Every few months or so for a little over a year now, the latest edition of some random magazine has shown up in my mailbox. These magazines show up unannounced, and at first I think someone else’s mail was accidentally delivered to me, but upon further inspection, I see that my name and address are on the label. These magazines vary in subject matter, and they usually arrive for about three to six months and then are followed up with an “if you enjoyed the magazine why not keep it coming for x amount of dollars” envelope. Needless to say, Old Man Savastano just tosses those and never subscribes.
And while I toss those subscription solicitations, in my endless quest to keep my mind occupied and pass the time while I am riding my stationary bike, I have started looking through these random free magazines while peddling away on the seat of my infernal chore.
I was once a pretty big sports guy, back when I actually played a multitude of sports which my parents felt would keep me occupied enough to keep me out of trouble, so the Sports Illustrated magazine, which has shown up weekly for about the past three months now, is usually an interesting skim. While I don’t follow sports like I used to, I do inherently catch enough sports news floating on the wind for the content of the magazine to be none too surprising. But other than S.I., magazine stalwart TIME, and a few other random titles, every single other magazine has been some type of fashion or fitness magazine.
And I noticed something interesting when going through these fashion and fitness magazines. Apparently, there are the beginnings of somewhat of a self-proclaimed revolution in the fashion industry these days – people are at least talking about the fact that while all of the depictions of women in these magazines are of rail thin teenage girls, most women in America are neither teenagers, rail thin, or fashion models. I, for one, applaud this dialog and am happy to see this change. While I do not have a daughter of my own, I completely agree with the notion that our media and advertising definitely have a very narrow minded view of what they believe women are ‘supposed’ to look like, and I would hate to see any young girl growing up with the notion that the women in these magazines are what she is ‘supposed’ to look like. Especially since we all know there is a lot of Photoshopping that goes on behind the scenes, right? Talk about creating something impossible to achieve in real life.
So, good job fashion industry...at least you are trying. But, in the end, to quote an umpire who you might find in S.I., I call ‘em like I see ‘em, and when going through these magazines, I really feel like not much has changed despite the industry buzz about this so-called size revolution. If you thumb through one of these magazines, you will definitely find a page in there with a highly cropped picture of Ashley Graham in a very covering one-piece bathing suit that shows her from her waist to the top of her head with a headline that reads “Great Style Has No Size”, but the entire rest of the 198-page magazine is nothing but size zeros, ones and maybe…maybe some twos.
If you are the size of the girls in the magazine, then hey, more power to you, I am definitely not trying to knock you, but I feel that if fashion is going to conduct what it is calling a ‘revolution’ and then pat itself on the back for including women of all ages, shapes and sizes, these fashion magazines that have been forced into my mailbox definitely did not get the message. I think this so-called ‘revolution’ is comprised of that typical American fabrication that if we do something 0.005% of the time, we are creating real change.
So, sorry, fashion industry, I’m not ready to pat you on the back yet…You still have some work to do.
Picture by Alexandra Maria via Pexels
It’s July 1st and you’re walking through your favorite local big-box retail store (or the one you tolerate to save all that money every year) and suddenly, despite it being sweltering outside, you find yourself in the middle of an aisle fully stocked with brand new Christmas decorations. You shake your head and snicker as you say under your breath, “Already?!”
You’re not going crazy, my friends. What was once a holiday shopping frenzy that took up the last month of the year has progressed into a full-blown half-year sales and strategy extravaganza for both retailers and consumers. Who is to blame, you ask? Surprisingly, if you do a little digging, you’ll find this is not a one-sided push from retailers, but in fact, the market reacting to the demands of shoppers.
Trust me when I tell you that retail marketers don’t want to be in holiday shopping season planning meetings in April, but they also recognize that if they wait until September to start thinking about the holiday season, they will have some serious catching up to do!
In fact, a recent CreditCards.com report shows that not only have more than 30 million Americans already started their holiday shopping by September, a full 50 million say they will start earlier this year than last year. Over 6 million Americans claim they are DONE with their holiday shopping by the end of September and nearly 64 million expect to be complete by the end of November.
From the Fiscal Times:
“We love to complain about stores putting up holiday displays earlier and earlier each year, but the truth is that millions of Americans start holiday shopping long before the first Christmas tree appears in a store,” CreditCards.com industry analyst Matt Schultz said in a statement.
So, gone are the days of black-and-white movies where the family piled into the station wagon and went out on December 24th to buy the tree and all the presents as soon as dad got home from work with his bonus. In today’s consumer-driven, always-open, online retail world, you can expect to see the vibrant colors of a fully stocked aisle of decorations on the first day of Q3. Enjoy your 177-day Christmas shopping season, America!
There’s been a bit of a fabricated buzz in the news about Abercrombie & Fitch that has been going on for a while, and I thought I’d chime in, because, hey, if there is anything I am an expert on it is hip (is that word cool again? – Sorry, still cannot bring myself to use the word “sick” because frankly, I am too old to use that word) fashion for teens, young adults, college kids, older people trying to look younger, etc.
First off, let me say that the biggest and only role Abercrombie has played in my life is the raised eyebrow I gave to how close and friendly the dudes in their ads and those huge pictures at the entrance to their stores always seemed and how hard I laughed when Saturday Night Live finally made fun of them for those ads and pictures. I have never stepped foot in one of their stores (frankly, they are too loud and smelly), would never invest in the company (unless it was in a fund, of course), and honestly would never want to do work for them, but I am here today to do something that you might not have thought I would do…defend them…defend their right as Americans and an American business to sell whatever they want, market to whoever they want, not sell whatever they want, not market to whoever they want, and to be as biased and condescending as they want to be.
Get to 315 pounds and then go out and try to find clothes, worse yet, clothes at a reasonable, non-full-retail price. It is not easy in the least bit! Now that I am back down to about 260, it’s still not that easy, but trust me, it’s getting easier as I get smaller. But, where does it say that I have a right to find what I want in my size, and it is up to society, the government, activists, and whiners to force businesses out there to manufacture and sell the clothes that I want in my size? I believe it does not say that anywhere, nor should it.
We have a wonderful free-market system that allows you, the consumer, to buy what you want, and the businesses that you buy from to sell what they want as long as it meets certain safety standards, and I personally think that is a great system. If Abercrombie doesn’t sell clothes in my size, then hey, they don’t get my money. If Abercrombie wants to come out and say they don’t want fat or unattractive skinny people in their stores, then they have a right to say it, just as you have a right as a fatty or unattractive skinny person, or any person for that matter, to not spend money in their stores if you don’t like what they are saying. You also have a right, like I am exercising here, to open your mouth and get the word out about what you think of it so others can get on board and be aware of how a company like Abercrombie actually thinks and the values that the company represents.
Does Abercrombie have a right to sell only sizes “God, you look like a skeleton, please eat something” on up through “Holy crap, you’re a size 10 and the size of a house so you should never eat again”? Yes, they do. Does Abercrombie have a right to say that they only want certain types of people in their stores? Here in America, I honestly think they do, and should have that right. Do they have a right to sell shirts that say, “Blondes are adored, brunettes are ignored” or “Do I make you look fat?” They sure do, and they should. Do I have a right as fat and someone who prefers brunettes to never shop there, and ask other people to never shop there? I sure do, just like I still have a right to tell everyone in the world to never buy anything from Jennifer Convertibles because they hosed me on some tables I bought one time.
Do I have a right to loop Abercrombie in together with a guy that is selling t-shirts that say, “Hitler is Great!”? I sure do. If you’re concerned enough that you want to stand outside an Abercrombie store and hand people walking in a copy of a news story or transcript from the CEO’s interview in which he said, “A lot of people don’t belong [in our clothes], and they can’t belong. Are we exclusionary? Absolutely,” should you be able to do so? Absolutely, you should be able to – just remember to bring a filter mask for that horrible cologne-y smell and some earplugs if you don’t like club music! Does their CEO have a right to say what he said in that interview and steer the business in that direction? Here in America, he does, and he should.
Now, I know where you are going, loyal reader…You are about to quote Helen Lovejoy and say, “Think of the children! Won't somebody please think of the children?!” I think this Abercrombie story and the company’s stance is, in fact, a great lesson for your children. It is a lesson in the rights of individual liberties, diversity, economics, morality and the free market system.
We should be using this story to teach children that when you grow up, life is not necessarily going to be fair. Not everyone wins, not everyone gets a trophy, and not everyone gets to wear #1 on their jersey – only one guy on the team gets that number. It is a lesson that some people are skinny, some people are fat, some people are tall, some people are short, some people are considered to be gorgeous and some people are considered to be far-from-gorgeous, but that all of these judgments can either affect their lives, or not affect their lives.
It is a great lesson that some people are kind and considerate to everyone, and other people are frankly, just self-centered asses. It is a lesson in being responsible for your own life and not forcing people to live your way, or feeling that you have to be responsible for and control the lives of others. It is a lesson in the fact that we as consumers have the power to use our dollars as we see fit, and we as Americans have the right to free speech, no matter how hate-filled or stupid, or benevolent and intelligent the things we might say turn out to be. But most of all, it is a lesson in the ideas that America was founded upon, and the rights that we as Americans are assured by the greatest combination of liberty, democracy and capitalism that the world has ever seen.
So, shop at Abercrombie if you’re small enough to fit into their clothes and don’t mind their philosophy and values. You won’t get any flak from me for doing so. Hey, more power to you. But, when you’re wearing one of their shirts and the uglies, the fatties, the non-trendies, the un-cool moms, the un-cool dads, the old-folks, and the like, are snickering at you, don’t get mad at them. They have just as much of a right to protest against Abercrombie as you do to shop there.
You know when I don’t work? Nights and weekends. Well, actually I do, but I’m not required to go into the office at that time. You know why, America? Because I found a job that doesn’t require me to go into work on nights and weekends. You know why I found a job like that? Because I used to have jobs that required me to go in on nights and weekends, and I didn’t like that so much.
Yet, as Black Friday grows near, I am seeing news reports and reading articles about a lot of the folks who work in retail during the holiday season complaining about having to work long hours, nights and weekends, and in particular, during the later hours of Thanksgiving Day, and frankly, I am puzzled.
I’m not trying to be heartless here, but the plight of these folks takes me back to my thoughts on the debate about working part-time at Wal-Mart with no health insurance. At any point when you were applying for the job did they tell you that you were going to have health insurance, then all of the sudden, take it away? No, they did not. I am sure they told you all along that your part-time job at Wal-Mart did not come with health insurance. So, why, then, are you sitting there with a part-time job at Wal-Mart, surprised that you do not have health insurance?
You work in retail. That is the job you have. For whatever reason, that is a fact of your life. And in case you are wondering, I spent the first three years of my working life in retail, full-time while going to high school, and even had to join a union for my first job, so that’s where I get off talking about working in retail.
The store at which you work is open on Black Friday. You can’t, at this point, sit there and be surprised that the store wants you to work crazy hours on Black Friday. Are you going to honestly tell me that you didn’t see that coming?
You work in retail, yet somehow do not understand what Black Friday is, and never took notice that the starting gates open earlier and earlier each year? You are still somehow surprised? Really? The 5:00 AM sale that became the 4:00 AM sale that became the 3:00AM sale? You didn’t see where that was going?
Ask all the folks who are not in retail about a job that requires them to work crazy hours once or twice a year, and trust me, you probably won’t get a lot of sympathy from them. Just to clarify what I am getting at, most of us non-retail employees, especially those on salary instead of hourly, end up having to work crazy hours more than once or twice a year.
Ask us about overtime pay and our 15 minutes breaks throughout the day too, so we can laugh at you. Do I even need to bring up the whole you work in retail and are lucky to be one of the 85% of people who do that actually still have a job in this economy?
And don’t get me wrong, I get it’s a holiday. I missed many a holiday, birthday, etc., when I was working retail, but I also understood that it was part of the job I had at the time. Again, you can’t take a job working retail and be surprised when you are working nights, weekends and holidays.
And while I’m on the soapbox, I have a little message for the consumers who are complaining on behalf of these retail workers. Really? So, year after year, you buy into the whole Black Friday concept, allowing these retailers to bait you into the store in deplorable, dangerous, and in some cases, deadly conditions, allow them to bait you into stampeding over each other to save some money on let’s face it, crap you don’t need to survive anyway, yet you draw the line at the store making employees miss part of Thanksgiving Day so they can work that night? If there was no one willing to show up to shop at 10:00 PM on Thanksgiving, the stores wouldn’t be opening at that time, so consumers are in no position to complain about when the stores are opening.
Again, America, we cannot sit here and be surprised that this year some of our largest retailers are opening as early as 10:00 PM on Thanksgiving night, expecting their employees to work, and expecting consumers to come in, risking life and limb, to save some money on all the stuff that they simply cannot live without. Like you didn’t see that one coming, America.
The CEO of Wal-Mart will tell you (and I’ve seen the interviews, folks) that the giant chain does not get discounts from their vendors because they purchase from them in such large volumes.
Though he’s not telling the truth entirely, he’s not lying entirely, either. Here is how the big chain’s pricing edge works.
A local mom and pop tire store will purchase a tire for $18 from Goodyear. Wal-Mart will buy a very very similar tire from Goodyear for $6. Naturally, the final price the consumer pays at Wal-Mart is much lower than the price they will pay at the mom and pop tire store.
First, Goodyear can get away with charging Wal-Mart so much less for the tire because Wal-Mart buys a large volume of tires. Also, large chain stores like Wal-Mart do their own advertising, so Goodyear has absolutely $0 in promotional and marketing costs in order to sell the large number of tires that are purchased by Wal-Mart to be re-sold to the end consumer.
Now, you ask in your 1930s draw, “ain’t there laws a’gain’ it?” Yes, there is, but here is how they work.
The competition pricing laws, most passed during the 1930s, were designed to protect the end consumer from price fixing. The laws state that a company like Goodyear cannot sell the exact same tire at grossly different prices to different customers unless they can justify the cost difference as a saving to their own bottom line.
The lack of promotional and marketing costs are the justification for the price difference and what companies like Goodyear do is add a number or two to their model number or maybe a different notch in the tread pattern and they are now no longer selling the same exact tire to the mom and pops as they are to Wal-Mart.
So, between the “different” tire and the “justification” of the price difference, the mom and pops do not have a leg to stand on.
To seal the deal, all of the 1930s competition laws state that in all cases, the consumer must be the end beneficiary of any intervention, so when the consumer can save 2/3 of their money by buying from the chain, there aren’t many lawmakers out there who are going to want to force the consumer to buy from the mom and pops.
