American Consumerism? Lets call it what it is....

[WasatchMan]

With the holidays around the corner, I am sure you will be hearing some condemnations of "American Consumerism". 

 

While I am rather agnostic on the actual magnitude of how bad consumerism is, I do know one thing, It is NOT "American" consumerism it is American women consumerism that is the issue, if there even is one.

 

 

Women account for 85% of all consumer purchases including everything from autos to health care:*
   91% of New Homes
   66% PCs
   92% Vacations
   80% Healthcare
   65% New Cars
   89% Bank Accounts
   93% Food
   93 % OTC Pharmaceuticals
   58% of Total Online Spending
(Source: Greenfield Online for Arnold’s Women’s Insight Team)

 

I am not trying to pick on women, however if we want to be fair, men are responsible for only a small part of the potential consumerism problem.  The above numbers would somewhat normalize due to shared expenses, however shared expenses are typically necessities and not considered consumerism. Normalization would also go both ways leaving women still holding (or wearing) a significant majority of the consumerism.  Furthermore, if women "control the purse strings" (household spending) then they are ultimately responsible for any consumerism issues.  Maybe we would still have the issue if men controlled spending, but they don't, and therefore this one is not on men.

 

Whenever men are primarily responsible for social and/or political issues, they are blamed for it (how many times have we been told that men are responsible for war?).  However, when there is an social issue in which women are primarily responsible for, it all of a sudden becomes an gender neutral problem and pinned on society in general.  Well I think it is time for men to step away from this issue, and whenever we hear people prattling about "American Consumerism", we politely call it what it is: American Women Consumerism.

[PGP]

Men can get by on very little. At one point for around 8 months in 2006, I was working 14 hr days and a regular saturday labouring and I had my food bill down to  40 euro/50 dollars a week. I was saving around 700 euro/950 dollars a week. I was saving for college.

 

I have thought about the post-war period and the explosion in cheap crap people buy. Oil consumption and the rise of feminism are fairly proportional ie. easy calories equals "equality" as they pursue it. It's thermodynamics 1001 mixed in with free-time and idle-minds enabled by cheap energy. I saw a video Sandman did on christmas in Canada during a snow-storm and blackout. 

Looked for it. here it is:

 

[J. D. Stembal]

Imagine how much money we would save if we stopped getting married and throwing expensive weddings.

 

You will notice that many of the purchases unapproved by women have a serious social stigma attached to it. Computers, soldering irons, and networking equipment belong in man caves.

 

I used to run LAN parties with a friend years before everyone had broadband internet, and no women ever showed up. Men know that women don't approve of these activities because it's not money spent on them, and men know that they can use it as an excuse to get away from the ball and chain if they choose.

[Dylan Lawrence Moore]

Imagine how much money we would save if we stopped getting married and throwing expensive weddings.

 

I often think about that, as well.

 

Is there any other point to a big wedding, that is to say, anything above what it takes to agree to engage in a contract combined with a ritual for our subconscious to accept it, than for the bride to show off her new-found power and resource supply?

[shirgall]

I often think about that, as well.

 

Is there any other point to a big wedding, that is to say, anything above what it takes to agree to engage in a contract combined with a ritual for our subconscious to accept it, than for the bride to show off her new-found power and resource supply?

 

Yes, a public demonstration of commitment is intended to make that commitment stronger as you will feel shame to all of those witnesses if the relationship fails.

[Dylan Lawrence Moore]

Yes, a public demonstration of commitment is intended to make that commitment stronger as you will feel shame to all of those witnesses if the relationship fails.

 

Hmm... got me thinking about it. Would it be accurate to say that the bigger/more expensive the wedding, the more shame that can be inflicted in the event of failure?

 

One of the things I'm considering: I worked as an apprentice/attendant at a Shinto shrine for half a year and I got to experience several Japanese/Shinto weddings. In fact, I may have attended more weddings at a shrine then in a church. The Shinto weddings, especially when both sides of the family are Japanese, are extremely low key. Usually just the parents show up, maybe the grandparents as well. Other than the chanting of the priest, everything stays very quiet and by the end the parties just quietly shuffle out the door and that's it.

 

This is a culture where a divorce is considered an extreme dishonor, and I've met at least one Japanese woman in an unhappy relationship who wouldn't even think about divorcing because of the negative social implications (she would rather just bitch about the relationship ). Maybe it's just the culture difference (where shame infliction is SOP), but at least in Japan, a big show isn't required to inflict shame on a failed relationship.

[shirgall]

Hmm... got me thinking about it. Would it be accurate to say that the bigger/more expensive the wedding, the more shame that can be inflicted in the event of failure?

 

As you mention, in our culture I think it works out that way. Look at the difference in weddings for most people that get married a second or third time. It gets more low-key. The ostentatiousness is still there for some (that does seem to be a bragging rights thing) but the guest list is usually shorter.