Heels, Flip flops

By Michael Tan Philippine Daily Inquirer WOULD you believe there’s actually an Encyclopedia of Feet and Footwear? The editor explains why the topic was considered important enough to merit an entire encyclopedia (even if only one volume): “How we view and treat the kinds of footwear that we wear, and how we view our footwear, tell us a great deal about society and culture.” There is an entry devoted to Imelda Marcos, but the other entries of the encyclopedia convinced me that maybe it’s time we move away from this fixation on Imelda’s shoes and face up to the fact that all throughout the world, people have varying degrees of fixations on footwear, a generic term which includes everything from slippers to sandals to shoes. (I won’t be dealing with feet here, which the encyclopedia shows to be an amazing object of culture as well, with many possible topics from foot-binding to sexual fetishes.) At first glance, footwear is there to protect our feet from dirt and mud, and from the heat. Yet when we buy footwear, even slippers, we go beyond the functional and want our footwear to be nice-looking, eye-catching, or both. Our aesthetics around shoes can become quite complicated as we consider the many social meanings for footwear generated in each culture. The most obvious is how footwear represents wealth. In many places in the world, some people are so poor they can’t even afford slippers. Even in the Philippines, the very poor might have slippers and shoes, but they use them very sparingly. The meanings can shift. The lowly tsinelas and bakya in the Philippines took elevated status when embellished with beads or sequins, so they could be worn by the rich. Who would have predicted that rubber slippers, once considered pedestrian and proletarian, would now command prices of a few hundred or even over a thousand pesos because of brand names or styles? Nope, they’re no longer considered tsinelas (slippers) but flip-flops, Havaianas or one of the many upscale brands of casual footwear. While footwear are status symbols, they also represent our contact with the ground, which is considered “profane” or “dirty” in some cultures. Many places of worships—temples and mosques in particular—require worshippers and visitors to remove their footwear before entering sacred ground. Many cultures, including our own, also require that visitors remove their footwear before entering a home as a sign of respect to the host. As culture goes though, there are many variations on the rules. If the visitor is considered very important or of high status, the owner of the home is required to “exempt” the visitor, “No, no, please keep your shoes on.” The cultural meanings attached to footwear may sometimes be lost across time. Take the men’s shoes with very long pointed toes which are currently in vogue. I never found them particularly appealing and wondered why they’ve become so popular... until I read in the foot-and-footwear encyclopedia about the poulaine, a male shoe that was quite popular in medieval Europe, but which was condemned by the Catholic church as obscene. Yes, the elongated toes were supposed to have been phallic. The poulaine’s toes could extend up to 24 inches, stuffed with wool and horse hair to keep it, well, erect. Men supposedly stood by street corners and would wave their poulaine-clad feet at women (and maybe fellow men?) passing by. Footwear reflects and replicates gender. Notice how men get to be the aggressor with their poulaine. Women, on the other hand, learned to wear all kinds of footwear not just for their own satisfaction but for men’s as well. Sandals and other open-toed shoes provided women occasions to display their feet to men, sometimes seductively as when the feet were brightly pedicured or dressed up with elaborate henna tattoos. Heels, terribly difficult to walk in, were meant to highlight women’s hips and legs especially when they were walking, because as women tried to keep their balance, they would end up swaying, precariously and erotically. The TV series “Sex and the City” had a strong “shoe theme” running through its episodes, its main characters (particularly Carrie Bradshaw) talking all the time about, and shopping for, shoes. The interpretation that appears in the foot encyclopedia was that it represented the shallowness, materialism and immaturity of the women characters (and of women in general?). Alternatively, the power to buy expensive shoes also comes through, so maybe accumulation of shoes runs parallel to the accumulation of power. The encyclopedia quotes Imelda Marcos as saying that many of her shoes were actually gifts, and it occurred to me that was probably true too—the more powerful a person becomes, the more gifts they receive. And in the case of Imelda, the gifts would probably be shoes, which then represented not just her power, but the attempts by many sycophants to bask in, or solicit, her power. Quick now and check the footwear in your home... and do an analysis of who wields power, and over whom. •

Published in Philippine Daily Inquirer September 4, 2010.

Where Cheapskate Put Their Money

By JANE NEPOMUCENO

September 6, 2010

When you’re out doing your monthly grocery shopping, do you always think about what you may gain or lose when buying a certain product? Do you often veer away from grocery alleys with novelty items that you believe you don’t need at home?

At home, do you find it a waste to throw away toothpaste bottles without squeezing out all of its contents? And do you not throw away Q-tips without using both ends?

If you answered yes to all the questions above, you’re probably a self-confessed cheapskate or have been called one a few times.

You are a cheapskate if you rarely spend even if you have the resources to do so. You have the money but you simply refuse to spend them.

These people usually spend most of their money on promo items and products with free items and most times, would only spend money on things that they believe will save them some more.

It’s no wonder that marketers have buyers on items like toothpaste squeezies and soap savers.

As reported by the Associated Press, the most effective way to get penny pinchers to spend is to pitch products that promise to save them money.

So it wouldn’t come as a surprise that demand for kitchen and bath gadgets that squeeze out that last blob of toothpaste and help get the suds out of tiny slivers of soap is rising.

Consumers buy these items believing that they can save more money by reducing waste on the products that they use on a regular basis.

Big companies like Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and The Container Store and a longtime "As Seen on TV" pitchman are stocking up on items claiming to help people save a buck.

These items include caps that keep the fizz in opened soda cans; digital day counters that count the days and hours food has been in the refrigerator and new, stylish versions of pants extenders that let people wear their clothes even when they gain or lose weight.

However, there is an open question whether the truly frugal are too cheap to buy the gadgets that can cost up to $20. Who needs a soap saver when an old washcloth or a pair of pantyhose will do?

According to Lynnae McCoy, who runs the blog beingfrugal.net, "Surely, people who lived through the Great Depression found ways to use up all their soap without needing a soap saver."

"Are these products convenient? Some of them, yes. But are they necessary? No. And in some cases, they're probably a complete waste of money." (With a report from AP)