With the comment about why come out at all: some shopping we'd do together, others parts not. I am not interested in (insert item here) and my wife is not interested in a bored husband for example. I'd rather spend the rest of the day with her, do the shared shopping and then head off for a while and do something I'm more interested in and let her enjoy the part she likes.
We don't have to be attached at the hip or in different towns, there's a happy medium.
Boredom is actually a bit exhausting for me for some reason. Never have quite pinpointed why...
Two decades of marriage indicates that much like a root canal, thirty minutes of selecting a new shirt for the big party seems like it takes hours of waiting but its really a very small slice of an otherwise enjoyable afternoon.
Due to aspects of contemporary style and higher physical variation in the female form, if we shop together to get new date night outfits or whatever, the vast majority of the time will be spent on her outfit. It drives my wife nuts that I can select a shirt or pants in about five minutes, and they actually fit me and my butt doesn't look fat or whatever it is she's selecting for.
I am so old I remember when enclosed legacy shopping malls had a variety of stores, not just 95% womens clothing stores, I can remember going to book stores and believe it or not, music and software stores when we were newlyweds. Perhaps much as vinyl makes music stores cool again, people will start distributing steam keys on floppy disks again, it could be very hip and cool with the youngsters. Also pre-Amazon, department stores were more interesting to shop at, if she was going to spend three hours trying on jeans I could buy a blender from housewares and I probably needed more AA batteries or dish washing soap or who knows, but now a days if I want a blender I comparison shop on the phone and its delivered tomorrow for cheaper than department store price, also I probably bought it when I thought of it weeks ago, not weeks later when I was bored shopping with my wife. I think of stuff that comes from Amazon boxes today, in the old days I shopped manually while my wife was trying to find a bra that fits or something for hours. Sears is a dead company now, but I spent a lot of time and money in my youth in its hardware store component, for example. To a large extent, "I'm bored" as a male shopper is a very "era of internet shopping" phenomena.
Changelog v0.2: Now with mandatory payment!
Seriously this is part of the cultural norm in certain part of SE Asia. And leaving the your wife to do the ( her ) shopping by herself is viewed as inconsiderate and to some degree rude.
I often go shopping with my wife and some items we both want to look for, others only one of us. Maybe she wants my opinion on the final choices she's made but I really don't need to be around for the rest of the deliberations. There's the exact same thing the other way around.
One of my favorites is Souvenir Shop: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBzW1xUjwew
There are so many bored husbands/boyfriends who could use them.
Maybe the bored adults can take care of the kids while the rest shop. ;)
On the other hand if you offer child care for 8+ hours, people will use it as a cheaper alternative to babysitting, and if you charge for it, most likely fewer people are going to use it.
I married a woman who likes woman's clothing stores less than I do.
EDIT: Mayby I should clarify. Assuming that such a feature is only for “bored boyfriends” is casually sexist. And it is also homosexual erasure, come to think of it.
Nuke the whole thing if that makes things clearer, but please do not make it seem like I'm saying things I'm not. I cannot say this strongly enough, please do not alter what I'm saying
Edit - maybe I'm getting confused but I'd thought things had been shifted around. If not, sorry, and if they've been shifted back then thanks.
They did not assume it was only for bored boyfriends. They thanked the person who thought about bored boyfriends. That means the chairs are at least partly for bored boyfriends but not exclusively for bored boyfriends. The person replying, if a boyfriend, would have a convoluted thought process if it was 'I'm glad the person who designed the space thought about other people than me that I can also obviously make use of' rather than 'I'm glad the people who designed the space thought about me' when seeing something that benefits them directly.
> homosexual erasure
I feel your assumption that a bored boyfriend being considered is homosexual erasure ignores the boyfriends of other men. Or perhaps you meant something more specific but didn't specify? Perhaps you'd like myself and others to check before jumping to a conclusion about your motives rather than calling you a homophobe? Why not extend us the same courtesy.
To make a comparison, what if a IT company which had a similar ratio of male employees to female as this mall has female visitors to male, would make a "girlfriend waiting area that is designed for women"? Would it be a considerable and thoughtful idea, or would it be perceived as sending a sexist message?
Can't it be both a sexist message and a thoughtful and considerable act that benefit people directly?
The original comment was this
> Every time I enter a clothing shop and see chairs, I thank the heroes of that establishment who thought about bored boyfriends.
I do not believe that this was a sexist message. At least, I think it's a stretch to claim that it definitely is without clarification.
The mods have moved the comments about so if you didn't read things in this order, it may not have come across the same.
I also think you read too much exactness into the original comment; it was casually written, and used the term “boyfriends” as a term for those who come into a store, not to shop themselves, but in the company of someone else who will. I feel that this is casually making unnecessary assumptions, and making some people feel like they are not “normal”, such as women who are not interested in clothes.
One must be careful when speaking and writing as to not make people with less-than-majority traits feel unwanted or excluded. Using gendered language where it is not strictly necessary is one such thing which should be avoided.
And what if they are a boyfriend? A boyfriend that sees a thing designed for people in their situation? Is it terrible for them to think "I'm glad people thought about boyfriends like me"?
> it was casually written, and used the term “boyfriends” as a term for those who come into a store, not to shop themselves, but in the company of someone else who will.
Or casually written as a person describing their own experiences as a boyfriend.
> I feel that this is casually making unnecessary assumptions, and making some people feel like they are not “normal”, such as women who are not interested in clothes.
It seems to me to make no assumptions at all, other than a boyfriend who does not enjoy clothes shopping is one of the groups that the designer considered.
> I also think you read too much exactness into the original comment;
You're on the verge of realising my core point. You took an incredibly precise meaning from the comment that, quite reasonably, said "boyfriends". It did not say others were not included, but that didn't stop you accusing someone of something I feel (and hope) most of us strongly disagree with.
Again, is it unfair for me to say your comment about homosexual erasure ignores homosexual men because you assume "boyfriend" can't refer to a man who doesn't care about clothes shopping with his partner who is also a man? Can't homosexual men also not care about clothes? Why do are you promoting such stereotypes? Is this not an unfair attack from me against you, because I assume you don't think this but your comment wasn't really quite clear enough not to be misinterpreted.
But then again, I like it so what does that make me? O.o
PS: Objectifying Guys as something to be stored, is okay. And we demand guy-stuff-quotas in every female clothing store.