Rent an Expensive Handbag (very mild RO)

[Nzinga_Seated]

Not that HazelNutCoffee, DianaG, or anyone else needs my co-sign, but I co-sign.

I can’t afford Chanel, but occasionally, I can get it together for a nice Coach or something. The quality is definitely better than cheap purses. In fact, genuine leather is damn near indestructable, and the quality and design is very hardy.

I don’t have tons of clothes and jewelry. But I do insist that all of my staple pieces be of good quality. This means that I pay more for shoes, jewelry, jackets and purses than a lot of people think a ghetto girl has a right to. So what? Not their business. I can’t count how many times I have seen girls buying a whole bunch of cheapy junk earings, that turn colors in a matter of weeks. One pair of sterling silver hoops will outlast tons of fake silver that turns color in a matter of weeks.

Also, people that insist that everyone is always doing something to impress others seem a little too preoccupied with what others think, themselves.

Hypocrites, too. Damn hypocrites are always the loudest judges.

[Moirai]

I have a bunch of average, Target-type bags, and then there are my good bags- a Chanel, two Coaches, a Louis Vuitton, a Dooney & Burke and a Prada. The LV, Chanel & Coaches have lasted for years (the other two are new). I am reasonably careful with them, but I am a klutz and I have kids, so the inside of my LV has purple pen marks and I think some apple juice. I don’t always pay full price, though, so I feel a bit better.

This is my D&B bag, I got it for my birthday. It’s my “summer purse.” I don’t “follow the herd” in terms of fashion, and I am far from trendy! But I do love a nice purse, and I tend towards the classics so they don’t look dated. The D&B is an exception, but I just loved the colors and patchwork pattern. There are even “picnic ants” on it!

My cute canvas hobo bag from Target would look like hell on toast with a nice dress, let alone a formal gown. I would consider borrowing or renting a good bag if I didn’t have one to match.

Having a taste for the finer things does not make one shallow- that’s dependent on other things.

[Omegaman]

[QUOTE=tremorviolet]
OK, you are correct somewhat (I originally had a snarkier reply about opining on subjects we acknowledge we have no experience with but I refrained) , at a certain point, you’re not gonna see huge differences in quality. However, you will see differences in style and aesthetics are a perfectly valid reason to spend more money. We don’t all drive Toyota Echos, we don’t all live in efficient undecorated block houses or apartments, and why the heck would anyone ever spring for stupid colorful plant pollinating structures?. Is choosing something we like because we appreciate the aesthetics always a case of succumbing peer pressure?
[/QUOTE]

I don’t think so. Peer pressure is just the usual suspect, but it certainly plays a role in how you perceive, and are perceived by others. I don’t think those who have loads of money view it in the same way you and I do. (again, no experience) Everyone has their own breaking point for what is acceptable to spend on any given item.

[Rick]

[QUOTE=HazelNutCoffee]
FWIW, I’d totally spend $500 on a medieval-style gown. I’d wear it at home and pretend I was a maiden in a tower, waiting for some lusty peasant to tear me out of my corset.
[/QUOTE]
Lusty peasant here, how you doin?

[NightRabbit]

The argument about buying expensive handbags because they’re of higher quality and stand up to abuse/wear and tear falls apart as soon as you begin to buy them often. If you’re buying them because they last, why do you need eight of them? or ten of them? It boggles the mind. Buy one and, 10 years later when it wears out, buy another. Oh, but wait, it’s all about the style and the fashion, isn’t it? It isn’t about quality and sturdiness at all, is it?

I live in NYC and I consider expensive handbags a way to tell who to avoid.*

*Also women who wear tunics with leggings. Also women who wear earrings bigger than their hands.

[NightRabbit]

[QUOTE=BlinkingDuck]

For you guys out there…

…if you want to buy an expensive present for your squeeze or just want to make the day of a sister, daughter, son’s fiance etc… consider a Coach purse. Usually gets a bigger splash than jewelry and makes a better impression.
[/QUOTE]

FWIW, I would consider receiving a coach bag as a gift to be a huge insult. I wouldn’t wear one around if I got it for free. Not every woman is obsessed with bags and jewelry, but at least nice sterling earrings doesn’t make you look like a fashion-obsessed clone.

[mswas]

[QUOTE=Hilarity N. Suze]
Personally, I don’t see the hate here. Why is it worse to rent a handbag than it is to rent a movie? More expensive, sure–but basically the same thing. You order it, get it in the mail, use it as long as you want while paying a certain fee, and then send it back. I do realize there are certain differences; I don’t pay Netflix any more for The Third Man than I do for The Hottie and the Nottie.
[/quote]

Because you are buying those for yourself and not to make people think you are wealthy, which is an outright lie if you are ‘renting’ the hand bag.

Basically, most of what everybody does, all the time, has to do with style. Some people will think more of a person carrying a Known Name Brand Bag, and it might be important–for instance if you have a job interview and the interviewer is a designer bag junky. My feeling is that most of the designer bags people are buying that have the name emblazoned all over them are a bit insecure. People who are into such things will recognize a quality bag without that imprint.

Yeah, but half the shit is just a billboard for the logo of some dodgy designer. There is something telling about someone’s level of intellect that they would buy something just because of the logo.

This bag for instance: Louis Vuitton Galliera PM is merely a vehicle for the logo and as such is ugly as sin. It’s the epitome of ‘Nouveau Riche’, where the point isn’t the quality of the thing, but the display of wealth. This is made even worse by ‘renting’ it, because you aren’t actually wealthy, you are simply trying to make people believe that you are.

I would never do the Bag Borrow or Steal thing, because first of all I hate carrying handbags, and second of all, if I really need one, I did spring for one I could live with. (I am a big fan of pockets, though, so I hardly ever carry it. It ought to last the rest of my life.) When I do carry it, though, I believe I am trying to impress anyone who might see it, or at least hoping they won’t think “Ugh, what an ugly, cheap, horrible bag”–and yet, my best friend saw it and said, “But–it’s not leather!” I should add that I LOVE this bag and when not carrying it have it in a place in my closet where I can look at it. Okay. I’m shallow.

I am perfectly ok with expensive handbags that are a work of art, whether that be a famous designer that everyone knows or something handmade by some artist in Sedona or something. The issue is that pretty is beside the point with these things, as they are often so fugly. If I saw someone with the bag I cited above, my first impression would be, “idiot.”

I have a couple of designer suits that I love, but I bought them directly from the designer, they weren’t atrociously expensive, and they look really good on me in addition to the impeccable service he gave me. They also don’t have the flashing, “Phil’s”, logo on them. His logo is concealed on the interior rib portion of the jacket.

[joyfool]

[QUOTE=NightRabbit]
The argument about buying expensive handbags because they’re of higher quality and stand up to abuse/wear and tear falls apart as soon as you begin to buy them often. If you’re buying them because they last, why do you need eight of them? or ten of them?
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps you like the different looks and the quality.

It boggles the mind. Buy one and, 10 years later when it wears out, buy another. Oh, but wait, it’s all about the style and the fashion, isn’t it? It isn’t about quality and sturdiness at all, is it?

I don’t know if I read the thread incorrectly or not, but as I understood it, several people have already given this as one of the very reasons that they do so. Do you think they’re simply not telling us the truth?

I live in NYC and I consider expensive handbags a way to tell who to avoid.*

Do you also avoid other people who make purchases that you don’t agree with just because it’s different from what you choose? Or is this simply because of the pricing in relation to fashionableness?

[joyfool]

[QUOTE=mswas]
Because you are buying those for yourself and not to make people think you are wealthy, which is an outright lie if you are ‘renting’ the hand bag.
[/QUOTE]

It could also be because it was just a gift. Or a nice choice for a special occasion. Just an observation.

[kathmandu]

[QUOTE=NightRabbit]

I live in NYC and I consider expensive handbags a way to tell who to avoid.*

*Also women who wear tunics with leggings. Also women who wear earrings bigger than their hands.
[/QUOTE]

I’m sure if they knew, they’d be very impressed with how un-shallow you are. I know I am.

[Obsidian]

[QUOTE=Omegaman]
I don’t think so. Peer pressure is just the usual suspect, but it certainly plays a role in how you perceive, and are perceived by others. I don’t think those who have loads of money view it in the same way you and I do. (again, no experience) Everyone has their own breaking point for what is acceptable to spend on any given item.
[/QUOTE]

One of the things I always think about whenever this subject pops up is how money scales. Most people have a “waste-able” number. Under that number they stop thinking about value, because it’s not enough money to worry about. Under that number you’ll buy something without really looking at the tag, or without caring what the tag says. (I got a dress at Marshals for $20. I didn’t contemplate if I really needed it, or if it was worth $20. At $20 I bought it because it was pretty.) If you have enough money, well, $200 (or $2000) is $20. It’s just not enough money to worry about value. If it’s pretty, you like it, you buy it.

I think when you have loads of money, spending hundreds or thousands isn’t indicating you can’t manage money well, it’s that the money’s pocket change. Too little to even worry about managing.

Obsidian, former EA to some obscenely rich people. I routinely purchased an extra international first class seat (back before they were single-seats) so my boss wouldn’t have a stranger to sit next to. I’m not sure he even grasped just how much money 10 grand was to me. In his circle, that was just SOP.

[mswas]

[QUOTE=faithfool]
It could also be because it was just a gift. Or a nice choice for a special occasion. Just an observation.
[/QUOTE]

Well, my criteria is whether the handbag is pretty or not. If it’s ugly and you spent a lot of money on it, you’re a fool.

[joyfool]

[QUOTE=mswas]
Well, my criteria is whether the handbag is pretty or not. If it’s ugly and you spent a lot of money on it, you’re a fool.
[/QUOTE]

My criteria, of course, only applies to me. But as I intimated up-thread, I’ve gone whole hog if I spend $10. However, your clarification here still doesn’t cover those who have been given these handbags. Their reasoning could be anything.

As, I’d like to point out, is pretty much the typical procedure for not being privy to why other people do what they do and not necessarily assuming the worst.

[ultrafilter]

[QUOTE=NightRabbit]
I live in NYC and I consider expensive handbags a way to tell who to avoid.
[/QUOTE]

Isn’t judging people based on their fashion accessories the epitome of shallowness?

[NightRabbit]

[QUOTE=faithfool]

I don’t know if I read the thread incorrectly or not, but as I understood it, several people have already given this as one of the very reasons that they do so. Do you think they’re simply not telling us the truth?
[/QUOTE]

I think they’re fooling themselves. Not the people who buy one and use it for 10 years, but the people who buy one every three months and then crow about quality. If you don’t use the purse enough to give it a chance to wear out, the quality argument is moot.

[QUOTE=faithfool]

Do you also avoid other people who make purchases that you don’t agree with just because it’s different from what you choose? Or is this simply because of the pricing in relation to fashionableness?
[/QUOTE]

I don’t have anything in common with people who need to make those purchases, and I know it immediately. I don’t live within the world of people who need to swathe themselves in brand names. For this reason, I don’t date men who wear flashy watches. Women with their bags can enjoy those men!

That being said, I can see paying out the nose for a high-quality, handcrafted, original purse by a master craftsman. But a carbon-copy “designer” handbag with a big logo on the front? Barf. That’s not kneeling at the altar of art or aesthetics, that’s kneeling at the alter of shallow consumerism.

[NightRabbit]

[QUOTE=ultrafilter]
Isn’t judging people based on their fashion accessories the epitome of shallowness?
[/QUOTE]

No, because people who spend money to portray a certain image will turn on certain people and turn off others. I happen to be one of those who is turned off, as opposed to the dozens of people who will recognize the bag and have some sort of admiration of it, and be turned on.

[Starving_Artist]

[QUOTE=faithfool]

As, I’d like to point out, is pretty much the typical procedure for not being privy to why other people do what they do and not necessarily assuming the worst.
[/QUOTE]
And there’s been quite a lot of that in this thread.

I recall reading once that one of the strongest human compulsions is to seek out a perch from which to look down upon everyone else, and many of the posts to this thread bear that out.

People do things for reasons that cannot possibly be understood simply by looking at what they happen to be wearing. In my opinion, criticizing people for what they choose to buy or wear while knowing absolutely nothing else about them does not speak well for one’s own lack of shallowness and snobbery.

[Sarahfeena]

[QUOTE=Lemur866]
So, this sister. Can you send her over to our house?
[/QUOTE]
She IS handy to have around…when she comes over to babysit, the place is always cleaner when I come home than I left it! If she ever has kids of her own, though, I think I might worry about them a little…

[joyfool]

[QUOTE=NightRabbit]
I think they’re fooling themselves. Not the people who buy one and use it for 10 years, but the people who buy one every three months and then crow about quality. If you don’t use the purse enough to give it a chance to wear out, the quality argument is moot.
[/QUOTE]

I see. I suppose than that this truly is an example of “your mileage may vary” because I simply believe what their telling us. I really see no reason not to. And although I’ve peripherally been around people who can afford really nice things (hell, in my world that could easily be a purchase of $100 or so), I don’t wish to engage in any reason to ascribe motivations to such things. It just seems to me, that there are better uses for my thought processes.

Thanks for your answer.

[QUOTE=Starving Artist]
And there’s been quite a lot of that in this thread.

I recall reading once that one of the strongest human compulsions is to seek out a perch from which to look down upon everyone else, and many of the posts to this thread bear that out.

People do things for reasons that cannot possibly be understood simply by looking at what they happen to be wearing. In my opinion, criticizing people for what they choose to buy or wear while knowing absolutely nothing else about them does not speak well for one’s own lack of shallowness and snobbery.
[/QUOTE]

Here’s my hijack in reply (sorry)…

Ya see, just the other day I was discussing with someone that it feels like when you’re growing up, you focus on the things your going to raise your children to believe. I’ve typically found that one picks issues that there’s been some sort of deficit over; like one’s parents are too strict, so you’ll be hyper liberal. They preach religion / abstinence / whatever and you won’t. Or vice-versa. Therefore, by this approach, it seems like most major things get covered in one way or another.

Yet, one item appears to me to be glaringly absent usually and that’s teaching non-judgmentalness. I’m really not sure why either. Because we’ve all been bound to suffer from it and the entire world would undoubtedly be better off with less of it. So why does it continue? And I’m not aiming this at anyone in the thread, but reading it (and recalling the pit I made about a week ago) just got me to musing. I honestly don’t get, despite having it explained to me time and again, the need to do this. Especially over piddly shit. I say save it for something important, like genocide. Surely we can all agree on that. Right?

[DianaG]

[QUOTE=NightRabbit]
I think they’re fooling themselves.
[/QUOTE]

My favorite people to avoid are the ones who think that anyone who disagrees with them is either an idiot or a liar, and the ones who confuse poverty with nobility. I find people in the first group to be lacking in imagination, and people in the second to be kind of a buzzkill.