Jennifer's profilethoughts born of boredomPhotosBlogListsMore Tools Help
    February 22

    Cheap versus Chic

    Looking through my little sister's teen magazines has become kind of a ritual (the funniest part about this ritual is that I stopped reading those magazines when I was 16 or 17 because I thought they were bogus ... not that my feelings have changed any.  Now I read them to make fun of the idiotic stories that are in them, for example "My Father was Addicted to Porn" which sounds a lot better than it actually was believe you me!  I also like to compare and contrast the magazines [you would be surprised to learn that there appears to be some leaks from one mag to the next, or so it would seem when more than one magazine comes out with a story about self mutilation in the same month] but I digress). 

    As anyone who has ever seen a teenage girl's magazine, or even just the cover of one in the supermarket, can attest to fashion is the BIG thing.  They all deal with what is hot to wear, who is wearing what and how you to can look like the stars!  These magazines also tend to realize that the average teenage female does not have the money to dress like the superstar celebrities that are trying to emulate, so they often include sections called  "Cheap and Chic" or something of the like.  I have noticed a trend since the time I was reading these magazines for enjoyment (approximately 7-8 years ago) and today (and by today I am referring to approximately the past 3 years since that is about the time period in which my sister has been getting these magazines).  This trend is that the Cheap and Chic section no longer is all that cheap (and maybe it is just that I have taste but the clothing is not all that chic either).  $50.00 US for a top, $80.00 - $120.00 US for jeans, a $40.00 US purse, not to mention $80.00 US shoes, undergarments and accessories our cheap and chic outfit costs in the range of $300.00 US to $500.00 US dollars.  And that is only one outfit.  These sections generally pair 7 or 8 pieces of clothing and show how a girl can mix and match these pieces for a weeks worth of different looks.  Where are these girls getting that kind of money and when was it decided that $50.00 for a top was a good deal?  I cannot disagree that for a well made top that will last a lifetime $50.00 is an amazing deal but these girls are not looking for clothing that will last them forever because quite frankly next month there is going to be a whole new style they will have to emulate.  To make matters worse these "bargains" are from stores such as Old Navy, Target ... etc.  Now as a Canadian I have never been inside Target so I may be off base here (and maybe the Old Navy stores in the US are different) but the quality of clothing in stores such as those mentioned above in Canada tends to be on the low side.  After washing clothing from Old Navy once or twice the clothing usually has lost it's shape, not to mention that the fabric leaves a lot to be desired in the way it feels against the skin.  What happened to the days when a bargain was a top for $10.00, pants for under $50.00 and shoes, purses and accessories that wouldn't break the bank?

    Another thing that boggles my mind about these magazines is their gift sections.  Falling along the same lines as the cheap and chic section this part of the magazine showcases gift ideas for all those people a girl may have to buy gifts for.  One of the most interesting things I find here is the idea that $50.00 is generally the lowest priced decent gift they showcase (sure they have the under $10.00 section but come on we are talking a bejeweled pen here).  Since when are we expected to spend $50.00 on our friend's birthday gift?  I personally do not have $50.00 to spend on every friend I have to buy a gift for (geez, sometimes I can't spare the $20.00 for a gift, then $20.00 for gas to drive that friend around, not to mention the $20.00 for the birthday dinner we attend and then another $20.00 for a night out [which if we are lucky will cover at least club cover and a drink for the birthday person]).  My big question is: why then are these magazines making it seem that anything less than a $50.00 gift is cheap (and not in the bargain way but in the “man my friend is CHEAP” kind of way)?

    Ah well maybe it is just me.

    Comments (3)

    Please wait...
    Sorry, the comment you entered is too long. Please shorten it.
    You didn't enter anything. Please try again.
    Sorry, we can't add your comment right now. Please try again later.
    To add a comment, you need permission from your parent. Ask for permission
    Your parent has turned off comments.
    Sorry, we can't delete your comment right now. Please try again later.
    You've exceeded the maximum number of comments that can be left in one day. Please try again in 24 hours.
    Your account has had the ability to leave comments disabled because our systems indicate that you may be spamming other users. If you believe that your account has been disabled in error please contact Windows Live support.
    Complete the security check below to finish leaving your comment.
    The characters you type in the security check must match the characters in the picture or audio.

    To add a comment, sign in with your Windows Live ID (if you use Hotmail, Messenger, or Xbox LIVE, you have a Windows Live ID). Sign in


    Don't have a Windows Live ID? Sign up

    Picture of Anonymous
    JustMissUnderstanding wrote:
    It's all about the way society is heading these days... It's the expectation generation as far as I'm concerned! They expect to have everything right away! What took our parents 40 years to aquire they want right away, designer clothes, new cars, houses... the best of the best! Not to mention you are addressing the teenage issue, and believe me it's starts way before that! Need I mention baby gap? I'm sorry, but I'm not spending $40 on an outfit (if you're lucky you may get the whole outfit...) that the child will wear for all of 2 months... again that's if you're lucky! $200 for a snowsuit? It's the entitlement era... and by golly they want to get theirs! The sad thing is what happens to those people who don't have the means to buy the trendiest things hot off the rack! Let's see how far we can widen the rift between the classes... the working class can maybe swing it to a point just to keep up appearances... of course they work their asses off until the day they die and still have a pile of debt to show for it!!!
    Sorry, went on a rant there... anyway you can guess what I think about the whole situation... and no!! $50 dollars is not a deal for a teenager! As for the whole thong comment by Kristoff_the_Last_Ronin, well as a women Jennifer you would know this, but doesn't he realize that it comes down to: Less Fabric, More Money! Go price some nice lingerie or even thongs for that matter! There oughtta be a law...

    ~Cheers~
    Jan. 4
    Picture of Anonymous
    Kristoff_The_Last_Ronin wrote:
    With how little women wear in the summer one would imagine that they are saving alot of money on clothes. I mean the thong uses far less cloth and really is just a suggestion towards the use of undergarments. So in order to save money girls should barely wear anything in the summer in an effort to reduce your costs, okay so I have a hidden motive in advocating such a measure but most importantly it would save money, and imagine the money saved if you went about town naked :) LOL
    Dec. 21
    Picture of Anonymous
    PerniciousShar_Bear wrote:
    I don't think this is necessarily just you... I must be one heckuva cheeepskate then... When I buy clothes, I tend to spend $12 on a shirt and $20 on a pair of pants... Of course, I do hit the rummage sales in the summer, so that helps alot with the $$ issue. I rarely ever spend $50 on my car, which seems to get used alot more than my clothes.... (I don't have a 2nd car to "change into").

    I tend to think that it's all just a bunch of propaganda trying to get us to buy more stuff we don't need. When we get more stuff we don't need, then we'll have to get a bigger house, bigger house = more taxed. And on and on and on....
    Mar. 11

    Trackbacks

    The trackback URL for this entry is:
    http://saintlyhellion.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!BED2319A10D150B9!390.trak
    Weblogs that reference this entry
    • None