Honestly, I think men can't even differentiate what's different on a woman half of the time (i.e. hair, nail color, perfume, outfit), they just know the golden rules - that women are complicated/moody creatures and to never ask how much they weigh.
So why do women care so much about clothes and looking good? Why are we so willing to shell out an extra $50 of our hard-earned cash on something name brand vs. a generic brand?
Well men's judgements aside, I think it's because we use fashion and appearance in attempts to make a statement of what kind of person we may be and our personality without having to state a single word. This is the gold that marketing is driven by, the desire to have the product speak on behalf of its owner in a favorable light. My "best-friends" in terms of name brands are all "best-friends" I can't afford, but merely dream of until I am no longer a broke college student - or if I don't eat (and blow it all on clothes, and SHOES).
When I think of elegance and class, I think of Chanel, Louis Vuitton, Louboutins - and all the other brands that cost almost as much as a semester's tuition. Though I do acknowledge the fact that I fall prey to the glitz and glamour that these brands perceive to bring, I question if it's really the lfiestyle I'm attaining to seek or rather the quality it promises. Deep down, I know I lust because it's the lifestyle that's so alluring, if I cared more about quality, brand names wouldn't be a concern at all.
Though my main example of brands serving more as a marketing tactic to attract attention rather than being a product distinction is focused on women (and ridicule of my illogical, lustful ways) and our crazy beauty rituals (beauty=pain I was taught at a young age), our time-consuming inability to decide the outfit for the day, and the desire to indulge on all things fabulous and trendy - the lesson of brand name preference can be applied to the masses and in all domain of products.
No comments:
Post a Comment