4 ms·

Anyone want to dare venture an opinion why women place such stock in judging men by their shoes? As a guy, I enjoy dressing nicely when I can except it irks me

Anyone want to dare venture an opinion why women place such stock in judging men by their shoes? As a guy, I enjoy dressing nicely when I can except it irks me people care so much about (men's) shoes. I don't get why they matter so much - they're on our feet near the floor out of sight mostly and serve an impt functional purpose to cushion and protect the foot. And it angers me our society makes it fashionable for women to hurt themselves with really painfully uncomfortable shoes.

eru 17y ago
I guess shoes are easy to judge for women. > And it angers me our society makes it fashionable for women to hurt themselves with really painfully uncomfortable shoes. Me too. I am just glad, that `nice' shoes for man are comfortable, too. At least after you have walked in them for a few days (or weeks) and the leather has become soft.
cynicalkane 17y ago
It has partly to do with that most men buy terrible shoes. Particularly dress shoes, but they also tend to buy ugly sneakers. Shoes are actually the easiest thing to understand, to the point many newbies on StyleForum start out by expanding their shoe wardrobe. It's hard to tell an expensive suit from a cheap one, but easy to tell a good shoe from a bad one, if only men would spend any time at all thinking about it. A pair of Allen Edmonds dress shoes is $325 or so. Seems like a lot, but 1) they look ten times better and 2) they last ten times longer. In an office environment where the "best-dressed" men wear hideous $200 KC glue-jobs that fall apart after a few years, you can one-up them while saving money. Pretty neat. Most dress shoes have hard leather soles, but this isn't a big deal unless you walk several miles in them every day. I can't explain why women love foot-destroying heels. It makes no sense to me.
- scott_s 17y ago
  Most dress shoes have hard leather soles, but this isn't a big deal unless you walk several miles in them every day. Funny you mention that. A friend of mine works at the State Department, and walks to the Metro every day. In total, he walks about 3 miles a day. The State Department is suit-and-tie, every day. He goes through suit pants and dress shoes like I go through gym clothes.
  - cynicalkane 17y ago
    Then he is the best candidate for resoleable leather shoes. Either that, or a pair of walking shoes to change into and out of.
- dkarl 17y ago
  It has partly to do with that most men buy terrible shoes. That's half the story. The other half is just that women like shoes the way geeks like digital toys, so they always look at other women's shoes, and this carries over to looking at men's shoes as well. Because of this interest, women will always look at your shoes; you won't get away with an ugly or inappropriate pair of shoes. Men tend to underestimate the importance of shoes because they're out of sight, out of mind. Who cares what's way down there? So they don't pay attention and end up walking around with really god-awful or contextually inappropriate shoes which, to a woman's eye, jump right out in an unpleasant way.
kpanghmc 17y ago
Probably because shoes mean a lot to women and they've become a status symbol. As for why society has made women wear painfully uncomfortable shoes (i.e. high heels), that's easier to explain. It makes them taller while also giving the appearance of longer legs and a firmer butt, which men find desirable.
- dkimball 17y ago
  I think the real explanation goes back to the Restoration. Charles II and his court wore 17th Century cavalry boots, which were high-heeled as a means of ensuring that the foot stayed in the stirrup, like the modern cowboy boot; this style carried over to women sometime in the late 18th or early 19th century (women's shoes for most of the 17th and 18th centuries were delicate rather than high-heeled; there's an anecdote, I think in Fernand Braudel's _Structures of Everyday Life_, of a lady complaining to her tailor that her shoes had disintegrated; the tailor examined them and replied that of course they did, she had walked in them); and once high heels were established as a female fashion, a sort of sartorial folk etymology came along to explain their popularity. This is why I don't have much respect for contemporary fashion; the extent to which it's dominated by accidents of English history is even greater than that admitted in the article.

eru 17y ago

I guess shoes are easy to judge for women. > And it angers me our society makes it fashionable for women to hurt themselves with really painfully uncomfortable shoes. Me too. I am just glad, that `nice' shoes for man are comfortable, too. At least after you have walked in them for a few days (or weeks) and the leather has become soft.

cynicalkane 17y ago

It has partly to do with that most men buy terrible shoes. Particularly dress shoes, but they also tend to buy ugly sneakers. Shoes are actually the easiest thing to understand, to the point many newbies on StyleForum start out by expanding their shoe wardrobe. It's hard to tell an expensive suit from a cheap one, but easy to tell a good shoe from a bad one, if only men would spend any time at all thinking about it. A pair of Allen Edmonds dress shoes is $325 or so. Seems like a lot, but 1) they look ten times better and 2) they last ten times longer. In an office environment where the "best-dressed" men wear hideous $200 KC glue-jobs that fall apart after a few years, you can one-up them while saving money. Pretty neat. Most dress shoes have hard leather soles, but this isn't a big deal unless you walk several miles in them every day. I can't explain why women love foot-destroying heels. It makes no sense to me.

scott_s 17y ago
Most dress shoes have hard leather soles, but this isn't a big deal unless you walk several miles in them every day. Funny you mention that. A friend of mine works at the State Department, and walks to the Metro every day. In total, he walks about 3 miles a day. The State Department is suit-and-tie, every day. He goes through suit pants and dress shoes like I go through gym clothes.
- cynicalkane 17y ago
  Then he is the best candidate for resoleable leather shoes. Either that, or a pair of walking shoes to change into and out of.
dkarl 17y ago
It has partly to do with that most men buy terrible shoes. That's half the story. The other half is just that women like shoes the way geeks like digital toys, so they always look at other women's shoes, and this carries over to looking at men's shoes as well. Because of this interest, women will always look at your shoes; you won't get away with an ugly or inappropriate pair of shoes. Men tend to underestimate the importance of shoes because they're out of sight, out of mind. Who cares what's way down there? So they don't pay attention and end up walking around with really god-awful or contextually inappropriate shoes which, to a woman's eye, jump right out in an unpleasant way.

kpanghmc 17y ago

Probably because shoes mean a lot to women and they've become a status symbol. As for why society has made women wear painfully uncomfortable shoes (i.e. high heels), that's easier to explain. It makes them taller while also giving the appearance of longer legs and a firmer butt, which men find desirable.

dkimball 17y ago
I think the real explanation goes back to the Restoration. Charles II and his court wore 17th Century cavalry boots, which were high-heeled as a means of ensuring that the foot stayed in the stirrup, like the modern cowboy boot; this style carried over to women sometime in the late 18th or early 19th century (women's shoes for most of the 17th and 18th centuries were delicate rather than high-heeled; there's an anecdote, I think in Fernand Braudel's _Structures of Everyday Life_, of a lady complaining to her tailor that her shoes had disintegrated; the tailor examined them and replied that of course they did, she had walked in them); and once high heels were established as a female fashion, a sort of sartorial folk etymology came along to explain their popularity. This is why I don't have much respect for contemporary fashion; the extent to which it's dominated by accidents of English history is even greater than that admitted in the article.