Britney Spears spent $6000 on a pair of Louboutins she’s never worn, and…??

World Premiere Of Sony Pictures' 'Once Upon a Time In Hollywood'

I try to call out conspicuous consumption when I think it’s warranted, while still maintaining the general belief that if you earn money, you should be able to spend it without the peanut gallery chiming in. The thing about it is though, if most of these celebrity stories were just about “Celebrity B bought an expensive bracelet,” it would be easy enough to just shrug that off and say fair enough, she earned the money. But it’s harder to maintain that when Celebrity B flaunts her new bracelet on social media and brags about how much it cost. I guess my aversion is mostly just towards the “conspicuous” part of conspicuous consumption. Just consuming to flaunt, to brag, to try to fill your life with an endless amount of sh-t.

Britney Spears is not really that kind of conspicuous consumer. Sure, she makes 80 trips to Target every year, but that’s just further evidence of her (dare I say) middle-class taste. She shops at The Gap and Old Navy and Target. She prefers McDonald’s to a fancy restaurant. She prefers flip-flops to Jimmy Choos. So, Britney decided to post this to her Instagram:

Four years ago she bought her first pair of Louboutin heels at a cost of $6000… and she never wore them. It’s not like she threw them out though – they’re just sitting there in her closet, not being worn. Well, people were offended. Her post was called “tone deaf” and she was accused of “bragging about her extreme wealth.” Again, she mostly shops at Target and Old Navy. She was trying to tell her followers that she once tried to be fancy four years ago and fancy hurt her feet.

Personally, I’m not offended by this, if you couldn’t tell. I’m more offended by the conspicuous consumption of the Kardashians – Kim literally flies to Japan to go shopping and comes back with 30 limited-edition purses. Kanye literally had a special Birkin bag painted by George Condo and Kim only used it once. THAT is wasteful. I mean, Britney buying one pair of expensive shoes and never wearing them is wasteful too, but I feel pretty strongly that Britney isn’t the woman with a closet full of never-worn Choos, Louboutins and Manolos. Her closet is full of Old Navy sweatpants and Nike leggings and flip-flops. I bet she’s got some Payless Shoes choices in there too.

Britney Spears pictured while out shopping at the Oaks Mall

Britney Spears shops at Camarillo Premium outlets

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

68 Responses to “Britney Spears spent $6000 on a pair of Louboutins she’s never worn, and…??”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. astrid says:

    I’m not offended by this…

    • Ronaldinhio says:

      Sister tried fancy ass shoes and didn’t enjoy them. This is a non story. She works her ass off and it is her money she is spending.
      We’ve all done our own version of this scaled to our own finances.
      I wish whomever it was would stop trying to make Britney into a disaster area. Considering what she earns, how hard she works and her health issues I reckon we have nothing but admiration for her.

      • M says:

        Well and I think she’s calling out consumerism a bit? I mean, she’s also kind of humble bragging, but at the core of it she’s saying “I have the money to buy this stuff that’s supposed to make you feel so good, and guess what, nah.” (In my fictionalized version the addendum is “Buying a fantastic mansion and dancing around it for Insta posts: WORTH IT.” Because that just seems objectively true.)

      • M says:

        Well and I think she’s calling out consumerism a bit? I mean, she’s also kind of humble bragging, but at the core of it she’s saying “I have the money to buy this stuff that’s supposed to make you feel so good, and guess what, nah.” (In my fictionalized version the addendum is “Buying a fantastic mansion and dancing around it for Insta posts: WORTH IT.” Because that just seems objectively true.)

    • Wilady says:

      Yeah. Can’t tell you how many times I bought a twenty dollar dress, or a too-trendy jacket that seemed like a good idea and then never wore it. According to my super scientific managerial income ratio estimate, it’s the same thing as her hitting and never wearing those shoes. Who cares.

  2. Katen says:

    Damn, the muscles in her legs though. She looks like she could kick anyone’s ass. Kudos to her trainer.

    • StarGreek says:

      Jealous too! I’d like to have her toned legs … mine are as big as hers with not much muscle mass though!

  3. Lori says:

    Big f@cking deal.

  4. BayTampaBay says:

    I think those shoes are fugly.

  5. Jess says:

    I’m more shocked she bought her first pair only 4 years ago, she’s had money for over 20 years! I think it’s cute she hasn’t let go of her humble country roots. I feel like I’d be the same way, target and old navy for life.

  6. Vava says:

    Maybe she considers the shoes an art form. I have some shoes I feel that way about. (Those Loubs though are really ugly, imo).

    The consumption situation that offends me is with all these damned bloggers/influencers out there. Some really have an attitude, they are the worst. And getting all that free stuff to boot. This is something in our culture that I wish would die.

    • megs283 says:

      I agree, those shoes are art (not art I would buy, but art nonetheless). Would people shame another celebrity for buying a $6,000 painting?

    • Veronica S. says:

      I’m really curious why they were $6K, to be honest. I wonder if they were hand painted or custom made? I know the Swarvoski crystal embellished pumps tend to run around $3-5K, so I’m really interested to hear what made these so special. (Not sarcastic – I honestly find it kind of fascinating.)

    • Spicecake38 says:

      I came to say the same after seeing the shoes,work of art.Not gorgeous IMO,but well,unique ,pretty even,and I think a decent something to own if one is filthy rich.
      I have friends who are well off,but super hard working,about 12 years ago they bought a Steinway piano,that their children DO use(concert level gifted at piano).They don’t brag,but she told me it was$ 56,000-considered it a work of art,and the money came from the savings for a new car,which they went without until about a year ago,so I don’t think Brittany spending 6K on shoes is too big a deal.

  7. Digital Unicorn says:

    Am not offended by this, I would love to buy a pair of Louboutins and I actually like those shoes.

    Bless Brit, you know what they say, you can take the girl out of the trailer but …… She has always been a creature of habit, shopping in places that are comfortable for her.

    • A random commenter says:

      Louboutins aren’t comfortable in the slightest. Get yourself some manolos and your feet will thank you!

      • Spicecake38 says:

        My daughter tried on a pair last summer at Saks,we were dressed in Nike and adidas, ponytails ,Looking and feeling out of place .Anyways I let her try them on,and the sales woman was sooooo pushy-I actually was going to buy them,because she really doesn’t ask fo much and she loves shoes and had been dreaming of these .We left,and my daughter burst out laughing she said worst,most uncomfortable shoes ever (she has a very wide foot).We were so happy to get to Jcrew and Target after that 😉

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Hmm good to know but they are way to high for me. I have a couple of pairs of Jimmy Choo’s, again not the most comfortable shoes and am actually thinking of selling them as my feet have changed since I got them (bought them several years ago).

      • Veronica S says:

        Oh yeah, Louboutins are definitely a fashion shoe and better for narrower feet. The brand cuts small. Mine are slightly wide in the front, so the pointy pumps just don’t work for me. However, I do have a pair of flats that I absolutely adore, but I did have to go up half a size for proper fit. Don’t regret it, mind, but you definitely have to be interested in the artistic value over any perceived comfort.

        I do have a lovely pair of blue velvet Manolos that I love. Blahnik always struck me as a designer with an eye for women who work for their money, and the shoes have a certain sensibility to them that I appreciate.

  8. STRIPE says:

    I actually took this as her saying “these weren’t worth it,” so actually making a point against conspicuous consumption more than anything.

    • Turtledove says:

      Me too! She was huge 20 years ago, and waited 16 years to splurge on shoes like that, then never even wore them. It felt like a “shoulda known better” more than a brag.

  9. Julie says:

    I think Britney’s much more wasteful than Kim. She doesn’t just buy cheap things, she goes on spending sprees and buys millions of dollars of cheap crap every year. Cheap crap that has zero resale value and will look like garbage and be thrown out after a handful of wears.

    If you’re going to spend that kind of money, then buying designer like Kim does is less wasteful. There’s an incentive there to actually look after the things, keep them or sell them to someone else who’ll use them. Kim’s conspicuous consumption isn’t headed straight to landfill. Britney’s is.

    • Chaine says:

      I got to stand up for her here. She is not throwing away cheap crap, she is conserving it with the diligence of a historical clothing museum curator. There is no way she buys all of those super low rise jeans and slacks in any modern store in 2019.

    • DiegoInSF says:

      I agree, Julie.

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      I actually agree with this. Buying more of cheaper items isn’t any less wasteful than what the Kardashians buy. In fact – it’s more wasteful. Fast fashion and cheaper items make up the second largest percentage of waste in the world. Literally. Second only to plastic. The fast fashion industry is the second largest contributor to the climate crisis – only second to gas.
      So yes it may be braggy and even a bit excessive but the Kardashians are definitely NOT more wasteful than Britney.
      Having said all that I don’t take issue with her post. I think the whole point of it was to point out that she wasted $6k on a pair of shoes she’s never worn.

    • lucy2 says:

      I agree to a point. With the cheaper stuff, you know it’s been done with underpaid labor, poor quality materials, and definitely not made to last, so yeah,landfills.
      On the other hand, the high end stuff is crazy overpriced, and people like the Kardashians usually only use it once or twice and then it just sits there.

      I don’t think Britney had bad intentions with this, but I can see the idea of it seeming tone deaf.

  10. meeee says:

    I’m not offended by this, I’m more worried about her overall behavior and captions. She sounds very much like a 12 year old with her first smartphone.

    • Ertia says:

      Very few pop stars are secret Rhodes Scholars.

      Her education was not a priority to those who wanted to make money from her. It seems unfair to blame her for their greed.

  11. Jb says:

    People are getting offended by $6K?? I follow Britney and wish instead of focusing on her shopping spending they’d make note of how strange, erratic and kinda off kilter she seems in the actual posts…she’s not all there but yes let’s yell at her for buying shoes she can afford and then some.

  12. Marianne says:

    * Shrugs* Whatever. You could consider an investment. The price will go up the more vintage they become especially if they’re in good condition.

  13. Veronica S says:

    Fashion will always be the indulgence of the rich, there’s really no getting around them. I own a pair of Loubs, and while I wear the hell out of them, they were still a massive splurge. There’s always an edge of growing up working class guilt around them when I wear it, even if I am very financially stable now.

    As for Britney…I feel like she doesn’t brag about her lifestyle enough for it to really be overly conspicuous to me. A little tone deaf, maybe, but so is the criticism – why else are you following celebrities if not for an element of fantasy?

  14. Valiantly Varnished says:

    If people want something real to be outraged about I can think of about five right off the top of my head.

  15. tealily says:

    Those are gorgeous and I would probably be afraid to wear them if I owned them, so no hate here.

    • 10KTurtle says:

      Me too- especially an item like shoes that touch the ground with every step! I’m leery of expensive stuff because I’m afraid I’d lose it or someone would take it anyway- I would be afraid someone would yank a diamond ring right off my finger and I’d never see it again.

  16. Kitten says:

    I have pieces of clothing in my closet that I’ve never worn before. Of course, nothing is more than $100 but yeah, it happens. We all know she has money and that high fashion is for rich folks so none of this is surprising or offensive. ITA that the Kardashians are FAR worse.

  17. Lady Keller says:

    With another celebrity I might find it offensive and tone deaf, but as far as Brit is concerned there is a sort of sweetness to it. I really dont think she is trying to brag or show off, she’s just sharing a little snippet of her life. She is probably much happier wearing her Target shoes. She’s a simple girl with simple tastes (no shade – I mean that in the nicest possible way) she probably bought them on a whim then had no idea what to do with them.

  18. As says:

    I’m not a fan but I’ve been aware of Britney’s struggles over the years. It seems that everyone used her as an ATM machine (some still do) while she worked her childhood and youth away. Her struggles with addiction, mental illness and picking lowlife men, were sad to watch.

    I’ve never heard of Britney Spears doing something to hurt someone or deliberately cause another person pain. Quite the opposite in fact.

    If Britney is healthy and happy and chooses to spend some of the money she’s worked hard for on a pair of shoes, then I’m not going to criticize her for it. I will always support a woman who likes shoes.

    Her money. Her choice.

    • 10KTurtle says:

      Good perspective!

    • Ertia says:

      At one point I read something about her and Federline (what a blast from the past remembering that name!) and it was heartbreaking, because apparently she told people that no one had ever been as kind as her was to her, no one had ever listened to her or asked her what she wanted to do or taken her opinions into account.

      Imagine how sh*tty things must have been for that dude to be your knight in shining armor.

    • Anna says:

      Agreed! Great way to put it, AS.

      There are certainly more selfish/cruel celebs out there than Britney.

    • kerwood says:

      I don’t know what happened but I (@kerwood) wrote this comment. Sorry for the confusion

  19. Val says:

    Well she HAS worn them, leading fans like me to believe it’s not her posting on her IG all the time. Remember- conservatorship, limited internet use, no personal agency whatsoever.

    • Anna says:

      I take your point, but it’s also not impossible that she’s only worn them once or twice and forgotten about it. It’s not like I can remember every time I’ve worn my clothes and to what events.

  20. JanetDR says:

    I too have unborn shoes. I always feel very protective of Britney and don’t see the need to bash her for a purchase that she could afford.

    • schmootc says:

      That’s just what I was going to say. I think most American women probably have a pair or two of unworn shoes in their closets. I know I do. Hers clearly cost more than the average women, but she’s got more $, so that is to be expected I think.

  21. Lisa says:

    Dont really care.

  22. VanessaBee says:

    I’m not offended by the purchase of them, but I am offended by how ugly they are.

  23. Jules says:

    Overconsumption is overconsumption. I think people are starting to wake up to the gross inequalities in the world. And social media makes celebrities much more accessible. So if celebrities want to flaunt their wealth, I have no problem with people calling them out.

  24. Sparky says:

    My first thought was that she bought the shoes for a soecific event and either didn’t go, decided they were too uncomfortable or decided to wear a different outfit which the shoes didn’t match.

  25. RoyalBlue says:

    Yes 100% agree with Kaiser here. Kardashians are 10x more offensive with their flaunting their consumption in people’s faces.

  26. TippyToes says:

    I remember her buying and wearring Louboutin’s during her breakdown period… when her cousin or some relative was her assistant.( not that it matters what she spends her money on but I hate when people claim things that are so easily proven otherwise)

  27. Murphy says:

    She was hanging out in her closet, found them, remembered them and got excited. Chill out people.

  28. JanetFerber says:

    Britney has gone through so much and I have so much sympathy for her. I’m glad when she can take pleasure in something (with money she herself earned). Somehow it seems a lot of perks have passed her by. I hope every day she lives her best life.

  29. VeronicaLodge says:

    My ex husband had a pair of expensive heels custom made for me. I’ve never worn them (got pregnant pretty quickly after the purchase and haven’t been able to shake off the weight). I keep them as they are pretty, and I consider them art, I think it’s the same for Brittney. Plus I hold on to certain items like shoes, that remind me of good times. Even if I’ll never wear them again.

  30. Laura says:

    The fact that they’re made out of snakeskin is what’s gross to me. I have a couple shirts and pairs of jeans that I’ve never worn, so I don’t care about that. Snakeskin though…ew. No one in the world needs snake skin but a snake.

  31. Laura says:

    The fact that they’re made out of snakeskin is what’s gross to me. I have a couple shirts and pairs of jeans that I’ve never worn, so I don’t care about that. Snakeskin though…ew. No one in the world needs snake skin but a snake.

  32. SJR says:

    $6K for those ugly, painful looking shoes? Heck No.

    Britney is small potatoes in this contest of celebs who waste money. IMO, the ones who fly everywhere/private jet a billion times a year and then lecture the rest of us about pollution tick me off no living end. Hi Leo! Hi George! You hypocrites.

  33. Krissy says:

    I think this has to do with her team trying to play off the fact that “Look! Britney Can buy expensive shoes!” Bc dear drunk daddy has control over every aspect of her life. Finances, phones, everything! It’s a shame that this woman can put on shows over and over, but has to get permission to use her credit card. She needs to be free from her crazy team!!!

  34. Bubbles says:

    Wow. It’s actually the fact they killed a snake for shoes and she’s not even wearing them. That’s the point. FYI, before people pull any ps about eating animals. Everything in my life is vegan.

  35. KLO says:

    I am just happy that she looks healthy and fit and is living her life.