Godly Women · Traditionalist Bird

When being Frugal Means Spending within Your Husband’s Income

Lori reminds us again today on the virtues of frugality and living within your husband’s income. 

“Many women today are spendthrifts. They are continually going shopping and spending money or scouring the Internet for things to buy.”

“We don’t need an expensive college education, the latest fashions, expensive haircuts and manicures, spa days, elaborate vacations, new cars, perfectly decorated homes, eating out often (Americans now spend more money on dining out than groceries), etc. if all these mean we are dissipating our husband’s income.”

Its funny she says these things as just the other week she bought a skirt on sale on the internet. Original price was $70 and I can’t imagine the sale price was much lower than $50. She didn’t bother to tell her readers what that was though. She says we don’t need the latest fashions, but because that skirt is within her husband’s income –well then, latest fashions are just fine, I suppose.

A commenter calls this to her attention:

Whether on sale or not, does not mean its a good deal or frugal. Frugality seems to be defined in that you just stay within your husband’s income. In other words if he makes a lot of money, feel free to shop away because you have a higher ceiling, whether the purchase is actually needed or not. Real frugality is having millions of dollars and still opting to shop at lower end stores or thrift stops because its the frugal thing to do. Just because you can afford say a $70 skirt and its within your husband’s income, does that mean you should buy it?

Lori’s new favorite 1828 dictionary defines frugality this way:

“Economical in the use or appropriation of money, goods or provisions of any kind; saving unnecessary expense, either of money or of any thing else which is to be used or consumed; sparing; not profuse, prodigal or lavish. We ought to be frugal not only in the expenditure of money and of goods, but in the employment of time. It is followed by of, before the thing saved; as frugal of time. It is not synonymous with parsimonious, nor with thrifty, as now used.”

Saving unnecessary expense is key. Is it necessary to buy a $70 skirt when you can get one for $10 at the thrift or consignment store (sometimes of the same brand and quality), despite what your husband earns? Expensive does not by any means always mean better quality either. Isn’t it better to still shop frugally despite what you can afford, so the saved money can go into more important things–medical bills, college education or retirement so your husband can retire earlier?

It it such an incredibly subjective thing on what one considers cheap, frugal, or getting a deal. Lori has also told the story about how she reupholstered her couches for cheaper than new–ONLY $1,500. Now my brand new couch set cost around $1,000 from Ashley Furniture. I would never pay $1,500 when I know I can get brand new for so much less, but in her world $1,500 is considered a deal for something that isn’t even new.

Overall, I think she is sending a confusing message.  It seems like “expensive college education, the latest fashions, expensive haircuts and manicures, spa days, elaborate vacations, new cars, perfectly decorated homes, eating out often” are only bad things if your husband can’t provide the money to support them. But this sort of materialism and unnecessary expenses seems to be just fine if he does have the money for them.

There is also this trend out there among the godly women where husbands basically define what words mean. If the husband deems something frugal or modest, then it is and she has full approval to buy it or wear it. It doesn’t matter what you spend or wear as long as your husband approves.

For example, as a side conversation, Lori has said her husband likes her to wear her skirts just above her knees. Well, some other men and women may find that immodest. She shames on women for wearing yoga pants because they are immodest, but perhaps the women who wear them have husbands who deem they are modest just as her husband deems skirts above the knees are appropriate. There was a big discussion recently about women not being stumbling blocks to men by wearing yoga pants. Well, to other wearing knees above the knees can be a stumbling block. And to take it much further down the road some would say any woman not wearing a burqa is a being a stumbling block.

Advertisements

24 thoughts on “When being Frugal Means Spending within Your Husband’s Income

  1. Yes, I agree with you about cheaply-made vs. higher quality. This is all very true — I find that in homemade clothing, I buy higher quality cotton and it lasts for three times as long as cheaper cottons.

    The problem is when somebody lectures and shames people about the audacity of how dare they work to earn money and pay bills while living high off the hog when most people can’t do that. I used to follow Lori and pay careful attention to what she wrote, but finally I realized what she was really doing. Anybody who talks so openly like she does about all sorts of sexual things that are not for everyone’s eyes and ears, has no set standards for anything, but says that every husband has the authority to set his own standards (thus leaving the door wide open to perversity and abuse, which we see has happened), and says that her way is the ONLY way — and her book was a telling thing, especially when we read about how she usually always got her own way, didn’t have any serious goals in school (I mean, c’mon, the only good thing about high school was cheerleading or something like that??!! Didn’t you take even ONE course that enriched your mind? What about math? English? History? A science course? Foreign language? NOTHING??!!) then something is wrong. If I had a daughter like that, I’d have yanked her out of cheerleading so fast she wouldn’t know what hit her!!! She’d also probably have been yanked out of that school (too many friends who aren’t good influences) and put in a private school where she’d be forced to wake up and take her schooling seriously. That’s where parents come in, to keep their kids focused and goal-oriented.

    I believe her only goal was to snag a husband as fast as possible so she wouldn’t have to work or serve anywhere. She wants to have a stay-home gravy train. I worked until my oldest was born and will go back to work when my youngest is finished with high school at the latest (since I home school, I need to be here and teach for now). Well, at least I’ll go back to work if I can get a job…..I’ve been out of the market for some years. I may end up having to go back to school myself.

    Like

  2. If you want to know what “equipment” all of this stuff is made on , read “The High Cost of Cheap Fashion.” Very eye-opening. And yes, I realize that a lot of time this sort of work is all people in third-world countries may have available to them, but that doesn’t mitigate the responsibilities companies like GAP have to do their part to monitor their own standards. In case anyone thinjs bringing this up is being a liberal or SJW or something…
    That being said, the quality CAN vary quite a bit, even within the same company, over the course of time. And yes, many prices are not at all reflective of quality–but sometimes, the price is. I myself dont buy much, but if I find a good-quality item, I will buy more than one of that same item on sale if possible. It sounds like I must be rich though when I’ve spent $50+ on a dress that is beautiful, well-made, and that I wear for years. My husband thinks those items were worth it.
    But then again, I do think there is such a thing as higher-quality clothing, that it is woth it sometimes, that having a zillion different outfits that were “on sale!” is stupid, and that cheaper stuff absolutely does wear out quite quickly or get holes these days, because it is made with cheap (and often synthetic) materials. I have bought some items from etsy online that I still have and wear nearly ten years later.

    I do believe LA is off her rocker, however. 😂

    Like

  3. I also wanted to add that they also show how desperate the single mother was in those days. There were a lot of single mothers among the poor; often the men in these families worked at extremely hard labor in very unsafe conditions. Widows were desperate to feed children. We already know several ladies whose grandmothers struggled to keep their families together and keep everyone alive. I really encourage everybody to watch this documentary, Victorian Slum House. You come away with a huge appreciation for your ancestors and for what you have today.

    Like

  4. After reading so many posts from Lori regarding how easy it is to simply wait for someone else to support us, it is interesting to look into some real history for a change. One thing I have found to be very educational is the interest in “living history” (when you see a re-enactment of a Civil War battle, in which everything right down to the toothbrushes and the all-wool fullcoats in the middle of the summer must be authentic, it really drives home the point of how much we have to be grateful for in the twenty-first century). Re-enactments, researched by historians and executed by those who are really interested in experiencing it first-hand, are very invaluable to make it all come alive.

    I’d like to draw your attention to this very interesting documentary that will be airing on PBS today:

    https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=victorian+slum+house

    This will give an authentic picture of what life was really like for the desperately poor in the days before relief, when some erroneously assume that family and the church provided for the widowed and abandoned. It will also give an authentic picture of the desperately poor family that was intact. Families rarely stayed intact because factory work was dangerous. The main breadwinner often was killed or injured. Children frequently had to go out to work. Married women were in even a tighter spot because they could not go out and work; all work had to be done in their homes and if they couldn’t produce enough or high enough quality, they didn’t get paid. It was a desperate hand-to-mouth existence.

    It was not lost on me that the prevailing attitude among the wealthy was that you were either born poor or had become poor due to your own moral failings. I was not born poor, but have experienced modest circumstances, and also experienced the loss of a sizeable amount of money in my family due to a poor investment decision (which seemed prudent to my grandfather at the time).

    It was a foundational doctrine of John Calvin that “predestination” was made evident by earthly prosperity. The poor were damned; the rich were saved. His followers might claim to believe differently these days, but the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree. This mentality has permeated a large number of fundamental and evangelical Christian circles.

    Like

  5. I find it interesting that as of today Mrs. F’s question about brands of quality clothes has not been answered. For one who claims to shop and pay for quality I am surprised a list can’t be rattled of quickly, especially for a blog that wants to help women.

    Like

  6. Jumping Beans is amazing for ages 2-6. I didn’t pay for any of the clothing I got for that though (gifts), but it survived the tom sawyer level of physical activity my kids put clothing through and held up through hundreds of washes, stain free.

    Anyway this discussion made me realize I could, like buy the big kids sizes now and see if they hold up as well. Or I could let the kids sew their own clothes, which they are desperate to do.

    Like

  7. Stone said:

    “Oh yeah I get most of those brands on clearance or consignment. I would consider Carters, Old Navy, etc not to be quality though. That is pretty much standard for kids. Lands End is probably more quality, but again its expensive so I am assuming its quality.”

    My feeling about this is that Lands End winter coats are much, much better than the coats you’ll see from the other stores, but that Carters is at least 90% as good as Lands End for just about everything else. I don’t find that GAP has dramatically better quality than Old Navy for kids’ clothes. Presumably, there’s some difference, but I feel like there’s a large overlap between Old Navy and GAP in terms of quality, despite the fact that GAP is way more expensive.

    I think Carters baby stuff is pretty much the gold standard for infant clothing, which is nice, given that it’s not high-end.

    One nuance here is that different stores are better for different age groups. I like Carters for infants, toddlers and preschoolers/early elementary (both for value and quality), but they do not make clothes for big kids. Lands End is my favorite for older school age kids (lots of very attractive and modest girls’ clothing and swimsuits with good coverage), but it’s kind of expensive for what you get. GAP also has some cute little girl dresses, but it’s a constant source of temptation to buy stuff there at 40% off when it’s not even that affordable at 40% off…I like Old Navy a lot for inexpensive jeans for Big Girl, who wears adult sizes. At this point, although I’m not crazy about Old Navy (it’s kind of boring), it provides very good value for basics.

    “Where is there stuff made and is it by any different equipment then Carters or Walmart clothes?”

    That’s the thing–I have not encountered a brand better than Carters. I think the name brand stuff is basically at the same quality level.

    ” I should have clarified also from the original question, I don’t care so much about quality for kids since they outgrow them so quickly. Was more thinking of brands for adults.”

    I buy tops for myself from Lands End, some bottoms from Lands End, rain coats and fleeces from Landsend, Landsend swimsuits, and then occasional swishy Amazon skirts. There was a time when I realized I hadn’t set foot in a store to buy for myself in 5+ years…I find Amazon stuff tends to be a gamble, though. Unfortunately, when I venture into Dress Barn, I often wind up with stuff I don’t actually wear.

    This isn’t really the budget way to go, but the Lands End holds up well and the sizes are predictable and the clothes do what they’re supposed to do. You could do a lot worse for coats and swimsuits.

    Like

  8. Oh yeah I get most of those brands on clearance or consignment. I would consider Carters, Old Navy, etc not to be quality though. That is pretty much standard for kids. Lands End is probably more quality, but again its expensive so I am assuming its quality. Where is there stuff made and is it by any different equipment then Carters or Walmart clothes? I should have clarified also from the original question, I don’t care so much about quality for kids since they outgrow them so quickly. Was more thinking of brands for adults. Before anything falls apart on me it usually gets stained beyond repair. I don’t buy anything with a lot of whites for kids. For kids and myself, I avoid red to avoid doing too many separate loads of laundry. I avoid materials that need dry cleaning.

    Like

  9. Stone said:

    “I don’t know either the quality brands. I know the expensive brands, but costs does not mean quality.”

    I really like Carters for baby and little kid clothes and Landsend for big kids, but basically all the name brand stuff has served me well: Carters, Landsend, GAP, Children’s Place, Old Navy, etc. Pretty much anything from those stores can serve multiple children (although bigger kids’ pants and jeans do wear out). My only son’s winter coats immediately go to my buddy (who has boys), while Big Girl’s serviceable clothing is tucked away for Baby Girl. Baby Girl’s outgrown clothing is either given to some smaller girl twins or goes to Goodwill. (I am keeping clothes for 0-3 just in case we have another baby.) Just imagine a big conveyor belt…

    (I can’t quite afford Landsend right now, even with 30% coupons, but we’re a captive audience because of school uniform needs.)

    I’m not uber-frugal, but a) I dislike children’s clothes that fall apart instantly and b) I dislike paying full-price (or anything close to full-price) for kids’ clothes and c) Baby Girl (the only child at home much of the day) is a good little shopping buddy. The result of those factors is that I hit the big strip mall with Baby Girl at least once a week and often visit 4 children’s clothing stores per visit (Baby Girl is very tolerant) before hitting the grocery store. Sometimes I’ll have a particular goal in mind (size 8 packable rain jacket or size 13 girls’ summer shoes for a wide foot–I keep a running list of things to keep an eye out for), but a lot of the time I’m just combing the sales and clearance racks, with the idea that I’ll get something for Baby Girl if it’s cute and under $10. There’s a lot of thrill of the hunt and suspense in wondering which items are going to wind up on clearance. I got Big Girl a new Old Navy dress for $8.99 this past week and was pretty darn thrilled with the acquisition–especially when she wore it to church.

    I confess that I spend A LOT of time at those children’s clothing stores but am not spending a lot on a dollar-per-hour basis, A lot of time, I might not get anything on a particular visit, even after visiting several stores.

    Like

  10. This is a good question at Lori’s that has not been answered yet:

    Mrs. F. says:
    April 27, 2017 at 2:41 pm
    Would you mind sharing some of the brands that are high quality, especially for children? I’m not familiar enough with brands to know what to get! But I’d like to make better choices for my family, even if it is at the thrift store! Thank you.

    I don’t know either the quality brands. I know the expensive brands, but costs does not mean quality. I would expect her or a reader to know the answer to this if they are so insistent they buy expensive things for quality or because they last longer. To me its all the same and seems like the expensive stuff in made in the same crap factories as the cheap stuff. As we know its hard to find anything made in the USA. N

    Related, out of curiousity, I did some comparison shopping.

    This is where Lori bought the infamous $70 skirt
    http://www.zappos.com/p/jag-jeans-florence-skirt-republic-denim-in-indigo-steel-indigo-steel/product/8814359/color/576712

    Now she says she got it on sale but won’t say what that sale price is.

    So quick 2 second google search of “jag jeans florence skirt”
    took me to Nordstrom Rack where you can get the skirt for $30

    https://www.nordstromrack.com/shop/product/1977678/jag-jeans-florence-skirt?color=MED%20INDIGO

    Was that so hard to save $40? Even though that took me a few second to save that much, I can see why on an hour basis women to spend a lot of time shopping. If you want deals, you do have to take the time to do research. But, why does it matter to save $40 if $70 is still in your husband’s income, right? Let’s just waste money because we can.

    Like

  11. To fix the disconnect the only answer they can come up with is…you must be jealous. If you don’t understand why a $70 skirt is perfectly reasonable, your just jealous you can’t buy that skirt.
    No clue how juvenile this makes them sound.

    Like

  12. For most, from-scratch living is a hobby to dabble at not a lifestyle. They have no concept of what it would be like to HAVE to do it or not be able to pay the bills.

    This is Lori in a nutshell. Which is why she doesn’t see the disconnect between posting newer kitchens and pricier clothing and the things that she is telling her readers about frugality and being a keeper at home. She needs to find a group of comfortably middle class wives looking to make stuff and post it on Pinterest to lecture instead of giving poor wives a hard time.

    Like

  13. Here’s my take – frugality is wise whether you have a lot of money or not. Who wants to waste money? But the issue with Lori’s poorer readers (large family/SAHM) is that frugality is toted as the end-all-be-all solution to making it on one income. AT SOME POINT, frugality for some families with the one income is not going to be enough to keep the family living a decent quality of life. Mom might, gasp, have to find work of some sort or another. But instead of facing this reality, they keep pushing beans and rice (or as Debi Pearl has admitted-cattle feed). Buy less meat. Shop thrift stores. Buy used. Cut cable. Hang your laundry to dry. Make your own laundry soap. Bake your own bread.

    It’s one thing to buy less meat if you generally have it seven days a week but when it gets to the point where you can only afford maybe a chicken at .99/lb once a week as a treat, then it’s time for mom to find a job.

    It’s one thing to say bake your own bread if you have the time but a mom who is homeschooling a large family doesn’t have the time to make and bake 7 or more loaves of bread a week.

    It’s one thing to say shop thrift stores but as Anonymous points out, shopping thrift requires time pawing through racks to find the gems. It can be a fun hobby for those who have the time but a mom with 5 kids trailing along is NOT going to easily pull this off.

    It’s very difficult to live like the pioneers and do everything from scratch and live in the modern world. The educational demands were not as strict for children, everyone else in your community was living the same way so goods and services could be swapped more easily, basic supplies needed for all this didn’t cost as much etc. When everyone in the society is at work and school during the day, there is very little support to live the frugal from-scratch lifestyle that is toted by these Titus 2 types all in the name of being “keepers at home.” For most, from-scratch living is a hobby to dabble at not a lifestyle. They have no concept of what it would be like to HAVE to do it or not be able to pay the bills. I feel bad for the women who feel like they are failing when they have many children and are harassed with “Your foremothers did it, so can you.” Our foremothers didn’t have many of the other modern day demands and lack of support that women have now.

    Like

  14. I see how this is being rationalized now. Buy expensive items because they last longer. That really you are being more frugal in the end because you don’t have to replace them every few years. This is going to become a game of my frugality tops your frugality. I can’t relate to cheap clothes only lasting a year or two at all. It just hasn’t been my experience to have clothes falling apart left and right. Why do these godly women have to replace cheap clothes anyway? Aren’t they all excellent homemakers who can sew and patch things up?

    I was thinking an example of an unnecessary expense is those who are insistent upon buying brand name products rather than generics. There are very few brand names products that are actually better than their generic. Tylenol for example. Why buy the Tylenol brand when the store generic is the same thing without the flashy packaging. I find store brand diapers are often just the same if not better than Pampers and Huggies. Whether your husband’s income can afford it or not, usually buying generic is the frugal and wise thing to do.
    Yet some women are insistent on buying brand name products as a sort of status symbol to show their husband makes enough to afford them. Generics are for poor people basically.

    Like

  15. TheJoyFilledWife said:

    ” Well I have always purchased very, very inexpensive clothing and have had to replace my clothes every 1-2 years most of my life. My husband was always saying earlier on in our marriage, “Didn’t we JUST by you those clothes that now have holes and are wearing thin?” and I would say, “No, we got these a while ago…Like a year or two.” He would say, “Honey, a year or two is not a long time. Your clothes should not be in bad shape after that short of time. If you will purchase quality items then they will save money and last forever.”

    !!!!

    I understand that that might work for lightly-worn fancy occasion clothes, but it’s much less true when one has a small wardrobe, an active lifestyle, and clothes are worn and washed 2X a week.

    I once made the mistake of simultaneously cutting down my wardrobe and doing Dave Ramsey, and I quickly discovered that it was going to be very difficult to keep ahead of the wear on my clothes.

    This is true for the active housewife, but even more true for blue collar workers. When I was a kid, my dad’s work jeans would be SHREDDED by the work he did, and my mom was continually patching them with her sewing machine. It wasn’t that the clothes were poor quality–it was just the nature of the work.

    Like

  16. Refocused Helpmeet said:

    “My hubby and I are planning a little camping trip away this weekend. I’ve struggled all week because I’ve got this picture perfect idea of what camping should look like (think: glamping) and have wanted to make multiple trips to Dollar Tree (it’s only a buck, right?) to purchase items that seem necessary. The honest truth: we don’t have the extra money right now. The point of camping was supposed to have been: cheap getaway.”

    I don’t think “glamping” typically involves trips to Dollar Tree.

    Like

  17. HH said:

    “Again, I say so what? No, we don’t have the money for me to spend $70 on a skirt, nor do we have the money for a “nice” kitchen like the one in the previous post, but I am not going to post about how unfair it is. It reminds me so much of the younger generation and how everything has to be “fair”. If you want everything to be “fair”, then guess what? We deserve to die for our sins, it wasn’t fair that Jesus willingly took our place was it?”

    !!!!

    Then why all the frugality talk, and why not post photos of unrenovated older kitchens and thrift store finds?

    Why the mismatch between the posts and the photos?

    (Hint: because the lifestyle that LA is pushing in print would look ugly and cheap in photos.)

    Like

  18. Overall, I think she is sending a confusing message. It seems like “expensive college education, the latest fashions, expensive haircuts and manicures, spa days, elaborate vacations, new cars, perfectly decorated homes, eating out often” are only bad things if your husband can’t provide the money to support them. But this sort of materialism and unnecessary expenses seems to be just fine if he does have the money for them.

    This is essentially what she saying. I wouldn’t have a problem with that if she didn’t claim to be frugal and lecture others about how to spend their money. Everyone buys things that someone else might see as an unnecessary luxury. Materialism is when you are more concerned with material things than with spiritual or intellectual things. I don’t know if Lori is materialistic or not, but she should really stop lecturing the poor women who follow her blog about being frugal. But you can’t be a Titus 2 blogger without hypocritically criticizing other women. That’s part of it.

    Oh this is great, apparently in the comments now, in traditional godly women style, they are bringing out the “your just jealous” card if you think a $70 skirt isn’t frugal. Apparently, anyone who disagrees with that purchase is jealous that they don’t have the money for it!!

    I think that Lori actually hopes that other women will be jealous. She knows that a lot of her readers have smaller than average incomes and a larger than average family size but she is still talking to them about $70 skirts.

    Like

  19. My husband often criticizes me for purchasing clothing through an online retailer for myself and my teenage daughter. We found a few online retailers that offer some rebates and wholesale reasonable prices (which are NOTHING like the $70 skirt) that are within my budget, plus I make quite a few of our clothes. I found this was necessary because with my family size and my time constraints, I simply have no time to rifle through clothing racks to find the needle in the haystack that sometimes is the case with thrift stores. When my older children were smaller and I had fewer of them, I was able to do this, and so had many lovely baby/toddler/preschool clothes for my children that were $2 or less — now, with teens and preschoolers and all in between, I simply have no time for that. I need to shop online, find what we need with a minimum of fuss and get it done. That’s the season of life I’m in. I usually know exactly what I want or what my daughter wants/needs, head right for that, check out price options and similar options and then make my decision — done and done.

    My husband goes to thrift stores, but he has an entire Saturday generally to do so. He can shop without time constraints and he can also find some really nice things as men’s fashions really do not change much over time. I observed to him that it’s a cinch to shop for our sons…..everything is pretty much appropriate, you simply have to discern between “Sunday best” clothing, “school/everyday” clothing and athletic clothing and you’ve got it made, whether it’s clothes or shoes. I can usually shop for the boys at a thrift, although I find it difficult to find pants and jeans that fit my ultra-skinny teenage son, even with the new adjustable waists. Wal-Mart is my standby, but even then it’s hard to find the slim fit and he needs that, or he looks like he’s wearing clothes two sizes too big for him. So I often find myself mail-ordering school uniform pants and dress pants for Sunday so he’ll look appropriate. But I usually check thrift first, and sometimes if we’re lucky we get the right size for pennies on the dollar! 🙂

    Shop for a girl, and that all changes. If you have the standards of our family, you even find it difficult to find appropriate clothing at a second hand shop. You must sew all the clothing or shop online. And we don’t wear our skirts above the knee, she and I both wear athletic skorts that cover our kneecaps (we have started running together) and all our other skirts are mid-calf. We don’t wear jeans, pants or shorts, nor do we wear regular swimsuits. This causes us problems. She needed some nice regular shirts and we went shopping only to discover that the size she used to wear has suddenly shrunk — they are now touting the new “feminine fit” which is really that they are tighter and show more. She had to get the next size up and even that was tight. She was crying, sure that she’d gained weight and was fat, ugly, etc. We finally found a size that worked for her, but the damage was done; she’s so self-conscious now that it makes me furious. The new “feminine fit” craze is all about getting the girls’ clothes tighter and tighter. And I can only imagine what might happen to the girl who always wore size 12 and now all of a sudden wears size 16 and her friends get wind of it — can you just hear the jeers and taunts? And the manospherians only get more fodder for their obsession with how fat women are these days….sometimes I wonder if the manospherians and the fashion designers of girls’ clothing are in cahoots!

    And as far as Lori is concerned, I would think, with no children in the home, one would have plenty of time to shop for good deals. That’s what I’ll be doing when my life changes and that time comes for me. I’ll have different things I’ll be wanting to spend money on rather than $70 skirts.

    But then again, maybe going out to find bargains would be under the category of “gadding about”.

    Like

  20. My disagreement has nothing to do with it being “fair”. Its about is spending $70 for a denin skirt necessary when you can get something just as nice for much less? Oh and the reason women spend so much time shopping is so they can find that $70 skirt for $10, so they can be frugal. It takes time to find the real deals.

    Like

  21. HH says:
    April 26, 2017 at 11:55 am
    Forgive me if I am reading something into this that is not there, but what does it matter how much her skirt cost?

    This reminds me of the time Lori done a post about keeping things clean and there was a picture of a kitchen from a lady in the chatroom and people got upset and started posting that “most people couldn’t afford a kitchen like that living on just one income and a nice kitchen like that is beyond most of the ladies that read these posts income” Again, I say so what? No, we don’t have the money for me to spend $70 on a skirt, nor do we have the money for a “nice” kitchen like the one in the previous post, but I am not going to post about how unfair it is. It reminds me so much of the younger generation and how everything has to be “fair”. If you want everything to be “fair”, then guess what? We deserve to die for our sins, it wasn’t fair that Jesus willingly took our place was it?

    It sounds like jealousy to me. What ever happened to being happy with what you have? Why does everyone have to be jealous if some are better off than others? Honestly, if you think about it, there is always someone worse off than you, for example homeless people, widows, moms who have lost their children. Rather than be jealous of what someone else has, ask yourself the question “Why do I deserve so much?”

    Not to come off sounding holier than thou, because trust me, I’m not, but I do feel like people sometimes just look for something to complain about.

    Proverbs 27:15 – A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.

    As always, Lori please feel free to not post this if you think it will cause problems.

    Reply
    Lori Alexander says:
    April 26, 2017 at 1:27 pm
    Thank you, HH, and I debated whether or not to post this comment but I get these types of comments frequently and I agree with you. There so much talk about being “fair” and life is NEVER fair. Ken gave our children a long lecture about this when they were young and our children were never heard saying, “That’s not fair!” They knew it wasn’t fair that they lived in America, had full tummies at night, and soft beds to sleep in and others do not. We must learn to be thankful and content with what we have and not be covetous towards others who have more since there will always be others with “more” than us.

    Like

  22. Oh this is great, apparently in the comments now, in traditional godly women style, they are bringing out the “your just jealous” card if you think a $70 skirt isn’t frugal. Apparently, anyone who disagrees with that purchase is jealous that they don’t have the money for it!!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s