Keeping Up Appearances: Consumption and Masking Poverty
Keeping Up Appearances: Consumption and Masking Poverty
Keeping Up Appearances: Consumption and Masking Poverty
Keeping up appearances:
consumption and masking
poverty
A Whose Economy Seminar Paper
Kathy Hamilton
June 2011
www.oxfam.org.uk
About the author
Kathy Hamilton is a senior lecturer in the Department of Marketing at the
University of Strathclyde, Glasgow. Her teaching and research interests fall
within the area of Consumer Culture Theory. Specifically she is interested in
consumer disadvantage and gender differences in consumer behaviour. She has
completed a qualitative study which focused on understanding the lived
experience of poverty against the backdrop of a society that is increasingly
dominated by consumption. In particular she considered the coping strategies
employed by low-income families to help them negotiate the marketplace, access
goods and services (including brands) and avoid stigmatisation. This work has
been published in a variety of journals including Journal of Marketing Management,
European Journal of Marketing, Advances in Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer
Behaviour and International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy.
Email: [email protected]
Whose Economy Seminar Papers are a follow up to the series of seminars held in
Scotland between November 2010 and March 2011. They are written to contribute to public
debate and to invite feedback on development and policy issues. These papers are work in
progress documents, and do not necessarily constitute final publications or reflect Oxfam
policy positions. The views and recommendations expressed are those of the author and not
necessarily those of Oxfam. For more information, or to comment on this paper, email
[email protected]
Introduction .............................................................................................. 5
2. Methodology ...................................................................................... 5
Conclusion................................................................................................ 9
References ................................................................................................ 9
Notes ......................................................................................................... 9
Some families are skilled at reducing the visibility of poverty and overcoming
societys ability to alienate. This was especially important for the children in the
study who did not want to appear different from their peers. Masking poverty
through consumption could be viewed as a disconfirmation of the stereotype. By
displaying brand-name or on-trend products that are regarded as socially
acceptable among peer groups, low-income consumers distance themselves from
the stigma of poverty.
2. Methodology
This paper draws on qualitative analysis of 30 in-depth interviews with low-
income families who encounter consumption constraints in the marketplace. The
study involved 25 single parent families (24 single mothers) and five two-parent
families. Families were selected from urban areas of Northern Ireland; the
majority of respondents were unemployed, although a small number were
working in low-paid jobs. The income level of the families averaged at 150 per
week. As poverty can affect the whole family unit, a family approach was
adopted in that all households included at least one child under the age of 18. In
16 families, a parent (normally the mother) was interviewed alone and in 14
families it was possible to arrange an interview with the main consumer
decision- maker along with their partner and/or children (aged 11 to 18).
Interview topics included everyday life (evaluation of circumstances relative to
other families and friends, feelings about shortage of money and its effect on
children), budgetary strategies (management of the household budget,
acquisition sites for goods and services), hopes for the future, family background
information, and financial circumstances (sources of income, attitudes to credit).
Case 1
Denise (43) and Barry (40) had two teenage sons, aged 15 and 17. Both were
unemployed and believed that remaining on welfare benefits was their best
financial option. A re-occurring topic of conversation was the difficulty of buying
clothes for their sons and they gave examples of 49 branded designer or sports
T-shirts and 130 pairs of trainers. Barry commented, its ridiculous, they wont
wear cheap stuff. They just refuse point blank. Denise and Barry blamed peer
pressure in that they have to look as good as everybody else and nobody wants
their kids to be laughed at on the streets. Although they did not agree with using
their limited budget on expensive clothing, they felt there was little option: You
have to let them have it, you dont want them out stealing.
Case 2
Lorraine was 43, a widow with three children (aged 23, 21 and 14). She described
herself as a smart shopper and a bargain hunter. However, one area where she
felt she couldnt control expenditure as much as she would like was on clothing
for Lisa, her 14-year-old daughter: It seems to be that its the done thing to dress
your kids; I have to do it now, she has reached an age. For years I fooled her, as
long as I could, but I was never going to make her stand out from the rest of
them. Lisa agreed that she often picked clothes just because of their name and
because her friends would slag her if she did not wear brand-named clothing.
Case 4
Eva (45) had separated from her husband after 25 years of marriage. She had a
12-year-old daughter and two older children who no longer lived in the family
home. Eva had been part of a secretarial group until three years previously, when
the charity she worked for lost its funding. She had been unsuccessful in finding
new employment: Everything is for younger ones and when you get to my age
youre nearly put on the shelf, you cant get jobs or nothing. Its all for younger
ones. Theres nothing really for you. As a result, Eva was very lonely. She
didnt have enough money to socialise, and spent most of her time home alone.
Case 5
Janice was 23, a single mother with two children aged six and four. She was
unemployed and having difficulty finding employment that fit around caring for
her children. She shopped in low-cost and second-hand outlets and was very
aware of potential stigmatisation: I know people do judge you, there are people
who look down on you for what you wear and the way you talk, there are people
who will look down on you for any reason My friends back home all have jobs
and houses and cars. My mum has a big house, my brother, who is four years
younger than me, has his own house and car, and I feel like Im stuck on the
outside.
Experiences of stigma
As indicated in these cases, as well as dealing with the practical hardships of
providing for a family on a restricted budget, the interviewees have to cope with
the negative attitudes and reactions of others. Respondents surviving on welfare
encounter stigmatisation and negative reactions from other members of society,
and during the interviews many noted that they met contempt in everyday life.
Some believe that the prioritisation of paid work creates stigma for those on
benefits. These families perceive they are judged for their welfare dependency
and do not want to fuel stigmatisation in other ways. They are already perceived
For low-income consumers, with food spending (in terms of quantity and quality
at least) there is some discretion. By contrast, spending on branded clothing and
footwear is in fact non-discretionary: these consumers present themselves to the
world through their spending on visible goods, giving added meaning to the
term conspicuous consumption. Any lack is an indicator of poverty, bringing
with it the associated stigma and shame.4 This suggests that new categories of
consumption are needed for low-income families, of visible and invisible goods.
References
Bauman, Z. (2005). Work, Consumerism and the New Poor, Buckingham: Open
University Press
Notes
1 Darley and Johnson (1985)
2 Darley and Johnson (1985)
3 Bauman (2005)
4 Hamilton and Catterall (2007)