To think wearing a £2600 dress is vulgar?

[CloudsofBrick]

According to This Morning (I'm on half term with a rare child - free day, don't judge) Kate Middleton was wearing some designer flowery thing for a night out this week that cost £2600.

AIBU in feeling slightly sick at the thought of a garment costing so much? Especially when that is almost two month's wages for me.

Even if I got rich, I swear I would never feel comfortable spending that sort of money on clothes

You do realise that those £40 shoes will have been most probably made in sweatshops with bonded, forced or underpaid labour?
I hope you spend more time thinking about that than about how a few people chose to spend their wealth

I am about as far removed from a royalist as you can get.

agree with OP

Sparechange - I know, and I do NOT feel comfortable with that. Hence I own five pairs of shoes, because I can't afford to spend lots of money in one go and I hate spending money on shit that will have been made by a poor ten year old for a pittance.

at MrsDeVere unpicking the dress for all the appropriate reasons

Cloudsofbrick
I cannot afford expensive clothes new
but I can afford them second hand
so I buy the best quality I can from the charity / agency / second hand shops
and wear them for as long as I can
LESS of good quality stuff is infinitely better than heaps of supermarket and Primark tat

Clouds I'm not a royalist at all, I just know how much work and money goes into producing clothing like that. When it's paying people to design and make clothing by hand, it really is not 'ridiculous' sums of money but goes on paying the designers and dressmakers involved.

Think about how much skill, training and studying people need to undertake to become a top tailor or leatherworker or milliner. It takes a lot of time and money.

While the dress is horrible I like the material. I live 3000 miles away in Northern NJ. The dear Duchess of Cambridge has done so much for UK retailers here in the US. LK Bennet and Reiss have both opened up here and are doing extremely well thanks to her wearing their clothes.

Also Clouds if you feel uncomfortable spending £40 on a pair of sweatshop shoes, spend a bit more (if you can) on more ethically produced shoes. More expensive does not automatically equal more ethical but it does mean there's more money to spend on wages.

There are plenty of traditional British shoe companies who still make shoes in Britain, usually around Northampton which was a traditional shoemaking area. Dr Martens still make some shoes there. I am on a low wage, but I'd rather save up and get one pair of Dr Martens For Life shoes (free repairs and a lifetime guarantee, made in Northants) than five pairs of poorly made, glued together, sweatshop shoes.

There is a point here about how much we are prepared to spend on a garment. £2600 is scarcely OTT for KM. and many good points about her promoting British fashion brands.

I remember 20odd years ago when cash strapped and had young DC.mi was in a shop for poncy people with babies and tiny vests were about £30 each.mi remember thinking that even if I was a billionaire I would never spend that on babies vests. I still feel that way. However I frequently waste £30 on other crap so hey ho. Live and let live.

Clouds, i dont think we are royalists per se. Its just who we have, the Republicans do have a voice on TV when big royal stories are about, but generally they are not that active. Well, not what i have seen anyway.
If anyone did try to start a revolution it would soon be stopped in its tracks straight away anyway!
It is immoral that one woman can afford to spend so much ( she may well buy them herself, but her and William do recieve tax payers money too) but it is the way it is. She has to look good, its their image to the world. Lots dont agree but there isnt an alternative ( maybe one day, who knows) !

The80s I don't see how it is immoral for one woman to spend so much. It would not be considered at all immoral for someone to spend that much on a work of art or a car. Why is a handcrafted dress different?

'Women's things' like clothes, shoes etc are seen as unimportant despite the amount of real skill that goes into them.

I think Dr Martens come under the Vimes boots theory of socioeconomic unfairness. They last wonderfully and are so comfy however they are very expensive and saving up to buy a pair is beyond some people.

Thanks to one of the links put on the thread I've found a dress I have fallen in love with for Christmas day, more than I had planned to spend but I will get plenty more use out of it too. I don't have an issue with spending a lot of money on a dress however no matter how many 0's you knocked off you still couldn't get me to wear that particular dress.

Well the event was being hosted by some very wealthy women, as their patron the DoC can't rock up in Primarni.

Whether you approve of her budget or not, every single thing she puts n her back gets global press. British designers make mints if the DoC puts their clothes on Page 1.

To the dress itself, I think it was a rare Kate catastrophe. Loved her in the bolder fabric, she really suits Jewel colours but thought the style was very Abigail's Party.

Thought the dress she wore to Spectre was fab and the Chinese dinner was spot on n every respect.

She lives a different lifestyle to me.
My £200 is her £2600
Bet she didn't even need to pay.
Don't know why you begrudge her tbh.

as want2be so rightly says, the Kate effect is very good for the UK export trade and visibility.
The number of UK designer clothes shops in Manhattan has rocketed in the last few years
and it sure ain't the Politician's wives that people want to look like

Hopeful, i do see your point but it does seem an awful lot of money even though i do realise she has to look good all the time.
Tough call, i can see both sides! If it was tax payers money paying for it, that we shall never know anyway.

Pfffft, Dr Martens moved all their Northants factories to China and left those towns to go into decline, plus their China-made stuff is crap compared to the old boots. You could get your DMs re-soled once upon a time, now there would be no point because the uppers are nothing like as good quality.

And as for KM, well, perhaps not first up against the wall come the Revolution, but definitely fairly near the top of the list. Why we retain this feudal system is beyond me.

Oh and OP - YANBU!

but it does seem an awful lot of money
But for something handmade / customised in the UK it is NOT a lot of money.

How much do you pay for a cut colour and blow dry?
How much for manicures / pedicures?
And facials / waxing?

Its the labour cost that pushes the prices of non sweat shop clothes up

Has anyone, anywhere, ever used the phrase 'the Kate effect' in rl?

The argument that we are compelled to keep one family in ridiculous, obscene wealth, then fawn that 'the Kate effect' is helping the economy, is not one which makes any sense to me at all.

FirstWe
I heard it while in New York
They raved about the Diana effect too

There's a certain set of Mid Town ladies who like to think they are royal, but have farm more spare cash than la Cambridge does

Compared to a dress by Alexander McQueen, Oscar de la Renta or Carolina Herrera it is cheap. I know from when I went shopping for dresses I nearly passed out when I saw the price tags of $10k+. Heck there was a D&G dress that was over $20k. They were off the peg with tailoring. Lovely dresses but I am not having my picture blasted globally so no need for me to spend that much. The $200 dress left over from prom season was more than enough.

I respect the DoC for wearing a British designer that's affordable compared to other options available.

Also when are we going to start calling her by her married name. I find it disrespectful myself. She is either the Duchess of Cambridge or Catherine Cambridge.

I love Barneys
www.barneys.com/barneys-new-york/women/clothing/dresses/evening#srule=price-high-to-low&sz=48&start=0
$22,690 for a really rather naff dress