Why are some vices more acceptable?

[Mdlerth]

My point of view: if you are spending lots of $$$ on booze & hookers, but you LBYM and you are saving enough to continue that lifestyle in retirement (including medical), you are still being financially repsonsible.

But...

If you are spending what little you have on helping orphans and baby animals, but going further into debt to do that, you are being financially irresponsible. "Morality" has no place in this discussion.

Agreed.

However, even were I to have Buffet's money, I predict DW would enter the discussion if it came out that some of it was going toward working girls...

 

[mpeirce]

While that "may" be true to women, I can say that to 99.99% of men I've known (including myself), the difference between a $2,500 pair of women's shoes and a similar style shoe from a discount shoe store is unlikely to be noticed at all. In fact, I can label women's shoes into "flats, open toed/open foot, heels, and boots" and anything that fits in one of those categories without being extravagant in some manner is going to be thought of like any other shoe in that category. I've never looked at a woman and said "wow, those shoes really make her more attractive to me" and I'd wager the same could be said for most men.

+1

Spot on

 

[Nodak]

You only go around once. If you can afford it and enjoy it, why not! I wouldn't have spent $800 to $1000 on a new pair of shoes. (my last new pair cost me $25) And someone would have to pay me $2500 to go to any theater show. I'd rather go to the dentist.

Now, dropping $100k or so on a new car or spending $10k on a short trip or risking $25k on a weekend at a casino is okay with me.

I agree copletely.

 

[Bigdawg]

While that "may" be true to women, I can say that to 99.99% of men I've known (including myself), the difference between a $2,500 pair of women's shoes and a similar style shoe from a discount shoe store is unlikely to be noticed at all. In fact, I can label women's shoes into "flats, open toed/open foot, heels, and boots" and anything that fits in one of those categories without being extravagant in some manner is going to be thought of like any other shoe in that category. I've never looked at a woman and said "wow, those shoes really make her more attractive to me" and I'd wager the same could be said for most men.

Now if the girl said "instead of buying the $800 shoes I maxed my 401K for the month and instead bought the clearance shoes for $40" I would be impressed.

 

[haha]

I know a fair amount about women and shoes, (taken together; nobody can be said to know a much about women in their entirety). I sold shoes in a specialty shoe store, and I have heard women refer to their "eff-me" shoes. My guess is that they know lot more about this than the typical male ER or engineer. In fact, we men as a class mostly live in a perceptual universe that has been stripped of much of what is going on.(mostly to help us try to stay calm)

Ha

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

To the OP, Im glad you were not directly involved in the argument/discussion. I had many friends that were going through divorces, I saw one or 2 make huge and what I thought extravagant purchases. One guy specifically told me his marriage counselor told him to buy something nice for himself to make himself feel better.I dont think buying expensive shoes or 2500 on a play is a vice if you got the dough.

 

[Scuba]

Sounds like the usual "stuff vs. experiences" argument. The finance gurus say that millenials are looking for experiences now and are less into buying things, but I can see both sides. My major vacations cost the equivalent of MANY pairs of Jimmy Choos and when I come home I have nothing to show except a lot of pictures and stories. I'm perfectly happy with that but others would rather have a closet full of designer clothes and shoes. To me, LBYM is what's important.

Agreed. To each his or her own on what is valuable.

 

[Scuba]

While that "may" be true to women, I can say that to 99.99% of men I've known (including myself), the difference between a $2,500 pair of women's shoes and a similar style shoe from a discount shoe store is unlikely to be noticed at all. In fact, I can label women's shoes into "flats, open toed/open foot, heels, and boots" and anything that fits in one of those categories without being extravagant in some manner is going to be thought of like any other shoe in that category. I've never looked at a woman and said "wow, those shoes really make her more attractive to me" and I'd wager the same could be said for most men.

The men I know wouldn't have a clue if a woman was wearing Jimmy Choos. However, someone willing to buy these shoes likely gets a confidence boost and feels more beautiful in these shoes. Men are usually attracted to confident women who feel good about themselves. Personally I would never pay for shoes this expensive, but I think women who do it feel more confident when they're wearing them.

 

[Fedup]

The men I know wouldn't have a clue if a woman was wearing Jimmy Choos. However, someone willing to buy these shoes likely gets a confidence boost and feels more beautiful in these shoes. Men are usually attracted to confident women who feel good about themselves. Personally I would never pay for shoes this expensive, but I think women who do it feel more confident when they're wearing them.

I used to have a cheap mirror. It did the same thing to my confidence. I felt tall and slim. Cheap mirror would do it for me.

 

[Nemo2]

I have heard women refer to their "eff-me" shoes.

Consequently they often end up with men who want to do just that, and only that; apart from temporary feigned interest they have no other interest in them at all.

And, when the next pair of shoes comes along......

 

[Sunset]

While that "may" be true to women, I can say that to 99.99% of men I've known (including myself), the difference between a $2,500 pair of women's shoes and a similar style shoe from a discount shoe store is unlikely to be noticed at all. In fact, I can label women's shoes into "flats, open toed/open foot, heels, and boots" and anything that fits in one of those categories without being extravagant in some manner is going to be thought of like any other shoe in that category. I've never looked at a woman and said "wow, those shoes really make her more attractive to me" and I'd wager the same could be said for most men.

+1
Count me in, I mean really I'm never looking at a woman's feet, always trying to keep my eyes on her face so she doesn't think I'm ogling her.. and DW doesn't get upset

Now I know why lawyers are so expensive, they don't buy their shoes as Costco.

I do wonder if it was simply the timing of the shoe purchase, as divorce is expensive and full of surprises. Had the lawyer said things were going great with hubby #3 , then blowing $$$ money might not seem too bad.
The accountant had no divorce or rebuilding of a house after a fire, so she was free to blow the $$ since there was no possible big expense looming.

 

[Mdlerth]

If the pending divorcee burns cash on footwear before the actual split, does it no longer count as a marital asset subject to judicial arbitration?

 

[6miths]

Now if the girl said "instead of buying the $800 shoes I maxed my 401K for the month and instead bought the clearance shoes for $40" I would be impressed.

Absolutely. And if someone told me that they had spent $800+ on a pair of shoes it would go down in the 'Con' column. Seems like this woman has more than shoes as a vice... husbands?

The cost of going to the show is what it is. If you are into that and derive pleasure from it and can afford it then it is the price you have to pay. Shoes are pretty much shoes for most but not all so the same could apply I suppose. If she could afford them and she didn't have a closet full then hard to get too down on her although I think the question would be the timing of the purchase and whether she really could afford them at this point.

 

[Chuckanut]

IMHO, it's the "If it works for me, it must work for you. And if it doesn't, you are are doing something wrong or you are defective in some way" syndrome.

Sometimes our alarm bells about what others are doing are correct and we as good friends/relatives need to speak up even at the risk of incurring the other person's anger. Perhaps even stage an intervention of some type. But, normally, it's best, IMHO, to plant the thought and let the other person work it out for themselves.

One added thought: If you have never been through divorce, it's tough to relate to what is going on. It's an awful experience and sometimes people do crazy things to keep their sanity - yes, a non-sequitur, but true.

 

[brett]

What others do with their money is of no concern to us. Don't care.

Just as long as they don't come to us for a loan or a handout. Each to their own.

 

[Chuckanut]

I know a fair amount about women and shoes, (taken together; nobody can be said to know a much about women in their entirety). I sold shoes in a specialty shoe store, and I have heard women refer to their "eff-me" shoes.

When I became single again, I made a point of being well groomed, and had shirts and pants that looked good together on me. However, a female friend informed me one day that my shoes were torpedoing the whole look. Women take shoes VERY seriously. So, I bought several pairs of new shoes and I keep them polished and in good shape.

For a man to get between a woman and her shoes is almost as stupid as answering the question "Dear, do these jeans make me look fat?"

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

I used to have a cheap mirror. It did the same thing to my confidence. I felt tall and slim. Cheap mirror would do it for me.

You and that special mirror again!

 

[mamadogmamacat]

If she has been divorced three times, she has probably wasted a lot more money doing that than spending $800 on shoes.

I applaud them both. Someone has to keep the economy running. It certainly won't be tightwads like me...

+1 thoroughly enjoying this discussion. lots of good posts. Think this may be the best one.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

When I became single again, I made a point of being well groomed, and had shirts and pants that looked good together on me. However, a female friend informed me one day that my shoes were torpedoing the whole look. Women take shoes VERY seriously. So, I bought several pairs of new shoes and I keep them polished and in good shape.

For a man to get between a woman and her shoes is almost as stupid as answering the question "Dear, do these jeans make me look fat?"

hahahahahaha

 

[Chuckanut]

Wait, theater tickets can cost 2500 bucks?

Reminds me of the "Bubble' skit on SNL a few months ago.

 

[Blue Collar Guy]

Seems my mind is else where, when i saw the title Vices, somehow fancy shoes and theatre tickets werent my first thought. Splurge maybe, not vice, hahahah

 

[Souschef]

I've spent a lot of money on what other people consider to be stupid things. So I made it a point a long time ago to not judge people's spending habits. Let them spend whatever $ on whatever makes them happy.

+100
I recently spent $2100 to fly a MiG15. I am 79 and only go around once,
Why not, if you can afford it?

 

[Amethyst]

Shoes? This thread says "Vice" but it's about shoes?

I kept looking for "Why is being a drunk somehow more OK than being a drug addict" or "why are people more judgmental of overeaters/fat people, than of people who sleep with anybody who'll hold still" but no.

Shoes.

Sigh...

 

[flyingaway]

Maybe that kind of spending habit contributed a lot to the three divorces.

 

[joeea]

Why were the shoes a no-no but the theater tickets ok. I see that here a lot too, travel is ok to spend on but say a new camera is not?

We all get to decide which extravagances are "acceptable" and which are not.

In recent years it seems to be "a thing" to value "experiences over things" for many. I think it depends on the experience and on the thing, but whatever.

As long as you have the money, and nobody else is depending on you for financial support, you can spend any or all of your money on whatever makes you happy - shoes, tickets, travel, cameras of whatever. In many of those cases I won't understand it (particularly the shoes), but I'm not the one who is spending their own hard-earned money.

As far as I'm concerned, acceptability is in the eye of the beholder.