Editor’s note: Today’s post comes from PMS Pammie. (Schadenfreude alert: She spotted a few stories that were easy targets for snarky commentary…)
‘Scuse me a moment while I take something for some miserable cramps. Endometriosis is one condition that likes to announce itself viscerally.
Okay while the pain killers take effect I’d like to revel in the fact that the bloom is off the rose in the “mommy market.” Seems retailers are beginning to realize that “mommies” have less disposable income to dispose of in a tightening economy.
The New York Times has a front page story, To Buy Children’s Gifts, Mothers Do Without. Apparently mothers sacrificing is news?? Interesting. I thought that came with the territory. Now check out the photo that goes with this story. There are a few things wrong with this picture. First of all what individual child should be getting this sort of haul in a downturn? And this quote from the sacrificing mother, “I want her to be able to look back and say ‘even though they were tough times, my mom was still able to give me stuff.”
Um, come again? Isn’t there a life lesson here to be taught about the fact that we all can do with a little belt tightening when the economy hits the skids. Is “stuff” the most important thing you can give your daughter. I understand the desire to want a few things under the tree but getting your daughter a full blown plastic fake kitchen while your real kitchen needs a dishwasher seems a tad ironic.
The article goes on to say that with mommies buying less for themselves the women’s apparel industry is going to be among the hardest hit. Hmmm. I sense an opportunity here, a silver lining in fact! More deep discounted sweaters, shoes, coats and other accessories for us! For once, infertile women and women who elected not to have children might get some attention.
Yoohoo advertisers we’re over here — bring your ad spend to our blogs. Hang on…this should get their attention: Non-mommies have more disposable income than mommies.
And what other story caught my eye? Well how about the dust up with Motrin? Mommy bloggers were out in force recently complaining about the “condescending” tone of a Motrin ad that targeted moms who wear their babies as fashion accessories. A company with a large ad budget clearly saw an opportunity. They wouldn’t have spent the money on the ad if they didn’t see a market. One self described “as a mom” didn’t taken take issue with the underlying content (mommies do wear their babies) but rather the stereotype that it perpetuated. Seems the same women who use their baby pictures as their avatars and carry their infants as a trophies were the the ones who were most up in arms. This struck me as particularly rich. Perhaps the ad hit a little too close to home?
BTW, Motrin — got anything for cramps?