Average western woman spends $25,000 on shoes number people who cannot afford one pair 3 billion

[SunnySong]

The average Western woman will spend almost as much on shoes (IN HER LIFETIME on edit sorry if that wasn't clear) as a woman in the third world will make in her lifetime (avg wage $2 a day with 40 years of work)

Almost half the world — over three billion people — live on less than $2.50 a day.


http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-an...

The survey of 3,000 women, by 'Gocompare.com', has shown that the average woman has about 19 pairs of shoes -- three pairs with heels, six pairs of flip-flops, sandals, ballet pumps or wedges, three pairs of boots and four pairs of "foxy style" shoes for nights out.

They also have two pairs of work shoes and another two or so "random" purchases.

Four in 10 women say they judge another female by the shoes she has on. More than half find it easy to justify a purchase to themselves but a quarter rarely tell their partner about new ones as "he wouldn't understand".


http://www.financialexpress.com/news/womens-shoespend16-000-pounds/639466/



In the jargon it is known as 'the feminization of poverty'. It has influenced women's lives more than any other factor over the last decade. In a study carried out over 20 years up to 1990, 'the number of rural women in poverty has increased by 50 per cent, reaching an awesome 565 million, while that of men has grown by 30 per cent to about 400 million.'2

http://www.newint.org/issue270/270keynote.html

[aquart]

1. Average? That means one woman spends a million, the rest two hundred.

Average. Please can we not be suckered by that crap?

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. $200 on shoes over the course of a lifetime

Come on. The $25,000 figure over the course of 60 years of teen-adult shoe buying is only a little bit outrageous for even most middle class women in the States and Europe.

[aquart]

91. A lifetime? I thought this was the annual rate.

[alcibiades_mystery]

92. Read the article

They're talking over a lifetime. Of course $25,000 a YEAR for shoes is ridiculous. But over 60 or 70 years of shoe buying? Doesn't sound that crazy to me.

[snooper2]

107. So you are saying the average woman spends $357.14 every year

for 70 years on shoes :eyes:

[alcibiades_mystery]

115. Average?

Yes. It's not an unreasonable number in the least bit.

[hayu_lol]

112. The study originator must have looked closely at two average...

western women to complete this study:

Condi Rice(every time something bad happened in the country...Condi was buying shoes...the very expensive kind--sort of an American Imelda)

Michelle Obama($500 sneakers)

You just know there are other average western women out there...right?

[blondeatlast]

35. Exactly. Thanks for the sanity. nt

[we can do it]

39. $200? that's not too many pairs of decent shoes

[canetoad]

2. Correction...

Average western woman spends $25,000 on cunningly crafted instruments of torture, many of which emulate the barbaric effects of Chinese footbinding.

:shrug:

[Swamp Rat]

3. One trip to Brazil or Guatemala would make anyone doubt this figure is true

I've seen many many shoeless women in Central and South America.

[Taitertots]

4. The average women has 19 shoes that each cost over $1,000?

Your link is dead.
http://www.financialexpress.com/news/womens-shoespend16

[SunnySong]

6. fixed... thanks. nt

[pnwmom]

5. I doubt that that survey used a representative sample of American women.

An average of 19 in wearable condition? No way.

[NoPasaran]

7. Good thing the average Western woman buys all those shoes

Or the footware industry would be totally screwed.

[SunnySong]

8. The sad thing is the numbers of those shoes made by woman in poverty

let alone outright slavery.

[Mimosa]

9. I don't buy into that

I know i don't have that kind of lifestyle.

[OHdem10]

10. To say average, is stretching it. Do women with very good incomes

buy expensive shoes??? I know so many people who have never
spent %500 on a pair of shooes much less thousands. I have
been aquainted with only few who could make such purchases.

The number of pairs can be deceiving.

Why compare with world. Look in our own country. We have
50,000,000 unemployed and one in five reqire some assistance
to buy groceries. Otherwise they are doing without.

[Cleita]

11. Is this per year? Because I doubt if I have spent that

much in my lifetime either.

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. Over the course of a lifetime

Say 60-70 years of teenage-adult shoe buying.

It doesn't strike me as a crazy number. My wife bought $300 boots last winter. That's just $50 under a yearly average to spend $25,000 over 70 years, and she surely bought at least one other pair this year. So if she buys some summer sandals at $45 (which is reasonable), she'd be well into the $400+ range for this year alone. Maybe some years she only spends $60 on shoes, and other years more. Over 60 or 70 years, that adds up to thousands.

[XemaSab]

26. That's what I'm saying

and I am by no means a shoe person. I just spend serious money when I do buy shoes. :P

[Cleita]

31. I don't pay the asking price on shoes. I wait until

they get to the surplus stores or Ross's or Marshall's. Usually you can get those $300 boots for less than $100. Also, lack of closet space all my life has kept my clothing and shoe holdings to a minimum. :-)

[pipi_k]

12. Damn. I'm always below "average" on everything...

I'm 57.

I don't think I've spent even $ 3,000 on shoes so far.


In my closet right now are two pairs of "good" leather shoes (flats), a pair of sneakers, a pair of flat skimmers, maybe two pairs of Crocs. What's on my feet now: a pair of orthopedic clogs I wear every day.



PS... I've actually spent more money on lipstick/lip gloss, eye shadow, and shampoo.

[Generic Other]

13. Not me!!

Imelda Marcos maybe!

[stray cat]

14. Not any average woman I ever knew

looks like a stupid poll - any real science in any of it?

[Regret My New Name]

54. 5 to 10 shoes a year at $50 each?

That's not unusual for many females I've known... I know of at least one dude who is obsessed with shoes though, but he's rich. :/

[SoCalDem]

89. 5 shoes? what do you do with the extra shoe?

:rofl:

[Regret My New Name]

90. Hey not me....

[shockra]

15. Ugh.

I don't think I've bought 19 pairs of shoes in the last 19 years.

[frazzled]

16. At first I found that number a little hard to believe (plus how to get your shoes to the needy)

So I took their number of 14 (the age at which they claim a girl buys her first pair without mom), and then figured a woman will continue to buy shoes until age 85, giving 71 years of shoe-buying. Dividing the $25,000 number by 71 gives an average of $352 a year. That's still probably a pretty high number, given that some Western women will buy their shoes at Pay-Less and some at Saks. Averages are deceiving.

I might spend almost that per year right now, since I have had to move to more expensive "comfort" shoes because of serious foot problems. I probably buy two pairs of shoes on average per year. And every five years or so a new pair of boots.

But I thought back to what an "expensive" pair of shoes cost when I was younger, and I came up with the price of $40. That same pair today would be $150. So the amount you spend over a lifetime differs dramatically depending on what age you are. Women who bought their first pair of shoes in 1964 (when I was 14) will have spent less over a lifetime than women who bought their first pair of shoes in 1994.

In other words, this article is pretty stupid. The main thing is (and I do this): donate your shoes to people who don't have them. Try, for example, "Soles for Souls" -- which sends shoes to people in poverty around the world, and has locations in 28 states:

http://www.soles4souls.org/

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. I saw this post after I wrote my response above

But these are precisely the calculations I was thinking of. Some years you may spend more (20's and 30's, or years you buy splurge on fancy boots, etc.), but the number as a whole does not seem really out of the range of what I'd expect for middle class women in the US, Britain, and Europe, and certainly, the upper middle class and the rich spend much much more (one pair might run you $500-$1500, depending). I'm surprised that everyone's treating this number as if it's ridiculous. It seems completely in line with what I'd expect if I thought about it.

[Fla_Democrat]

17. Is Imelda Marcos still around?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,961002,00.html

:shrug:

[alcibiades_mystery]

18. Capitalism is a great success!

And a wonderful way to organize society!

:sarcasm:

[MajorChode]

28. Absofuckinglutely!

You won't find any of those 3 billion living in communist China, Cuba, North Korea, Vietnam, or Laos.

:sarcasm:

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. What's funny is that you think thoseplaces

are *not* capitalist. I guess North Korea would be the limit case, but it's not really communist either. I mean, geez, haven't we heard the triumphalist rhetoric from the capitalist types for years that China is actually capitalist now, and Vietnam to boot. Haven't we heard how communism was defeated, and the end of history has arrived in global capitalist triumphalism? You either won the Cold War or you didn't. It's not so easy to say that you won but all the bad stuff is somebody else's fault. Capitalism is a global catastrophe, whatever the awful and catastrophic feudal state of North Korea happens to do.

The truth is that communism as it was formulated under the State was a failure in practice. It never came close to delivering on its promises. It is also the truth that capitalism is a similar global failure. It can never deliver on its promises, because it is structurally a species of theft from the workers, and always has been, and always will be, and there's no amount of "regulation" that can change that. It is of the essence of the capitalist social formation to exploit labor power for profit.

[MajorChode]

74. Here's the really funny part

Those places I mentioned are still considered socialist states regardless of what you think. It's just that in some areas capitalist reforms have been allowed, and in those areas the difference is like night and day. Areas that never had electricity and running water now do, and the standard of living has risen by leaps and bounds. This is all because of capitalism, not in spite of it.

Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried, and the usual result is people eventually starve, not just go without shoes. The really funny part is you want to completely ignore that inconvenient truth and instead measure capitalism against some fictional utopian socialist society that has never existed ever and probably never will. If you think about it, it's not really that much different than the Ron Paul looneytarians that want to measure our mixed economy against some fictional laissez-faire economy that has never existed ever and probably never will. As long as you can invent your own version of reality, it's pretty hard for anything else to measure up.

There's actually quite a few areas where mixed economies work quite well and it has more to do with societies that value quality of life over quantity of possessions.

[EOTE]

111. Do you really not know the difference between Socialism and Communism?

Because that certainly seems to be the case by your post. "Socialism has failed everywhere it has been tried"? Umm, no. Not at all, Socialism exists in many places in Europe and elsewhere and generally the more Socialist countries in Europe are doing far, far better than we are.

Mixed economies can work quite well. But it's becoming very clear that the predominant form of Capitalism isn't working at all. It's been a horrific failure.

[MajorChode]

117. Yes, but you seem to have absolutely no idea from your post

Communism is the natural progression of socialism, at least as far as Marx envisioned it. The countries I mentioned are no more communist than the US is a democracy. They are, however, listed as socialist states by their own constitution:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_socialist_countries#Current

Socialism exists nowhere in Europe. The countries you may think are socialist because they may have a political party with the word "socialist" in the name are actually mixed economies, just as the US is a mixed economy. They may have enacted many social reforms the US hasn't (which is a good thing) and they may have nationalized some industries the US hasn't(which is usually a good thing) for the sake of welfare capitalism (for instance, Norway nationalized the oil industry). However, they still have mixed economies where the majority of industries are privately held.

Welfare capitalism /= Socialism
Social reform /= Socialism
Welfare state /= Socialism
Social justice /= Socialism
Social liberalism /= Socialism

Certainly there are those on the right (and some on the left) who believe all of those things = socialism, I just choose not to go down that road of pure unadulterated ignorance.

[HockeyMom]

19. I live in the flip flop state

where you can buy them for $2 a pair at Walmart. Yuck, yuck, yuck.

[Maru Kitteh]

22. Mother of pearl!

Uh - no.

I would form a very low lying outlier in that statistic.

[XemaSab]

23. Am I the only one who doesn't think this sounds totally crazy?

If a woman buys shoes for 50 years, then that's $500 a year, and most of my shoes cost between 90 and 200 bucks.

I usually buy about 2 pairs a year, but I don't work in a setting where I have to wear dressy shoes, so that would obviously inflate the shoe-consumption total. I also don't live in a part of the country where different shoes for winter and summer are that essential. I mean, hell, 2 pairs of summer shoes and 2 pairs of winter shoes a year could EASILY come to $500.

Like, seriously, my steel-toes alone would be half of that number. :shrug:

[alcibiades_mystery]

25. I said the same in at least three posts here

It sounds actually correct to me. People have a hard time extrapolating little purchases over a long period (which is how credit card companies get rich).

[XemaSab]

27. I responded before I read your response

than I responded to your response while you were responding to mine. :toast:

[XemaSab]

29. I'm also wondering how much men typically spend

Men's shoes are expensive, and I would expect most of the men I know to get a pair of hiking boots, a pair of sneakers, a couple pairs of regular office shoes, and a pair of dressy shoes at least once every couple years. :shrug:

[SunnySong]

32. I've got six right now... two were $200 or so (One dress shoes on pair of boots

the others $40 to $60 range... but I have had the boots for about five years.

My significant other likes shoes and seems incapable of throwing any away. She definitely skews the average up despite rarely buying a pair over $100.

[pipi_k]

37. But some of us really don't spend that much on shoes...

Or, I should say, don't buy that many shoes that often.

I got a pair of orthopedic sneakers last year, and my orthopedic clogs this year.


They'll last me at least three or four years.

My other "good" shoes, I bought three years ago and they are still almost new.

So I basically buy a pair of shoes once every five years or so. But then, I don't really go anywhere.

My winter boots I've had for at least four years.


Shoes just aren't real important to me other than protecting my feet from rocks, dirt, and cold.

[wickerwoman]

45. Me too.

I buy a new pair of shoes about every three years. Usually for about $80-100. So that's about $1,500 over the course of 50 years.

That's a lot, but it's not $25,000.

And I really get annoyed with the "80% of the third world lives on $1 a day crowd". Having lived in the third world for a quite a while, it's obvious that you can't make those kinds of comparisons. If your home is free (inherited or provided by the government), you don't have student loans (because education if provided free by the government), you don't need a car because you can take the bus or subway anywhere you want, you don't have medical bills because health care is provided by aid groups or the government, your family has a little patch of land to grow food or graze animals on and you can buy rice, vegetables and a little meat or fish for $.80 a day, then what is so horrible and shocking about living on $1 a day?

Yes there is hunger and poverty and desperation in the world. It just isn't revealed by intellectually lazy statistics like "...% of people live on x $US a day." All that shows is the speaker's ignorance of real living conditions in other countries.

The average Chinese woman probably spends more than $100 on shoes in her lifetime... because shoes cost $2 in China. What does that really tell us about anything then?

[Kalyke]

71. Your shoes cost $90 to $200?

WOW! I don't think I've ever spent over $30 on shoes. My husband once bought me $50 boots and I polish them and sew them and have them heeled so we don't have to spend that again in years.

And I DO work in a setting where I have to wear dressy shoes. I just buy basic black/brown/bronze and it fits any outfit.

Jeez. $500 a year?! :wow:

[smirkymonkey]

119. Same here, if not more. And it's not because I wear dressy

designer shoes. I work in a corporate casual environment, but because I live in a large walkable city and walk everywhere, I have really worn my feet out and can no longer wear cheap shoes. If I do, I am in so much pain, I have to go barefoot after an hour.

I need to buy shoes that are built to support the foot and body and they just tend to be more expensive. I don't buy a lot of them and they are usually black, but I also wear them out quickly. However, I do get them repaired if they are still in relatively good shape instead of buying a new pair.

I do wish I could buy pretty shoes every once in a while (the orthopaedic shoes are getting much more stylish these days though), but I would rather have one or two comfortable pairs that will last a while than 10 pairs of pretty, but poorly made, cheap shoes.

[SemperEadem]

94. I agree

If I had my way, I would wear a t shirt, jeans and some sneakers to work. My company feels very differently and they say I have to dress up for work (without providing a clothing allowance for us to acquire the regalia satisfactory to the boss' vision of how he wants his employees to look at work). As I don't deal with customers or represent the company to the public in my job, there is no need for me to dress up, but the company doesn't agree with that, so here we are.

Until that edict changes, I'm going to continue to buy as many shoes as I see fit.

[CBR]

30. The point of this article is the number of people who cannot afford

shoes not the $25,000 figure. I do not find it hard to believe and it highlights the horrible inequities of our global society.

[XemaSab]

34. True dat

but the average western woman is hardly Marie Antoinette, ya know?

[SemperEadem]

95. thank you!

I don't get why they're trying to hang this around the necks of all western women when only a handful of them may do this.

[CBR]

96. I just think it is awareness that the fact that if you have 1 pair of shoes

is more than many in the world. Even if that pair of shoes cost $5.

[Number23]

85. Thank you. It is amazing the privileges/hardships given to a person based on something as simple

as their place of birth. This shouldn't be hard to understand even though it is almost impossible to accept.

[MerryBlooms]

33. I've been a shoe whore most of my life

I've scaled way back in the last 5 years. I've gone from buying 5-10 pair a year, down to 3 pair in the last 5 years ... I have shoes still wrapped and new in their boxes from years ago and I'm now pulling them out. It's rather sickening to admit the addiction, but I'M ALL BETTER NOW. :-P

[Demeter]

36. Few Women Spend over $300 a year on shoes, even in their 20's.

That is ridiculous.

[SunnySong]

40. I can think of quite a few woman who have spent that on a pair of boots... nt

[Catherina]

41. I know women who spend many thousands a year. Christian Louboutin pumps are about $800 each

Same with Tods and other "got to have" brands.

$25,000 over their lifetime doesn't suprise me.

For every woman who just owns a few pairs of sturdy shoes, there's a closet out there with 100 pairs of Louboutins in it.

[Hannah Bell]

52. nah.

[Catherina]

66. Sad isn't it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RM_DON9L5No


Tail Lights is all you'll see
Watch this Benz exit
That driveway.

I'm throwing on my Louboutins (eh hey eh)
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins

Watch me walk it out,
Walk it out, walk it out.
Walk this right up
out the house.
Walk it out watch me walk it out
walk it out walk this right up out the house

I'm throwin on my Louboutins (out the house)
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins
I'm throwing on my Louboutins




$965.00 at Saks Fifth Ave



$1,395.00 at Saks Fifth Ave



Shameful

[Hannah Bell]

77. where do you live? i've never known anyone who would spend $700 on a pair of shoes.

i think this must be a narrow slice of the us population. new york & la.

[Catherina]

100. Northern CA

I'm in San Francisco but it's all over.

Corporate environment and daddy's little girls. I get laughed at at work for wearing the same good shoes over and over again. People actually give me gift cards to expensive shoe stores. It defies their undertstanding that I'm not interested though I admit, I did break down and pay $120 for a pair of $700 high heel Tods pumps that were on sale. They made my feet feel like I was walking on air.

Shoes and purses are big out here unless you're part of the *other* crowd which is where I think most of DU falls. I don't condone it. In fact it upsets me to no end but I see it all around. Keeping up with fashion as comfortably as you can adds up. One year the heels are slim and long, the next they're slim and short, then they're thick and long... You get the drift and the entire collection *needs* to be updated, replaced. Managers at In and Out Burger make $100,000/year out here, imagine what professional women and daddy's little girls have at their disposal to spend on themselves.

[CreekDog]

87. Yes, but which is more comfortable?

:D

No, I could not resist.

[Catherina]

101. It can be a toss-up.

Seriously. Unless you shell out big bucks for the designers who score both fashion and comfort, it can be a toss-up. I don't understand paying money for a pair of heels, or narrow shoes that will pinch your feet all day and give you corns. :shrug:

[Kalyke]

72. Who?

I'm sorry - I couldn't give two shits about name-brand shoes. Fuck... they're SHOES. Who cares who makes them as long as they fit well and last.

Seriously, I have no idea who Chistian Louboutin or Tods is/are.

[SemperEadem]

97. More like $600 on average

let's remember what we're talking about with shoes like these: his focus for his clientele aren't average women with average means. They were never envisioned to sell in Walmart, Sears or JCPenney. They are for celebrities and those who have that kind of expendable cash, so I don't really think it's fair to take this designer to task because he's never tried to hide who his market is: that women of average means cannot afford his shoes is another issue altogether. Nine West, Bandolino do a good job for those with average means.

[Scout]

125. who are these stupid rich bitches that pay that kind of money for shoes?

i can't stand "conspicuous consumers" whether it's shoes or cars or wine...

fucking idiots.

[Toucano]

50. Cite your source.

Your claim is ridiculous.

You're saying that few Western women spend $30 for a pair of shoes 10 times a year?

I will say that every American woman I know (maybe 200 women) spends at least DOUBLE that, at least once a month.

I think the OP is much more accurate than you are.

[iris27]

57. $60? A month? JUST on shoes?

Every American woman you know? Now THAT is a ridiculous claim. You must travel in much wealthier circles than I.

[Toucano]

59. Submitted for your consideration:

http://forum.purseblog.com/the-glass-slipper/some-interesting-shoe-facts-from-allure-magazine-134795.html

From 2007:

********************************************
$277: Amount the typical American woman spends on shoes per year.
(ok, I want to meet those "typical women"... only $277. PER YEAR?!?! Even when I was FLAT BROKE I think I spent more than that per YEAR)

***************************
Seriously? Only $277?? That's kind of odd, considering it also says the average woman owns 27 pairs of shoes...

But I definitely spend more than that on shoes per year, and I don't even buy many "expensive" shoes.

****************
haha, if the average American woman has 27 pairs of shoes and she spent $277. on them that makes them like $10.50 per pair. Does Payless even SELL shoes for $10.50?


(PS: I know, I know.. I'm not an idiot, I am sure a good number of those 27 pairs were carried over year to year. )

************************

Originally Posted by susieserb
LOL I thought you were going to say the average woman spends 270 dollars for a pair of shoes!!

Me too! $270 for a pair of shoes sounds reasonable to me!

************************

HA! i'd LOVE to meet this typical woman too, and i'm sure my hubby wished he'd have married her too!

27 pairs of shoes?! i have over 127 at last count

************************

I don't travel in wealthy circles. Maybe you know more people who work in a uniform that includes shoes than I do. ;)

[iris27]

68. Nope. Bank tellers, retail sales, HR, teachers,

meteorologists...no uniformed positions. Oh wait, there is one nurse, but she actually spends more on shoes than the rest of us because she's running around constantly at work and needs new supportive sneakers every 3 months.


If the average posted in the OP is accurate, I believe the mode would be significantly less; the average is pushed up by outliers whose closets are overflowing with $500 sandals. For every comment you copy over from another site, there's another right here on DU saying they buy roughly one pair of shoes a year at $100 or less. Why assume those women are more prevalent?

[Toucano]

60. Second response: samples.

http://www.ladyfootlocker.com/catalog/productdetail/supercat--home/model--136514~30500134/cm--57831P/

That a pair of ASICS® Gel-Kayano 16 - Women's from Lady Footlocker: $139.99

http://www.amazon.com/s/qid=1277857938/ref=sr_st?page=1&rh=n:672123011,n:!672124011,n:679337011,n:679425011&sort=-price

That's Amazon's Women's shoe selection sorted by price.

Note the discount prices that are listed.

Here's another site where women discuss their shoe purchases:

http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-how-much-will-you-spend-on-shoes-in-a-lifetime/

Say each pair of shoes costs $52, and estimate that between sandals for summer, heels for work, boots for winter, and occasional special events such as weddings, you’ll accumulate about seven new pairs a year. Multiple that times 67 years of shoe buying, and there goes those 240 hundred dollar bills. Obviously, this number is dependent on your penchant for cheap versus expensive shoes—and if you’re a Louboutin lover, that number’s bound to be thousands of dollars higher. Given my current shoe rack is overflowing with about 30 pairs of heels, flats, wedges, and sandals (not to mention my boot closet), I think it’s safe to say I’ll hit the estimated number, much to the dismay of my boyfriend who just doesn’t get my addiction.

[Hannah Bell]

80. the kind of women who are interested in discussing their shoe purchases are a biased sample.

[Toucano]

83. That's absolutely true.

But the discussions cited might enlighten some regarding a segment of the population they have no personal experience with.

It's totally a subset and not cited for statistical purposes. Just FYI.

[unapatriciated]

93. sure as hell not my circle.

I have had the same dress shoes for five years (3 pairs). Wear them once or twice a year. They are basic colors and styles, none them cost more than $40.00 a pair.
My everyday shoes are sneakers and I replace them as needed about twice a year. I buy them on sale and never pay more than 35-50 bucks. (I try to buy
american but it is getting harder and harder to find)
I might buy a pair of sandals once every two years. This does not even come close to sixty dollars a month, and when my kids were younger and still home I spent even less.
Working women with families to support do not have an extra $60 a month to spend on shoes.

[Hannah Bell]

79. i've bought one pair of shoes this year, a pair of white keds knock-offs, for under $15

at target.

i normally buy shoes at thrift stores, & i buy about 1 pair a year.

i don't know anyone who buys 10 pairs of shoes a year.

more like 3.

[eShirl]

38. "The survey of 3,000 women, by 'Gocompare.com'"

hmmm...

http://www.gocompare.com/about/

History

* Gocompare.com launched in November 2006. It was the first comparison site to focus on displaying product features rather than just listing prices.

Management and ownership

* Hayley Parsons is the founder and Chief Executive of Gocompare.com.
* Gocompare.com is an entirely independent business that is controlled and managed by its staff.

How we make money

* We don't charge our customers for using our service and we do not add fees or commissions to the prices you compare; instead we make money by charging our partners a small fee once a sale has been made.

-snip-

[1monster]

43. I must be far far from average. I pay between five and fifteen dollars per

pair of shoes. The most I can remember ever paying for shoes was a pair of walking shoes that went for around $30.00. And that was a rare thing for me.

[Toucano]

53. Where do you shop? The Salvation Army?

Yes.

Regardless, you are far, far, far from average.

$5 shoes? Please!!! For us, even a pair of flip-flops is at least $5.

[Toucano]

63. Too late to edit, but addendum required.

Don't wish to suggest that there's something wrong with shopping at the Salvation Army or other second hand shop.

I do it all the time. I just know I'm not typical.

[1monster]

69. Close out sales mostly. There are fifteen dollar shoes to be had... Although, I'm finding it

harder and harder to find nice ones. I guess I'm going to have to increase the amount I spend on shoes.

And while I buy most of my clothing at a thrift shop (I now pay $2 to $3 for a shirt that I would have paid $40 to $60 for a few years ago). I'm dressing quite well thank you. Also finding loads of fascinating things that I mostly don't buy, but it is fun looking.

I have only bought one pair of shoes at the thrift shop though. They were brand new and never worn, otherwise I would not have bought them. I draw the line at shoes and underwear. I buy those new.

[Toucano]

81. I know what you mean.

But the point is we're not typical.

Years of shopping at thrift stores and I am still considered one of the best dressers in my circle.

If they only knew they joy of finding a super quality garment for, like you say, $2 or $3.

I tell those who ask...once a coworker went to a shop I told him about and reported great success. He bragged about what he found. Then weeks later, he returned with a complaint.

"Did you know those clothes are USED?"

He was indignant.

I just chuckled to myself...d'uh! What did he think? Armani shirts are normally $85 to $120 dollars. How did he think they were selling them for so little?

Anyway...thanks for sharing, and continued good luck in the shops!

P.S. I'm okay with used shoes, but I do buy all the underwear new.

[lunatica]

44. Oh bullshit!

Maybe if they're Imelda Marcos or the gals from Sex and The City.

[ismnotwasm]

46. Well

While I personally find most 'fashionable' women's shoes ugly or uncomfortable or offensive or mildly dangerous or harmful and don't buy them, and I do understand the point of the article about mindless-or thoughtless- consumerism, women in poverty or the 'feminization of poverty' is not only not new, it's a much larger picture.


Women, Poverty & Economics
Women bear a disproportionate burden of the world’s poverty. Statistics indicate that women are more likely than men to be poor and at risk of hunger because of the systematic discrimination they face in education, health care, employment and control of assets. Poverty implications are widespread for women, leaving many without even basic rights such as access to clean drinking water, sanitation, medical care and decent employment. Being poor can also mean they have little protection from violence and have no role in decision making.

According to some estimates, women represent 70 percent of the world’s poor. They are often paid less than men for their work, with the average wage gap in 2008 being 17 percent. Women face persistent discrimination when they apply for credit for business or self-employment and are often concentrated in insecure, unsafe and low-wage work. Eight out of ten women workers are considered to be in vulnerable employment in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, with global economic changes taking a huge toll on their livelihoods.
http://www.unifem.org/gender_issues/women_poverty_economics/

Men tend to buy larger items--electronics and cars for instance, making what at first glance 'investment' type purchases. They also tend to buy porn and beer. Of course, some of those shoes remind me of porn-wear, kind of a economic vicious circle perhaps.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

47. The most expensive shoes I ever bought in my life were $90, and

I usually don't spend that much.

I tend to buy on sale or at PayLess. Why pay $125 for a pair of athletic shoes when you can get shoes from the same slave factory for $35 at PayLess?

[HipChick]

48. Shoes? Try handbags...

[Toucano]

49. K&R n/t

[Hannah Bell]

51. that's $357/year over 70 years. i doubt it.

[iris27]

55. $2,500 I could see. But there must be one hell of a lot of Sex-and-the-City Manolo-wearers

out there to pull the average up THAT high. I own one pair of all-brown sneakers, one pair of all-black sneakers, and one pair of black, heeled, dressy boots. The newest pair are the all-brown sneakers at two years old.

[distantearlywarning]

56. Guess I'm not the average woman.

I have fewer than 10 pairs in my closet, the most expensive of which cost (maybe) $50.

This line disturbs me more:

"Four in 10 women say they judge another female by the shoes she has on"

Seriously???? :eyes:

[Throd]

58. No they don't.

[customerserviceguy]

61. What makes this believable

is that women's shoes are mostly constructed for flashy looks rather than durability. Men wouldn't put up with shoes that last twice as long as the average woman's shoe.

It's not hard to spend a lot of money over a lifetime, if you have to keep buying them over and over. Of course, the shoe fashion industry loves to give their customers a reason to keep coming back for more overpriced junk. They know they're selling the experience of shoe shopping, rather than a product.

[Catherina]

102. +1 n/t

[MrSlayer]

62. Soon enough none of us will be able to afford any shoes at all.

If the Republicans and corporate Dems have their way, no one but the elite 1% will be able to buy shoes or food or housing.

[renate]

64. I think it's easy to judge people who don't choose to spend their money "correctly"

Full disclosure: I have a lot of shoes. Like, a lot. Almost all of them are from eBay, Ross, Goodwill, etc, but I have a lot of 'em.

On the other hand, I shop at a discount grocery store and we almost never eat out; when we do, it's a carry-out pizza. Both of our cars are more than 10 years old and we have no plans to replace them any time soon. We're pretty frugal in other ways, too. So with what we save on food and cars and other stuff, I indulge myself a little in cheap shoes and clothes and my husband indulges in things related to his hobbies.

I totally don't understand dropping big bucks on gourmet food and wine, for example, but I'm not going to call anybody selfish or greedy if that's how they choose to spend their money, as long as nobody else is hurt by their spending habits. Same with iPods, camping equipment, travel, etc. So I'd rather not be judged by anybody who spends their money in ways that I don't understand.

[eShirl]

65. uh guys, it was based on a survey of women using a price comparison website (as posted above)

so it is actually about the supposedly average woman who prices shoes on the internet

it was NOT a scientific survey of the typical western woman

[SunnySong]

110. Actually a very good point. The people involved would tend to be richer, more savvy

and certainly more fashion oriented than the general public as a whole.

[seabeyond]

67. betcha i dont spend as much as you. but then i never said i was average either, lol. nt

[Kalyke]

70. Why the hell would any woman (and I am one) spend that

much on shoes in her lifetime?

I can think of some reasons we need more shoes than men (our feet swell during pregnancy, periods and menopause - which are all pretty much something we can't do anything about unless we choose not to get pregnant and the prevention actually, you know, works), but, shit... I can't justify spending that much money on any one item other than a house or car.

[renate]

75. I think it's because we have more variety in what we can, or are supposed to, wear

For a man, heels vs. flats (formal vs. informal) isn't an issue. The black shoes he wears with Suit A will go with his more formal Suit B. We have skirts (long and short), pants (formal and casual), jeans (boots, heels, flats...), and the tone of whatever you wear on top has to match the tone of the shoes--we can't wear a sloppy t-shirt with high heels, but a man can wear anything from a sweater to a button-down shirt to a t-shirt with deck shoes.

Also, women's shoes can be VERY cheap, whereas anything fancier than tennis shoes for men are a serious investment. I have tons of $10-$15 shoes and, with a black t-shirt and jeans, it's like getting a whole new outfit with each pair.

Also, shoes are nonjudgmental. A cool pair of shoes will look nice whatever size or shape or height you are.

Also, they are fun. I love the variety in what we get to wear, from fancy to casual--there's so much more room for creativity. It's a hassle sometimes--it's easier for us to be either conspicuously underdressed or overdressed than it is for men, who have relatively basic uniforms for various occasions--but I wouldn't trade it for the monotony of polo shirts or t-shirts.

Also, if you wear heels, you need comfy shoes to wear the next day to compensate. I wear heels a lot, but I am a fool for big ugly comfort shoes.

My defense of shoes does make me sound terribly shallow, but I don't think it's any more shallow to enjoy nice shoes and nice clothes than it is to enjoy nice food or nice cars or nice music. Different things appeal to different people at different levels. Fancy food is irrelevant to me, but I love a perfect cashmere sweater at 80% off.

I should mention in my defense that, despite my "I love being a girl" attitude, I have never seen one single minute of "Sex and the City." :)

[Kalyke]

76. But VERY cheap shoes aren't comfortable or don't last long.

I'd rather buy a pair that lasts a few years.

And... I'm not sure where you live, but I can pull off Tees and heels if necessary. I can also pull off sandals with pants or skirts.

I have three pairs of interlocks: a high-heel sandal with black straps and a medium bronze heeled flop for summer... and my crocs. My FMBs, a pair of black pumps and a pair of brown pumps... and my crocs... for winter.

That's it.

I do have a pair of tennies I've had a million years for walking, though, but I'd still rather wear my crocs.

And the the biggest reason I love being a girl is that I can have multiple orgasms with the right stimuli - even at 40. Heh. :hi:

[lumberjack_jeff]

73. 70 posts and +1 rec?

I guess you're not supposed to criticize womens shoes.

[Hello_Kitty]

104. You are seriously complaining because this OP isn't getting rec'd?

:wow:

Even for you, that's just :wtf:

[lumberjack_jeff]

118. I just think its funny

Complaining? Not really.

"Too many shoes" is a sacred cow.

[Hello_Kitty]

126. Gosh, you must have missed all the coverage of Imelda Marcos.

Not to mention the cultural handwringing over Sex and the City.

Or this OP, while we're at it.

[smalll]

78. I blame "Sex And The City" --

I hate that franchise. I remember once reading some review of it's latest TV show and/or movie, where the review said something along the lines of "Watching this crap makes me want to run off and join the Taliban." I know where he was coming from.

[Toucano]

82. I've never seen it, and I don't care to see it.

It doesn't appeal to me.

But this goes back far longer than that.

Almost all the women I know are shoe whores* and always have been...more than 40 years.


*that doesn't mean they have sex with people for shoes - it's a colloquial expression that means they'd "do anything" for shoes. Don't take it literally.

[Codeine]

84. Completely flawed sample.

A web poll on a fucking price comparison site.

Statistics fail, facts fail, hysteria fail, and sanctimony fail.

[Hello_Kitty]

106. Oh now, don't go and interrupt a good moral panic with your "facts". eom

[FedUpWithIt All]

86. My personal hell will be a show store. I buy about two or three pairs of $15 shoes every two years o

This is not an exaggeration. I detest shoe shopping and basically will wear out my latest pair of flip flops and boots before i buy a new pair of each. I occasionally own one pair of dress shoes. I try to pick the most neutral pair possible. I am crap at deciding what pair of shoes goes with what.

I am stunned at the amount of money friends will pay for a pair of shoes or a purse (I don't use purses either :shrug: )

[SoCalDem]

88. How much do men spend on sports paraphernalia & garage-fuls of tools they never use?

:rofl:

[1776Forever]

98. Please - If I spend $50 a year I am doing good! This is really weird! n/t

[hlthe2b]

124. Exactly... I keep shoes until they wear out and maybe supplement

with one pair a year. Maybe two if I need some special use shoe (athletics, for snow, or whatever). No way I could average $350/year over 70 years.

Frankly, shoes are among the things I least like buying. Once I find a classic style that is quality, lasting, comfortable and fits, I usually buy more than one pair and wear them until they are worn out. I guess I was not destined to be fashionable... The frivolous, superficial, materialistic sex and the city gals, I am NOT.

[CBGLuthier]

99. Wonder where all those shoes get made?

The problem isn't with the women buying shoes. The problem is with the greedy companies that charge 100 to 300 dollars for shoes they paid some worker 2 dollars a day to make.

If all these women stopped buying shoes what would happen to all those jobs making shoes?

You know what,I would bet the average westerner in an affluent country spends more money on just about everything, food, water, perfume, gerbils, whatever, than people who make 2 dollars a day.

This seems like a pointless way of arranging facts that seems to blame women buying shoes for the economic ills of the world.

[Hello_Kitty]

103. What does the average western man spend on gadgets?

Oh wait, that's different. :eyes:

[joe black]

108. Glad I'm not average.

I'll fret and procrastinate till the cows come home before I'm forced to buy a tool to get the job done. BTW many are bought due to honey-dues. I.d live in a rotten, hollow log if I wasn't married.

[SunnySong]

122. $2,500 a year if you include home entertaiment....

and exclude transportation.

[madmom]

105. I have 8 pair of shoes in my closet. Been the same ones for the last 5 years, save for the

flip flops (old ones wore out) Heels (one pair each white, black, brown), 1 pair sneakers, 1 pair winter boots, afore mentioned flip flops, and 2 pair of dressier sandals ( one pair $40 I got for $8 at an end of the year clearance sale last year).Oops sorry make that 9 I forgot my leather slip ons that I wear when it's to cold for sandals. I've been wearing most of these shoes for at least 3 years, some more. I guess some one else can have my numbers for the "average".

[pitohui]

109. sure she does -- eyesroll

if something is stupid-ass on the face of it and does not have any relation whatsoever to consensus reality...it's OK to call bullshit...really

have you ever met any woman who spent that kind of money on shoes? no, i don't mean imelda marcos on CNN, i mean live in person?

huh, thought so...

i have 19 pairs of shoes, i don't doubt it, total cost probably around $200, i mean some shoes cost literally $2 (flipflops in my local walgreens, in fact, i was cussing myself because they had a sale and they were down to 99 cents but i already had too many cute flipflops)

now i am an EXCEPTIONALLY skilled shopper but even an idiot can find a better deal than paying over $1,000 per pair of shoes/boots in her closet...$25K my happy ass

as for the people who say, well, if she buys $500 worth of shoes a year...um, i have news...your feet don't grow for several decades between the time you're a teen-ager until i guess you have a stroke or something and now your feet are all puffy and changed...there's no need/reason to buy shoes every year, if you are a serious hiker/walker, then you break in the shoes and you stick with THOSE shoes to the bitter end, unless you enjoy the torture of breaking in new shoes...there are plenty of years where you don't buy any shoes at all and when you do, even if it's for serious sport, well, it's not blahniks, then is it?

[Tailormyst]

113. I spend maybe 50 a year on shoes

Maybe 75 if there was a really special occasion.

I'm a bargain shopper and very cheap :)

[Beacool]

114. This is so depressing.

I'm also embarrassed because I'm probably one of those women (although $25K seems a little high to me). I love shoes, I got dozens of pairs. I try to get them at a good price, but still.....

:blush:

[tallahasseedem]

116. I love shoes!

I buy a ton of them...heels, sandals, flats, etc.

The sanctimony in this thread is hilarious.

[a la izquierda]

120. the most expensive shoes i own...

are for cycling (and those were only $80, which is cheap in the cycling world).
i buy everything on clearance and don't give a crap about what's "in."

[jmowreader]

121. A serious athlete spends a LOT more than that

Really top-shelf running shoes, the kind you want if you're into long road races, Ironmans or other feats of strength, cost well over $100 per pair--and you'll destroy a pair every three months. (The sole cushioning beds down, and you'll hurt yourself if you keep running in them.)

So let's see...if you spend $150 a pair on shoes (there are shoes even more expensive than that), replace them four times a year and run for 50 years, that's $30,000--just on running shoes. Forget work shoes, dress shoes or anything else--just the shoes you are going to wear to go out running in the street are going to cost you thirty bills over a lifetime of running.

[hlthe2b]

123. not this woman, I can damned well guarantee it..

I rarely wear the type of shoes that are considered highly fashionable and the ones I have are pretty classic, so they tend not to look too dated year after year if you take care of them. Otherwise I buy quality classic and comfortable style shoes and keep them until they wear out. I know I may be the exception among women, but I'd like to think I am not.