"Awkward" - yes, I can see that. That sort of, ah, lack of sensitivity, is something that came in somewhere around the sixties or seventies - I can't say that I miss the days before ads for products like genital herpes patent medicines were part of prime time television.
@Dad: Yeah, there were certainly other problems with the decades before the sixties. I'd still like to have a large, featureless wall around the lingerie department.
*rolls eyes* Gotta love disturbing comments from anonymous users. Brigid, I'm not quite sure I comprehend the layout of the store. If it was children's underwear next to women's underwear, then it makes sense from a marketing perspective because the women usually do the shopping for children, so the stores want to encourage sales by having the woman go "Hmm, I could use new underwear myself."
If it's adult underwear of both types next to each other, then it's probably in hopes that the husband will think "Hmm, get the wife new lingerie" and then get sales that way.
In short, it's all marketing, and thus meant to be so alien and disturbing that it would send Cthulhu fleeing for his underseas home. ^^
Awkward, "Yes". As to your being the only one to notice it and does something seem wrong here, "No" on both counts. Certain things simply don't belong on the main aisle...and I like to consider myself a more or less tolerant, open-minded fellow (not to mention the fact that there seems to be some sort of Underwear Conspiracy going on at WallyWorld; you'll NEVER find MEN'S underwear or even socks anywhere other than hidden away in the center of the department somewhere)...
@Robert: So that's it. Sort of makes sense, in a twisted sort of way.
@Dan: Exactly! And why is it always the frilly, slinky bits that are most visible? Why are the sports bras relegated to an ill-organizes corner far near the socks?
As to why, I couldn't say. As to who, it's usually the Grand High Mucky-Mucks who make all of those decisions. Specifically, MALE executives, if that explains anything at all...
Again, it's marketing. ^^ Undoubtedly in the belief guys are mindless sex-driven idiots who'll either pressure their girlfriend/wife/whatever to buy said articles of clothing, or actually buy it themselves as a "gift" only to get the stupid size wrong and all that. ^^;;
I've also noticed that logical reasonable everyday clothing ends up hidden in the center of the clothing area. Sale stuff and stuff that "looks cool" are on the outskirts, but if you want dress pants or a plain long-sleeve shirt you have to go through a maze of stuff to reach it.
Considering Marketing degrees these days often require some level of higher mathematics (I've abstracted marketing journals before, I'm not exactly joking on this bit) and it only proves that Marketers are some form of alien life that are infiltrating mankind with the intention of enslaving us all. ^^;;
Ah yes... one of the earliest times in my life that I began to recognize that older girls and women are different from me and the rest of the boys was clothes shopping with Momma bear at JC Pennys, or was it Sears. More importantly, I began the realization that these differences intrigued me greatly.
Concerning Robert's quote about this all "only prov[ing] that Marketers are some form of alien life that are infiltrating mankind with the intention of enslaving us all..."
...Didn't I SAY that Walmart execs were largely, if not entirely responsible? Didn't I ALREADY warn you!? :P
I'm Brigid, not my birth-name, but the one I chose for Confirmation. It's a Catholic thing. Want to learn more about how I grew up? Check out my semi-autobiographical webcomic, Mary Quite Contrary.
The closest I've come to earning a living as a writer is one summer I worked as a feature columnist for a small-town newspaper. I've been telling and writing stories my whole life, though, and, hey, it's something I enjoy. Whether I manage to make a buck at it isn't that important to me.
13 comments:
"Awkward" - yes, I can see that. That sort of, ah, lack of sensitivity, is something that came in somewhere around the sixties or seventies - I can't say that I miss the days before ads for products like genital herpes patent medicines were part of prime time television.
@Dad: Yeah, there were certainly other problems with the decades before the sixties. I'd still like to have a large, featureless wall around the lingerie department.
Nothing wrong with underwear of different genders touching. You should try it sometime, Brigid.
@Brigid,
I'd be a lot more nostalgic, if my memory wasn't so good.
@Anonymous: Uh, I'll leave that for my parents' laundry, thanks.
@Dad: Definitely.
*rolls eyes* Gotta love disturbing comments from anonymous users. Brigid, I'm not quite sure I comprehend the layout of the store. If it was children's underwear next to women's underwear, then it makes sense from a marketing perspective because the women usually do the shopping for children, so the stores want to encourage sales by having the woman go "Hmm, I could use new underwear myself."
If it's adult underwear of both types next to each other, then it's probably in hopes that the husband will think "Hmm, get the wife new lingerie" and then get sales that way.
In short, it's all marketing, and thus meant to be so alien and disturbing that it would send Cthulhu fleeing for his underseas home. ^^
Rob H.
Awkward, "Yes". As to your being the only one to notice it and does something seem wrong here, "No" on both counts. Certain things simply don't belong on the main aisle...and I like to consider myself a more or less tolerant, open-minded fellow (not to mention the fact that there seems to be some sort of Underwear Conspiracy going on at WallyWorld; you'll NEVER find MEN'S underwear or even socks anywhere other than hidden away in the center of the department somewhere)...
@Robert: So that's it. Sort of makes sense, in a twisted sort of way.
@Dan: Exactly! And why is it always the frilly, slinky bits that are most visible? Why are the sports bras relegated to an ill-organizes corner far near the socks?
As to why, I couldn't say. As to who, it's usually the Grand High Mucky-Mucks who make all of those decisions. Specifically, MALE executives, if that explains anything at all...
Again, it's marketing. ^^ Undoubtedly in the belief guys are mindless sex-driven idiots who'll either pressure their girlfriend/wife/whatever to buy said articles of clothing, or actually buy it themselves as a "gift" only to get the stupid size wrong and all that. ^^;;
I've also noticed that logical reasonable everyday clothing ends up hidden in the center of the clothing area. Sale stuff and stuff that "looks cool" are on the outskirts, but if you want dress pants or a plain long-sleeve shirt you have to go through a maze of stuff to reach it.
Considering Marketing degrees these days often require some level of higher mathematics (I've abstracted marketing journals before, I'm not exactly joking on this bit) and it only proves that Marketers are some form of alien life that are infiltrating mankind with the intention of enslaving us all. ^^;;
Rob H.
@Dan: That explains a lot.
@Robert: That explains *everything!*
:P
Ah yes... one of the earliest times in my life that I began to recognize that older girls and women are different from me and the rest of the boys was clothes shopping with Momma bear at JC Pennys, or was it Sears. More importantly, I began the realization that these differences intrigued me greatly.
Concerning Robert's quote about this all "only prov[ing] that Marketers are some form of alien life that are infiltrating mankind with the intention of enslaving us all..."
...Didn't I SAY that Walmart execs were largely, if not entirely responsible? Didn't I ALREADY warn you!? :P
Post a Comment