31https://www.aestheticscienceinstitute.edu/medical/celebrities-who-use-viagra/100/ thesis speech ideas case study scribdВ viagra propecia cialias essay on changing fashion http://snowdropfoundation.org/papers/thesis-proposal-case-study/12/ buy essays online for cheap go to link essay on social media hamburg writing instrument company apa style case study template viagra levittown generic cialis doesn't work lasix 40 mg dosage https://www.arohaphilanthropies.org/heal/woher-kriege-ich-viagra/96/ http://belltower.mtaloy.edu/studies/writing-my-dissertation/20/ harvard thesis cdo viagra ardentown free cialis samples try viagra ships 2 to 3 days u.s jelly viagra generika potenzmittel writing kindergarten worksheets https://childbirthsolutions.com/sildenafil/butyr-fentanyl/20/ see essay a house on fire with quotes follow url water the cycle of life essay ideas see url viagra causes migraines ielts academic writing task 2 band 9 x-ray diffraction thesis customized research paper from the paper experts inc MAY 2017
My big question is: Why is there still a stigma surrounding thrifting and consignment shopping? Why is it there still a bigger emphasis placed on buying something new over just wearing something you like regardless of where it came from?
I can see an argument being made that it is all about consumerism and how industry/marketing has implanted in our (society) heads an emphasis on new vs. second hand. Yes, I can clearly see that argument. In working with kids I see how the more money a family has the larger the emphasis is on having the new trendy thing. How it doesn’t really matter your income, you want to have a new thing but money is what dictates what you have. The monetarily poor get left out.
Here is where I get a bit left behind in this… a second hand item like a DaVinci painting has worth but a second hand shirt is considered “used” in the sense that a tissue has been used and therefore dirty and less. How does that make any sense?
I grew up having things but my family not having lots of disposable income. For all intensive purposes we were monetarily poor. That didn’t mean I went without all of the time. Overall, I was a happy kid. Society (or consumerism, take your pick) is saying that because my family was “poor” that I shouldn’t have been happy because I didn’t have “stuff” but I did have stuff and my life felt full and rich regardless of our income. My parents tried not to place a strong value on what we didn’t have but chose to focus on what we did have. They have even said I taught them so much about thrifting and making do because I saw color in places they felt were bleak.
Great, I changed my family’s outlook and view. I have had a hand in changing the outlook some friends have had. All of that is great but it doesn’t change society as a whole or the view it has on second hand items, unless it’s a highly prized/sought after item.
Something needs to change.
Why? Because I still see today kids placing value on having brand new Nike sneakers over being happy that they have a pair of shoes that fits well and they like irregardless of the swoosh on the shoe. Most of the time the kids don’t know why they want those Nikes except for peer pressure or other outside influences. Worse, I see this misplacement of value being forced on kids not just by their parents or the media but even by schools and the branches of the government. Shouldn’t we (society) be doing more to change how “second hand” is viewed?
So here is where the stigma with “second hand” really bothers me. The value of the term “second hand” within a flawed system: foster care.