yeah, one quick one, since when was it a crime for someone to spend money on clothing? No matter who it is buying it, man or woman, what relevance does it have in the mix?
Personally, at the moment, I make all the money in the home, if I want to buy myself something, which I rarely do, what crime is it to do so? Just because I have tits I'm gonna be condemned forever for buying myself a shirt now? WTF??? :roll:

Quote from fairdame

Just because I have tits I'm gonna be condemned forever for buying myself a shirt now?

Well... not if you get written permission from your hubby first.

Quote from little glutton

Well... not if you get written permission from your hubby first.

Ahhh yeah, there's a real manly suggestion little glutton, I'll keep that in mind for next time I go shopping for his food too, just to be sure I don't mess up that order too....or should i ask for permission from him to even leave the house, seeing as how women are just savages n all.....

Quote from fairdame

....or should i ask for permission from him to even leave the house

Why, of course! - but only after you ask him for permission to speak, first!

Anyway, since we're already joking about spousal permissions so much, I remembered something worth mentioning - as an interesting tidbit;

Quote from [url=http://www.mid-day.com/news/nation/2004/september/91395.htm

Mid Day[/url]]Bihari hubbies going tipsy every evening may have to spend three years in jail if they continue their drinking habit without the permission of their wives.

A new law is afoot making it mandatory for them to get “written recommendation” from their better halves to drink. This is a part of women’s empowerment campaign.

In its 78-page report just submitted to Chief Minister Rabri Devi, the Bihar Women’s Commission (BWC) has recommended that the special act on anti-alcoholism aims at liberating the women from mental torture of their men returning home late night and “creating scenes” after heavy drinks.

No 1, Anne Marg, the chief ministerÂ’s residence has officially described it as a revolutionary step.

The Home CommissionerÂ’s Office said the BWC has asked the Rabri government to send the draft of the proposed act to the Centre for its approval.

“Women must be empowered to save themselves from their drunk men who torture them bodily and mentally,” says the BWC report.

The BWC said that as wives and children happened to be the worst victims of male-alcoholism, legislation must be there to minimise problems caused by it. A three-year jail term would be an ideal threat perception for wine-zealots.

It must be around 2 years since I first posted this on the ifeminists boards (not this exact article, but I couldn't find any other, more detailed article about this right now), so I don't know if this law/act actually passed.

Oh, and Bihar is a state in the Federal Republic of India.

Quote from Anonymous

Men spent almost $53 billion on apparel

Spending on women's clothing rose 3 percent to $101 billion,


Men 53 Billion Dollars

Women 101 Billion Dollars


Any questions?

Mmmmm....I think this little tid bit should be examined in a wider context!

I don't have any figures but here is some food for thought...

That which men do not spend on clothes is more likely to be diverted into the coffers of other industries - in short cars, gadgets and booze! :roll:

I don't even want to think what my beloved has spent on his cars - but I can assure you it's a small fortune.

Gadgets? Well you know the old cliché about women buying something new and then saying '...What. This old thing? Had it had it for years....'
My husband does that with all his new technical acquisitions (which are myriad and frequent) and then knocks of about £50 off the true cost!!!! Now that's just damn cheeky!

He's also a bit precious about which bottles of wines he will and won't drink - here's a clue - not the cheap ones.

Personally - I wish he would spend some of that on clothes !

I think the same could be said of the clothing market - most clothes are massed produced in third or second world countries (like many technical components).

In terms of development of national and global economies the value judgement why something is bought or sold is less important that the fact that it is successful and is re-invested profitably to sustain and grow those economies.

My point (a light hearted one) was my husband spends lots of money on things he doesn't need - but wants (how many pda's and ipod variants does one man need within a very short space of time?) and this is how I see clothes (a personal perspective) - we (actually, not me) tend to buy more than we need simply because we want them rather than not.

BTW I don't begrudge my beloved his gadgets or his car or anything esle for that matter - it was simply an observation.

I see your point - but you're missing my orignial one!!

Even so -

I imagine that the clothing industry world wide re-invests it's profits in all sorts of ways, including technology - partly to improve production and partly because investing in technology is a good way to to invest for profit. I rather imagine that's to the benefit of the technology industry.

I'm sure the profits from the clothing industry are invested in all sorts of industries.

Think how many people the clothing industry employs? I don't know how it would compare with technology - it doesn't matter - it's a lot! Those people probably buy technology from wages via the clothing industry.

I could go on but I need to do some work!

Fortunately, thanks to the clothing industry, I am dressed, my modesty preserved and therefore shan't be scaring any pedestrians or catching pneumonia and expiring.

Fortunately, thanks to technology I'll get through a bit more work than otherwise.

BTW, post above by BH - sorry, forgot to log in.

Quote from Anonymous

Hello Guest - you are a very literal man or woman!

1) I suggested that the billions made on the clothing industry would filter back in the economy in a multitude of ways, one of them being the tech industry.

2) To take a very literal approach - women would have to spend money on clothes not to walk around naked, as indeed do men. Clothes are not often given away for free.

You implied a value judgement about the merits of the tech industry vs clothing industry.

I'm not entirely sure why my point about men spending money on other things rather than clothes eg gadgets, cars etc (I outlined them as a generalisation in comparison to the observation that women spend comparatively more on clothes than men) became a discussion about the merits of the tech industry in comparison to the clothes industry (you suggested a value judgement). I might be taking a leap here, but it seemed that you were saying that it's better for men to be spending money on the tech industry than women to be spending money on clothes.

(As an aside I would like to make it clear that I'm not insensible of the major and advantageous benefits of the IT industry on society, industry, the economy etc. Until recently I worked in the IT industry and have benefitted from it immeasurably it as a consumer, employee and employer. I'm fascinated by it and think this must be one of the most exciting times in the advancement of human invention to be living.

I can understand you taking the tack that the IT industry had more significant impact on the world and the advancement of man than the the clothing industry. You're right).

I suggested ultimately that in some ways it wasn't really relevant which indusrty had more 'merit' as long as both contributed to a stable economy - money in people's pockets - does it matter where its from when the important thing is that it pays for dinner? I merely ventured that profits from the highly succesful global clothing industry would filter back into the economy in many ways, one of them, the tech industry (and vice versa - if it hadn't been from some profitable shares in IT I might not have some of the things I do - including a couple extra frocks ).

Quote from Anonymous

No, you're wrong....

Guest, I haven't checked the IP addresses to ensure you're the same person posting each time, but assuming you are, would you consider signing up on the forum to make life a little easier when trying to debate please?

I don't have an issue with a person wanting to remain anonymous, but i do feel the forum would serve yourself, those you talk with and myself better if we could see a name/identity to the posts.

I enabled guest posting to allow non-regulars to make posts, however, you do seem to be becoming somewhat regular here so i respectfully request that you consider the offer of signing up as a member.

Quote from Anonymous

Its okey, I won't be hanging around here for long. I don't think I'm particularly welcome!

Anyone is welcome... I don't think i've seen anyone say otherwise. Ultimately, the choice is yours though. But rest assured, even a feminist (Amber)has found their way here and not been made unwelcome nor banned etc.