March is designated as Women’s History Month in the USA, the UK, and Australia, a month set aside to commemorate the contributions of women in history and society. In honor of that, I elected to take up the study of gendered fountain pens produced by Pelikan over the last century, specifically their fountain pens and pen modifications made especially for women. Gendered products, just as the name implies, are those items or services marketed specifically towards a particular sex. Goods such as these have been around for a long time, and many have a controversial history owing to the promotion of unhealthy and often false gender stereotypes. There are a multitude of products which fall into this category, many of which are quite laughable. The distinction between male and female targeted products frequently consists of nothing more than a pink color and some slightly altered packaging with the word “Lady” prominently displayed. Marketing departments pursue these gendered products in an effort to enhance their appeal, thereby broadening the pool of potential consumers. This pursuit frequently results in the distorted portrayal of women as weaker, more delicate, and in need of special care while at the same time promoting toxic masculinity. Many cultures still frown upon men enjoying anything of a pink persuasion because of the femininity associated with it. In addition to various shades of pink and pastel, items targeted towards women tend to be smaller in size to better fit the stereotype of the more diminutive female. Many of the historical boundaries surrounding gender roles in society are being tested and debated today, a debate that is well beyond the scope of this blog. What is on brand for this blog is just how Pelikan has fed into and perpetuated some of these societal constructs with their writing implements over their 94 years in the industry. Pelikan’s gendered writing instruments can be found as far back as the original model 100 from the 1930s but there have been more recent examples as well. Indeed, it’s hard to believe that such products have persisted well into the 21st century. Pelikan’s catalogs from the 1930s through the 1950s list products that could be altered for use by a woman, labeled as “Damenhalter” or “Für die Dame” but, make no mistake, this is not a Pelikan specific phenomenon. Other pen companies, both past and present, have done the same including Sheaffer, Soennecken, Parker, and Montblanc. Believe it or not, even the ubiquitous Bic Cristal has not been spared. Read on to learn about just a few select examples of products from Pelikan’s back catalog that have been geared towards women.

Whether intentional or not, the sheer act of advertising a specific model as a “lady’s pen” is inherently patronizing and suggests that all others are, by default, built for men since there is no similar carve out for a “man’s pen” in advertising.

Before we dive into the pens themselves, I think that it is important to set the stage. This is not an article about misogyny within the fountain pen community. I have been a part of the broader pen community for the past 11 years and in that time, have found the majority of people with whom I have had occasion to interact to be very welcoming and nonjudgmental. I have been able to share my passion for fine writing instruments with both men and women with equal bravado. I think that most of us in the community look at a pen and judge it as we might a piece of art or a fine wine, critiquing it based on its merits and not any preposterous marketing or packaging that might accompany it. That fact notwithstanding, the gender-bias inherent within the pen industry’s marketing has clearly favored men, seemingly from the get-go. That is not surprising since concepts like gender sensitivity and political correctness have only been in the broader social lexicon for the past 50 or 60 years. Rather than a unisex approach, pens from many manufacturers tend to conform to a masculine aesthetic characterized by large, weighty models in dark colors and manly shapes. When the female consumer is targeted, those models enjoy smaller, lighter, more curvaceous bodies in glittering pinks and pastels which frequently employ a cartridge/converter filling mechanism. Whether intentional or not, the sheer act of advertising a specific model as a “lady’s pen” is inherently patronizing and suggests that all others are, by default, built for men since there is no similar carve out for a “man’s pen” in advertising. This tiered hierarchy suggests a certain authenticity and superiority for those products targeting the male consumer. Assigning either masculine or feminine features to a pen is exclusionary and discounts the fact that both sexes enjoy quality fine writing instruments based on their utility and design, not some sexist marketing campaign. Since I began collecting and admiring the Pelikan brand of writing instruments, I have found them to be one of the more gender neutral brands out there. Taking the Souverän by way of example, a Black/Green striped Pelikan could at one time be had in one of five sizes without suffering any technical inferiority when moving from one model to the next. This wide variety means that a pen exists for any hand regardless of your personal preferences and biases, an inclusiveness that many other manufacturers lack. That is not to say that Pelikan has never run afoul of these gender-bias traps, they surely have, and sometimes quite spectacularly.

A fountain pen should just be a fountain pen without the added baggage tacked on by half-baked marketing.

Let us travel backwards through time, taking a closer look at some of the writing instruments Pelikan has manufactured with women in mind. Perhaps the most recent and blatant example of a gendered product from Pelikan has been the M600 Pink released in 2015. This now hard to find fountain pen is quite desirable and commands a sizable premium on the secondary market but its initial release was somewhat scandalous. Pelikan’s launch of the M600 Pink could have been ripped straight out of the pages of the mid-20th century. Manufacturers then saw a financial opportunity and heavily leaned into a period of ravenous post-war female consumerism which lasted from the late 1940s through the early 1970s, a time characterized by the rapid proliferation of products marketed towards women. A second wave of feminism took hold in the 1970s and a conscious rejection of such practices began. That is why so many of these gendered items seem absurd today. Not surprisingly then, once the first photos of the M600 Pink hit the internet, people threw out unfavorable references to Barbie, Hello Kitty, and Victoria’s Secret to name a few. When it first debuted, it was sold under the heading “Ladies’ Collection” in some markets, being described as both “feminine and very striking.” Advertising was rife with pink ribbons and the official packaging even recalled images of a laced woman’s corset. This is perhaps the clearest example of unnecessary gendering by Pelikan, taking a standard product, the M600, which is suitable for use by both men and women and targeting its promotion towards women based on no intrinsic virtue other than the fact that it was pink in color. Don’t get me wrong. Pelikan has a back catalog littered with pink pens which is all well and fine but few of those have been so blatantly marketed towards women as this one. Pelikan did seem to tone down their marketing rhetoric a bit following the M600 Pink’s official launch and reference to the “Ladies’ Collection” can nary be found today. Regardless of the original umbrage that the product may have generated, the pen clearly stood upon its own merits, appealing to a broad swath of users, making it the desired item that it is today.

The M600 Pink (2015) was initially advertised as part of the “Ladies’ Collection” and was depicted entwined with pink ribbons. Click on a photo to view the gallery

The packaging for the M600 Pink recalls the lacing on a corset which was once fashionable amongst women. You can see it here, next to a corset belt

While the M600 Pink may be the most recent example, similar instances are easy enough to find scattered throughout Pelikan’s back catalogs. Traveling several decades further into the past brings us to the P452 Lady Pen, an export only model made for just one year in 1973 which makes it somewhat hard to find these days. This model can literally be considered the little sister to the P460, the fourth version of the historic Pelikano school pen. With similar aesthetics, the P452 was smaller than the Pelikano and featured a modified ink feed. The Lady Pen measured 4.80 inches capped with a diameter of 0.39 inches whereas the Pelikano was much larger at 5.20 inches when capped with a diameter of 0.43 inches. The P452 was available in standard Black as well as bright colors such as Turquoise, Yellow, and Purple intended to appeal to a more female user base. The cartridge filling mechanism lacked the technical sophistication of a piston filler which also fit perceptions of the less technically inclined female. The smaller size of the model likewise played into the gender stereotype of women being better suited to smaller products that fit their tinier frame. This is something that has deep historical roots with Pelikan as we’ll see below. Perhaps Pelikan learned a lesson here as the tiny M300 which launched twenty five years later maintained a healthy gender neutrality and was never marketed specifically towards women despite its small stature. We may only guess at how the P452 Lady Pen was received but its brief time in production would suggest that sales were less than robust.

The family of P452 Lady Pens made only in 1973

The pen on top is the Blue P460 Pelikano (1973-78), the fourth version of the famous school pen to be produced. Below it is a black P452 Lady Pen (1973). Notice the similar styling in a much smaller package

The Black P452 Lady Pen (1973). Click on a photo to view the gallery

The tiny Souverän M300 shown next to an automobile key fob for scale. Despite being a smaller model, it was never marketed directly towards women

Not all products were designed specifically with females in mind. Some were modified versions of a standard item, retrofitted in an effort to broaden product appeal. Go back another 40 years and you’ll find that Pelikan’s gendering of writing products began with the model 100 in the early 1930s. Most of us by now are well acquainted with the standard appearance of the 100. In its most recognizable form, a conical cap head sits atop a cap with a drop shaped clip which is married to a barrel housing a best in class piston filling mechanism. What is much less commonly observed is a little known modification that would accompany the “Damenhalter,” those model 100s specifically modified for use by a woman. Starting in 1930, the standard drop clip fitted to the model 100 could be removed and, in its place, a rolled gold ring inserted. This ring preserved the overall dimensions of the cap which allowed an altered appearance without any impact upon functionality. This “Lady’s Ring” was specifically employed on a woman’s pen as it was presumed to be better suited for the intended transport of the pen within a handbag where a clip would be more of a hinderance. A small change to be sure, not unlike what we see with countless other products today. According to Schreibgeräte, the first mention of this ring comes in 1930 when a Polish price list introduced the possibility of replacing the standard drop clip with a rolled gold ring. Up until 1934, a vendor who ordered a consignment of six fountain pens would receive one rolled gold ring which could be swapped at the time of purchase. According to Dominic Rothemel, a position for a lady’s ring could still be found in a spare parts list dated as late as 1949. Based on how infrequently these are found on the secondary market, I can only surmise that the models outfitted with gold rings made up only a small minority of the total number of pens sold. It wouldn’t surprise me if in fact women preferred the model 100 with a clip just as much and didn’t bother with the ring.

The photo on the left shows a standard Green Marbled Pelikan model 100 (1942-44) next to a clip-less Green Marbled model 100 (1938-40). Note the rolled gold ring in place of the drop clip which preserved the cap’s overall dimensions. The photo on the right shows a model 100 (1942-44) with a jeweler’s custom sterling silver overlay next to another model 100 (1933-37) with similar overlay and clip-less cap. The custom pen on the far right may have once been given as a gift. Click on a photo to view the gallery

Page 46 of Pelikan’s price list 50A from 1932 shows a parts list that includes a ring for a woman’s model 100 (underlined in red), referred to as a Damenhalter. Price list available at Pelikan Collectibles hosted by Dominic Rothemel

Pelikan’s gendered writing implements weren’t restricted to just their fountain pen lines. Mechanical pencils also received similar treatment. The miniature AUCH-Pelikan 210 without eyelet and the 475 were both listed in catalogs as being appropriate for a man’s vest pocket but could also be considered a woman’s model. What is notable about these pencils is that they were significantly smaller than the model 200 or 450 mechanical pencils which have a similar appearance but in a more standard, full sized package. These pencils serve as good examples of smaller versions of a product being targeted towards women for no virtue other than appeasing the gender stereotype of the dainty female hand. This would not have stood out as odd in its day as the perception fit in well with the gender roles that prevailed when these pencils were being produced (1930s – 1950s), a concept which has not aged well.

The photo on the left shows Black and Green Marbled 200 AUCH-Pelikans (1937-51) alongside the more diminutive model 210 without eyelet in the same finishes (1938-49). On the right, the tiny model 210s are shown next to the equally small Black/Green 475 (1951-57). Tiny pencils were useful in a man’s vest pocket but were also billed as suitable for a woman’s use. Click on a photo to view the gallery

The pen at the top of the photo is the first version of the Black/Green 450 (1955-59). Below it is the much smaller Black/Green 475 (1951-57), similarly styled

Page 161 of Pelikan’s price list number 70 dated 1938 (scanned from my personal library) indicates that the small model 210 was billed as “vest pocket sized and for the lady” (see red underlining)

The five models discussed here are not meant to be an all-inclusive list but merely an introduction as to how Pelikan has responded to a gendered market at various times over the last several decades. Regardless of one’s views on such products, at least those from the 1930s, 40s, and 50s could be better understood in the context of their time, much more so than those of today thanks to the evolving views of gender and the role of the female in society. A fountain pen should just be a fountain pen without the added baggage tacked on by half-baked marketing. Men, women, and those who identify as something else just want a great pen, something that is outwardly attractive, functionally superior, and able to be easily used by all. This article is not a commentary on those who enjoy these writing instruments on a daily basis whom I feel tend to view these things through an ungendered, neutral lens. What it is is a critique on the absurdity of gender specific designs and marketing. You may argue whether or not gender-biased products still have a role in the 21st century but I for one am grateful that Pelikan has only seldomly turned to such gimmicks.

References

• Dittmer, Jürgen & Lehmann, Martin.  “Pelikan Schreibgeräte 1929 – 1997.” Art Forum beim Baumhaus Verlag. Pages 30 and 87. 1998.
• Dittmer, Jürgen & Lehmann, Martin.  “Pelikan Schreibgeräte 1929 – 2004.” A.H.F. Dunkmann GmbH & Co. KG. Pages 39-40 and 87.  2004.
• Doolan, Kate. “A Minefield of Pink and Blue.” The Public Ear. June 11, 2019. Last accessed 2/24/23.
• Hix, Lisa. “Girlie Pens, Again? Why Ordinary Things Go Pink.” Collectors Weekly. September 7, 2012. Last accessed 3/5/23.
• Kaygan, Harun et al. “A pen that ‘looks like a CEO in a business suit’: gendering the fountain pen.” Journal Of Gender Studies. December 4, 2017. Last accessed 2/12/23.
• Pigott, Susan. “The Pelikan M600 Pink Special Edition Fountain Pen: A Review.” The Pen Addict. October 29, 2015. Last accessed 2/28/23.
• Silbermann, Michael. “Pelikan Limited & Special Editions: Fine Writing Instruments 1993-2020.” 2021.
• Wagner, Günther. “Pelikan Price List No 50A.” Page 46. 1932.
• Wagner, Günther. “Pelikan Price List No 70.” Page 161. 1938.

A special thanks to Susan Pigott and Dominic Rothemel for their input and feedback on my early drafts.