women's vs. men's departments

[Rÿcher]

Just got back from Target. I was looking for some shoes for me.

the pink shelves represents the women's shoes. The red, the children's shoes and the blue, the men's shoes.

I went to the nearby fitting room desk where there was an associate who I asked if there was a men's shoes section and she just said there was just the one shoes section.

Maybe this might sound small-minded or ignorant of me or whatever but maybe the reason women think they're paid less is because they spend so much on shoes and come home with next to nothing where as guys have two or three pairs of shoes. One to work in, another to yard work in and another to and chillax in.

See that Geico commercial?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itDejkU20Ig
If "Scott K." is saving up to $330 on his car insurance and the lady wants to spend that on a pair of shoes, you'd think she'd be able to afford car insurance. Guys, you ever spend More than $50 on a pair of shoes?

If Obama is smart, reeeeeaaaaaalllly smart, he'll tax shoes to bolster the economy!

 

[Spot's Meow]

What a lovely stereotype. I'm a woman and I only own three pairs of shoes, haven't bought a new pair in over a year. I guess that makes me "manly" then.

 

[Rÿcher]

but the graphic. You can't argue with the graphic. It's gospel.

 

[Jono]

The only time I spend less then $50 on footwear is when I buy new thongs. Otherwise its all $100+. I can't get shoes in stores like Target, Big W, Kmart since they don't keep my size (US 14-15).

 

[Goliath]

Guys, you ever spend More than $50 on a pair of shoes?

All the time. Cheap shoes hurt my feet, knees, hips, and back. In fact, the older I get, the more I spend.

 

[RoJoHen]

The only time I spend less then $50 on footwear is when I buy new thongs.

I had to think about that one for a minute before I remembered the alternate definition of "thong."


And no, I never spend more than $50 on shoes.

I rarely spend more than $30 on shoes, and that's only because I have to buy slip-resistant shoes for work.

My last pair of shoes were $11 tennis shoes from Walmart.

 

[Holdfast]

My current shoe count is 32 pairs, though 2 pairs of those are flip-flops and one pair are sneakers. And that's after selling a couple of pairs!

I'm not commenting on the price tags.

All I know is that I still need more shoes!

 

[Goliath]

^Yes--but I think even you would admit that you're unusual, in this respect.

In my experience, men get their biggest break, not in the cost of the clothes they buy, but in the length of time they can wear these clothes.

If a man treats his clothes with care, he can wear them for years before he has to worry about looking seriously out of style.

But as we all know, the fashion industry does its best to persuade women to buy whole new wardrobes every year.

 

[Hermiod]

It's been about 15 years or so since I was last able to buy a pair of shoes in a shop so I wouldn't know how they're laid out.

Whenever I do shop for clothes (not shoes) in the tiny, cramped cupboard most places call a "Men's Department" though, I think they take one look at me, think "here comes a miserable single man" and send a female assistant to come and flirt with me.

It doesn't work! Stop doing it! (Well, it doesn't work except for that pretty Irish girl in Gap that time...)

 

[Holdfast]

^Yes--but I think even you would admit that you're unusual, in this respect.

I'm showing the world the way forward.

If a man treats his clothes with care, he can wear them for years before he has to worry about looking seriously out of style.

Women could do it too, and look consistently stylish. Many do. The idea that most women go out and buy a whole new wardrobe every season is false. Most buy a handful of new but not too weird pieces per season (and maybe one more outre item) and fit those into their existing wardrobe.

Men aren't immune from fashion either though - if you buy a suit now, it WILL look noticeably different to a suit bought 10 or 20 or 30 years ago. Men's ready-to-wear fashions do change, and sometimes in really big ways. Think of the ultra-wide lapels of the 70s... or some of the ultra-thin lapels of the past couple of years. Those will look pretty odd in a few years time in the way the 70s lapels do, though many men buying them now don't realise it.

The only way to get a consistently similar look is to go to a very traditional store (like, say, Brooks Brothers, and even then only their most conservative lines), and sacrifice styling for consistency... or go bespoke and try to get the best of both worlds.

Even something like jeans aren't immune to this evolution. I noticed in the jeans thread on the board recently people were talking about the 501 cut as if it was immutable. Well, even something iconic like that has evolved over the years (though the most recent update is a bit of a throwback to the 1947 version).

Whenever I do shop for clothes (not shoes) in the tiny, cramped cupboard most places call a "Men's Department" though, I think they take one look at me, think "here comes a miserable single man" and send a female assistant to come and flirt with me.

And this is a complaint, why?

 

[Laren]

Maybe this might sound small-minded or ignorant of me or whatever but maybe the reason women think they're paid less is because they spend so much on shoes and come home with next to nothing where as guys have two or three pairs of shoes. One to work in, another to yard work in and another to and chillax in.

Or women think this because they are being paid less for the same work and have to be substantially better than any competing guys to be even considered for the same position.

And yes, currently I am thinking about buying another shoe rack since I am seriously lacking in storing space for my shoes. And I don't even own any really fancy ones.


Right now I am in love with the fall 2008 Ann Demeulemeester triple lace up boots. Too bad they cost about two grand. Why can't I be filthy rich?

 

[Surefire]

I had a boss that spent nearly $700 for a pair of shoes. Some people just like to collect shoes.

Not my cup of tea, but to each their own.

 

[Holdfast]

Right now I am in love with the fall 2008 Ann Demeulemeester triple lace up boots. Too bad they cost about two grand. Why can't I be filthy rich?

I know the boots you mean. They are BRUTAL.

I can see the appeal, but woah, they make a statement!

Some people just like to collect shoes.

I know (online know) a guy with hundreds of pairs of seriously high-end shoes. Most he hasn't worn yet. And he's still buying them.

I'm happy to say that nearly all my shoes are in regular rotation. There are a few seasonal ones though, and some more that are worn a bit more rarely. But most are worn regularly. I just like having options to mix & match with what I'm wearing. I don't think I've repeated the exact same outfit this year. A handful of very close repeats, I'm sure, but no exact dupes I don't think.

 

[Trekker4747]

I'd say your first problem is buying shoes at Target.



A store or other retail outlet is going to stock their shelves based on sales. If men's shoes aren't hot sellers for them it's a waste of precious retail space to fill it with product that isn't going to sell. So if thi paticular location sells more women's shoes than they do men's then, yeah, they're going to have more of them.

I'd also argue that it's likely that "on average" men only need two or three pairs of shoes. Tennis/everyday shoes, black and brown dress shoes and maybe as far as four to need work shoes. Women need shoes to practically go with every outfit, in a variety of styles and colors and shoes for every conceivable situation.

Besides, women's shoes are prettier to look at.

 

[blablover5]

Hm do I dare to tell the OP that I actually got my wedding shoes at Target for a whole $12?

Yeah I think I own a whole 3 pair at most and I get them to last for a few years. Mostly out of will power because I despise shoe shopping in all forms.

I also know I am not an exception to the rule either. So please just take your 1950's stereotypes elsewhere.

 

[Laren]

Right now I am in love with the fall 2008 Ann Demeulemeester triple lace up boots. Too bad they cost about two grand. Why can't I be filthy rich?

I know the boots you mean. They are BRUTAL.

I can see the appeal, but woah, they make a statement!

Then of course there are those Margiela open toe ankle boots... With those crazy covered heels? *drools*

 

[Rÿcher]

1950's stereotypes...

perpetuated by the mass market, not by me, sister!

 

[Holdfast]

Besides, women's shoes are prettier to look at.

Even I'm forced to agree with this statement.

 

[blablover5]

1950's stereotypes...

perpetuated by the mass market, not by me, sister!

Then explain to me why there are all male shoe stores?

I can think of two in my town.

I'm also not your sister. Last I checked I didn't wear a habit or go around smacking people with rulers, though I am a bit tempted now.

 

[RoJoHen]

1950's stereotypes...

perpetuated by the mass market, not by me, sister!

Then explain to me why there are all male shoe stores?

I can think of two in my town.

I have never once seen an all-male shoe store.