Weird Mailing Lists
Every so often, I get junk mail that makes me wonder what bizarre mailing list I’ve managed to land myself on, and, more importantly, how. I think the strangest was probably the Republican fundraising campaign that kept assuring me that they knew how important Republican values are to me (ha!), but today’s entry was also a fair contender: an offer for a free issue of a shopping-related magazine, complete with marketing questionnaire.
Now, I’ll admit that I have my moments of acquisitiveness and avarice. Don’t turn me loose in a bookstore without a chaperone, especially an old-fashioned secondhand bookshop with really good scifi from the 1960s and 1970s. Otherwise, I will totter out an hour or two later with as many books as I can possibly carry, my fingers straining to support the massive pile o’ books, my navigation entirely sonar-based because I won’t be able to see over the books I’m hugging to my chest. I have been known to go insane in well-stocked vegan-friendly grocery stores and buy boxes of cupcake sprinkles for which I have no earthly use. My wardrobe is probably fairly sizeable, as well, though leaning heavily toward black — though, to be fair, probably half of it is old, bordering on ancient, but still worn. (One of my favorite shirts, actually, is a slightly modified version of an old top from circa 1988.) I do have a fair few DVDs, as well. Anyway, the point is that I’m aware I have shopping-related foibles and much room for improvement, but if today’s survey is anything to go by (buy?), I’m one step away from being Barbara Good.
First item: “Estimate the number of times per month you shop for fashion items?” Firstly, that isn’t properly a question, so why the fack does it have a question mark? Secondly, the lowest choice is one to two times a month. Assuming they count socks, I think I average probably six times a year. (The highest option was over 10 times a month. Are they perhaps just counting browsing or window shopping as “shopping for fashion items”? That’s the only way I could see their numbers being at all believable.)
Later questions deal with how many items you currently own — handbags (lowest number considered possible: three to six!) and shoes (lowest: six to ten!). I’ll grant that I own two spiky backpacks and an elderly purse from Kambriel.com — so old, in fact, that it dates from back when they were called Atrocities; I also have a messenger bag with my employer’s logo, which I got for free at the Quebec meeting but have actually used, as well as a largish collection of canvas shopping bags for groceries (also mostly freebies from conventions, albeit from my parents’ trips instead of mine).
But who could possibly own “more than 15″ purses, or “more than 25 pairs” of shoes? And more importantly, why? Even if you’ve been collecting for years, how could you possibly find 25 or more shoes that are affordable, cute, wearable, and at least reasonably comfortable, without having at least some duplicates? (Most women’s shoes I’ve seen fail dramatically in at least one of those categories.) How could you possibly have the space to keep all of those organized? I am admittedly somewhat, um, haphazard in my housekeeping, but I have difficulty keeping my six pairs of wearable shoes organized. (Okay, I do have a seventh pair, but there’s a hole in the sole of each shoe and I haven’t gotten them repaired yet. I can’t throw them out, because I’ve had them forever [circa 16 years] and lurrrve their velvet and their hourglass heels. So, okay, I have more shoes than I probably need and am thus hypocritical. Bite me.)
I think the question that startled me the most, though, was about what factors influence your choice of where to shop. The options range from “I go wherever my friends take me” (really!) to “additional amenities (beauty salon, etc.).” There is no mention of supporting independent businesses and artists, or ethical or even vaguely patriotic concerns (e.g., buying U.S.-made clothes certified to be sweatshop-free). There isn’t even an option to specify “other qualities” beyond style, comfort, value, and “match[ing] the new outfit I just bought” when considering shoe purchases. It’s not that I necessarily expect the survey writers to anticipate that some people actively look for, say, animal-free shoes that are, we hope, produced by people paid a fair, livable wage under reasonable working conditions; it’s just frustrating that they failed to include even the weasel option of “other.”
It’s not that I’m perfect; I have bought things on impulse, and probably bought things that were produced under less than perfect working conditions. I screw up sometimes. The important point, though, is that these are real concerns, albeit imperfectly applied, and it’s somewhat startling to find that they’re not even mentioned in passing in a consumption survey.
(Caveat: I’ve got a bit of a cold, so please chalk up any egregious typos or omissions to the fact that my sinuses seem to be occupying a slightly different time-space continuum than the rest of my physical being, and my eyes are all itchy and dry and keep refusing to focus properly.)
