven-step skincare regimen, a different conditioner depending on the occasion, and mothers who gift us night cream for our 21st birthdays, wouldn't we also indulge in the convenience of 2-in-1? 3-in-1 is diabolical, though.