jump to navigation

Of undergarment disbursements May 19, 2009

Posted by Snoopy in Current-affairs, Observation.
trackback

BigNSmall.png

When I write a letter to my lovely Aunt Ethel, and I know how she loves receiving my rambling repartee, the largest cost is most certainly tied up in the time it takes me to put pen to paper. I would not want her to think that I’d rushed my correspondence, love her as I do. I take my time, and place the carefully written words into a small envelope, the front festooned with a curlicued address and a perfectly aligned first class stamp. Thirty-nine pence is never too much to bring a ray of sunshine to my Aunt’s world.

Every so often I will treat my Aunt; I know she is particularly partial to the odd jaffa cake or two with her afternoon tea, so along with my words, I will sometimes post a generously-sized carton of the cakes. I can only imagine the smile that such a package brings. It may cost a little more, being bigger and heavier, but she is of course worth every penny spent.

And on my dear Auntie’s birthday, I make sure that no expense is spared. It may be forty rolls of wool for her knitting, a complete buff and wax kit for her treasured Hillman, whatever it is I would gladly pay double, for the purchase, packaging and delivery of such love, irrespective of size, weight or transportational taxonomy knows no price.

I was reading through the daily news recently, and came across a rather curious piece about Marks and Spencer. It was made all the more curious when i thought about my special deliveries to my dearest of relatives. It would appear that the venerable high-street store has been charging higher prices for larger sizes of bras, upsetting the bountiful ladies with additional undergarment disbursements.

And I must confess, taking into account the overheads associated with all items of larger girth, post and bras alike, I find my equilibrium somewhat disturbed.

On the one hand one should not be penalised for what god hath sought to place on one’s plate, dutifully celebrating each in its turn, but on the other, does it not make a modicum of sense that if something is more generously-endowed it does indeed require more time, materials, energy and transportation to place said item on said shelf for perusers to peruse?

Well, it would appear that Marks and Spencer have adjusted their prices based on out-of-joint noses, thus creating what would seem to be an amicable solution to media and public alike.

However the veritable grey matter just won’t leave this be. For does this not now penalise those of a lesser-endowment who will in all likelihood, and unknowingly, now subsidise the additional costs of the larger garments? And does it not seem even mildly puzzling to other people that the ire of those of a more lithe physique has remained unfanned despite now suffering the same indignancies that those of a larger disposition once experienced?

Such happenstances are curious indeed.

Comments»

1. RCT - May 19, 2009

ah what misguided logic – would it be so simple that baby and children’s clothes must then cost less than adult ones? That leather costs more than silk? That stockings cost less than tights?

Me thinks not!
We can but dream .. ;)

2. Snoopy - May 19, 2009

Aye, and so say we all. A strange world we live in.