Our article examines how products are valued differently depending on if the product has a male or female brand representation and if the consumer is male or female. This research extends previous research that categorizes brands as "gendered" (masculine vs. feminine) using stereotypical gender representations ("soft" vs. "hard") by showing that male and female brand names are evaluated with a bias that favors male brands. Across five studies (online, field), using a mixed-method approach (implicit association test [IAT], experiments, sales data), we examine genderneutral product categories (champagne, chips, tea, board games) that have male or female brand representations. We find that men devalue brands with female names, whereas women made no such distinctions, which we explain is due to gender bias created by the "precarious manhood" principle. This bias by men can be overcome using agentic brand descriptions. This research has implications for brand management, marketing communications, and public policy.Léa recently took over the family business from her father, Eric, and would like to refresh the brand name and logo. She wonders if she should keep the brand as is, Eric Humbert, or rebrand as Maison Humbert or, ideally, Léa Humbert. However, would consumers keep buying her products if her brand was clearly identified as feminine?