Veblen held that vicarious consumption shifts from wives to the master as class rises

Evidence

In her role of “chattel” to her “master,” the wife is expected to “consume only what is necessary to her sustenance—except so far as her further consumption contributes to the comfort or the good repute of her master.” Yet this gender hierarchy gets disrupted among members of the lower middle class. Writes Veblen, “As we descend the social scale, the point is presently reached where the duties of vicarious leisure and consumption devolve upon the wife alone.” For these classes, it is the wife who consumes ceremoniously and displays such products ostentatiously. — Brooke Erin Duffy, (Not) Getting Paid to Do What You Love, 55

Categorization

• XREF: Nuances the familiar conspicuous-consumption claim by noting Veblen’s class-based inversion of who consumes for display. — connects to: Veblen’s leisure class framed status as conspicuous wasteful consumption — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory: A Marxist…, 20; Elite influencers shift from relatability to aspirational otherness as their fame rises. — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory: A Marxist…, 165

Broader Connections

• Veblen’s leisure class framed status as conspicuous wasteful consumption #expands (0.90) — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory, 20
• Elite influencers shift from relatability to aspirational otherness as their fame rises. #exemplifies (0.75) — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory, 165