Where is she or he?! That's a serious question and exclamation. In my Sunday reflectiveness and organizing my closet this thought crossed my mind. I realized that I've heard more negatives than philanthropic positives when it comes to these shoes that were and are still quite cult favorites. I've had mine more than a year and although a part of me did feel like they were overpriced canvas shoes considering H&M sells similar/better quality shoes for $14 max. Around the same time I bought some discounted Puma shoes for less than $40 and they are still going strong. Now I do know a company like Puma uses a different business model from Toms, but I guess as the consumer I reserve the right to decide what is of value to me when parting with my hard earned dollar. All that aside, I bought Toms because in my loathing of sneakers and anything that looked clunky Toms were the perfect plain, flat and comfortable shoe. The fact that a child somewhere in need would get a pair was just bonus.
My issue with these shoes as far as this particular post is concerned with the quality and durability of the shoes. Having had mine for as long as I did and not wearing them all that frequently, my biggest disappointment is how QUICKLY the sole wears down. I live in a city where I walk mostly on concrete or carpet. The most rugged it gets is if I decide to cut across the grass in a rush. Now if a child, assumingly in a lesser developed setting, is to get a pair and THIS shoe is their ONLY pair, hence the NEED to give him/her a pair, this is a problem. If these are shoes used to walk to and from school on unpaved roads I'm not so sure I feel so good sending them to a child out there. Some might say it's better than nothing for someone who doesn't have anything. Yes that is true, but in giving and feeling good about it, we must not neglect the need for preserving the dignity of the recipient.
ON the Toms website/blog, there are a lot of pictures and it was interesting to me that a lot of them do NOT show people wearing Toms. There is a lot of soft poverty porn [old women, men children in rural settings in India, dancing & smiling Africans], but the only instances where actual SHOES were shown was on people who don't look anything like the people one might imagine to be the target of One for One. They looked like private schooled students or American (code White) youth.
I did a google search and saw mostly what looked like photo ops of the founder with kids in villages waving at the camera or fitting shoes. I thought no there had to be more. I did a twitter search using "Toms children shoes" and the top results were Invisible Children and Toms. I definitely laughed out loud at that! You all MUST remember the Watergate of development work in Africa - "Stop Kony"! Some one on twitter even mentioned how she saw donated Toms being sold by the recipients in a market in Haiti for about $7.50. We buy them for $40 here and they are not even worth $10 to someone who may not/supposedly doesn't have as many options?!
For the few miles I walked in these they fell apart, what more for someone who has more miles and rougher terrains to navigate? Walk a couple miles in these shoes and they are done. You have to get another pair, but presuming the kid who got a pair the first time you did has already worn theirs to the ground, do they get a second pair when you do?
I have questions and I need answers.
______________
*@afropolitaine*
No comments:
Post a Comment