I'm certain there's a bias because it's part of what I want to address. I don't understand women's shoes (or really women's clothes) because I am ignorant, not because I think there's an unseen incongruity. At the same time, I have to start from somewhere. It seems like a natural question to ask why the standards for women's clothes are different from those of men's. It also seems natural to ask whether or not there exists an overlap between the two somewhere. Is there an equivalent to MC within womens wear? Some of this boils down to determining what knowledge about men's clothes I can transfer to understanding women's.
I agree that there is no a priori reason why the measure of quality in women's clothes should be the same as that used for classical menswear. As we've both pointed out, an emphasis on longevity is not a universal phenomenon. While it seems logical that we could come up with a set of criteria - longevity, design, construction, etc - by which to judge all clothes, I see no reason why the emphasis among different genres should be the same. To use your Haute Couture example, I don't disagree that the longevity of the piece may play little or not at all into judging its value. The purpose and usage of a couture dress is very different from that of a Saville row suit. Context is important.
Going back to women's shoes, I know there are women's bespoke makers out there. Foster and Sons has one. It is also apparent that the emphasis for women's shoes is different than that for men's, specifically the shoes valued on the MC side of things. There are also issues and tradeoffs that don't come up here. My wife has told me that there's a tradeoff between comfort and design for heels because of the way that the toe is forced into the toe box. While something more lithe and pointed may be more fashionable, it's likely to hurt and be unwearable for long periods of time. Addressing this requires - or at least appears to require - sacrificing some of the sharpness to the shoe. My wife buys shoes on both ends for different purposes. I, on the other hand, have options that do a good job of addressing both.
Some of it certainly seems like either the cycle for women's clothing runs faster than men's or that the changes between seasons are greater. I don't know, but that's the impression I've gotten so far. As I said, I don't really know where to look to get a better impression. One thing I have noticed is a mindset that given two options from a given season (say for boots), buying the more expensive thing is less likely to be worth it because there's probably not much of a quality difference and the time of both will have passed rather soon anyway. Something like that. The general mindset seems to be different, and I don't know what that is. There are also issues of shape and fit that brands aren't necessarily going to meet, and so women have to be willing to shop with what they can do.
As I said, I don't know. Some of the things I'm saying sound like they are problems that could be encountered by either gender. The thing I see to do is understand their difference in prevalence and use that to understand how this affects the way that either gender views clothing. Obviously there will be no universal maxims to come out of it, but if there is something general to be known that seems worth finding out.
I will try to watch the videos tonight. The kids are not giving me time to do so at the moment.