Gentlemen, you all must be aware, by now, of the trend in fashion shoe design over the better part of the last decade. I mean the ones with the VERY long, extended toe, most of which curl up, be they square, chisel toes, or flared-out, broad tipped ones, or the absurd hybrids that meld a leather dress shoe top, with an athletic shoe sole. I am reminded of:
1. Clown shoes
2. Elf shoes
3. Ducks bills
4. Genie shoes
Most of these exaggerate the size of a mans foot in relation to his leg and trouser bottom, and focus attention there. Why, in God's name, would anyone want to call attention to his feet? Why would a man want to appear clumsy and clod-footed? Why would a man want to ape the look of Bozo the clown? Flop, flop, flop??? Not since the heavy, clodish, chunky-heeled platform shoes of the 1970s have I seen such ugliness in men's shoes. I am not super fond of trad, wrinkle-toed mocs, but they are pure refinement compared to the type I am posting about. It is my opinion that the most elegant mens shoe of the entire 20th century is a Balmoral last, lace-up oxford, with a very high instep. I have seen many such posted on this website, and admired deeply. So, briefly gentlemen, can you tell me what in sam-hell is going on the the shoe design world? Are we seeing novelty for its own sake, anything going, even ugly, as long as it's new?? Or, is style evolving towards an inevitable new destination, with some as yet hidden purpose? My questions are esoteric, sorry, but reply if you have thoughts on the subject, I'd love to read them. Thanks
Mark Fowlkes

Thank you. I enjoyed that very much. "Flop, flop, flop" indeed! :icon_smile_big:

What's going on? Novelty for its own sake?

Yes, just business as usual. That's life in the fashion industry.

 

Thank you. I enjoyed that very much. "Flop, flop, flop" indeed! :icon_smile_big:

What's going on? Novelty for its own sake?

Yes, just business as usual. That's life in the fashion industry.

Pretty much sums it up...

 

I could do a paragraph or two on prole drift also

Mainly, I think it's a lack of masculinity and maturity.

I see long pointy shoes to be a mimicry of womens shoes. A shapeless clunky police officer's shoe would be the height of unornamental practicality, so the extreme opposite is a fey long, narrow shoe with a thin little sole. In the Manichaean mind, these would qualify as classy and refined because of what they are not.

The desire to attempt to wear sneakers of some sort everywhere is just stunted adults who see leather shoes with leather soles to be something worn by stuffy old men, which violats their percieved eternal youth.. Eventually they reach a point where their actual age and socioeconomic status can no longer be hidden, so they compromise with compromise shoes. Prep school kids are notorious for stretching the most casual items possible within the confines of a dress code, but now we have post-adolescents doing it too.

 

Mainly, I think it's a lack of masculinity and maturity.

I see long pointy shoes to be a mimicry of womens shoes. A

Amen. That's part of a much larger trend to make men's attire more like women's attire. Men's clothing should be oriented towards dignity, power, action, self-confidence, and self-expression. Not demure-ness, subservience, luxury, delicacy, etc.

 

... The desire to attempt to wear sneakers of some sort everywhere is just stunted adults who see leather shoes with leather soles to be something worn by stuffy old men, which violats their percieved eternal youth...

Trends are funny. A friend of mine who works in advertising tells me that Wallabees are "in" again (and indeed I've seen them in stores). As he tells it, a group of influential hipsters--apparently young enough to feel secure in their youth--decided that while it wasn't cool to dress like dad, it was cool to dress like grandpa.

So, who knows? Maybe at some point men will decide it's again okay to look nice and wear classic, leather-soled shoes. This bizarre notion might (gasp) even take hold among the over-30 set.

 

You need to hear from guys that wears (or use to:icon_smile_big that style of shoe.
You won't find them on this forum. If you do, are they honest enough to admit it? I see lots of good looking women with men wearing those kind of shoes. Try comparing ladies with men wearing AEs to the ladies with men wearing the ugly clown-like shoes?:devil:

 

Amen. That's part of a much larger trend to make men's attire more like women's attire. Men's clothing should be oriented towards dignity, power, action, self-confidence, and self-expression. Not demure-ness, subservience, luxury, delicacy, etc.

The ever-increasing domination of menswear by a feminine aesthetic, and even more importantly the wholesale incorporation of womenswear design and marketing practices into menswear, is the bane of well-dressed, and would-be well-dressed men everywhere!

 

The ever-increasing domination of menswear by a feminine aesthetic, and even more importantly the wholesale incorporation of womenswear design and marketing practices into menswear, is the bane of well-dressed, and would-be well-dressed men everywhere!

We are of one mind, my good man. I knew the world was in trouble when basic cable started a show with the premise that effeminate gay men are the ones who should show straight men how to dress, cook, entertain, etc. How about Well-educated Eye of Discriminating Taste Irrespective of Sexual Orientation for the Uneducated Guy of Lousy Taste? Instead, masculinity itself has been subjected to a sit-com caricature that depicts maleness itself as synonymous with buffoonery and cretinism.

 

Amen. That's part of a much larger trend to make men's attire more like women's attire. Men's clothing should be oriented towards dignity, power, action, self-confidence, and self-expression. Not demure-ness, subservience, luxury, delicacy, etc.

Well, maybe a little luxury...:icon_smile:

 

We are of one mind, my good man. I knew the world was in trouble when basic cable started a show with the premise that effeminate gay men are the ones who should show straight men how to dress, cook, entertain, etc.

While I agree to some extent, I don't remember Carson wearing God-awful shoes!! (Though I wouldn't put anything past Kyan)

I have more problems with the gender-neutrality of Top Chef!! :crazy:

 

We are of one mind, my good man. I knew the world was in trouble when basic cable started a show with the premise that effeminate gay men are the ones who should show straight men how to dress, cook, entertain, etc. How about Well-educated Eye of Discriminating Taste Irrespective of Sexual Orientation for the Uneducated Guy of Lousy Taste? Instead, masculinity itself has been subjected to a sit-com caricature that depicts maleness itself as synonymous with buffoonery and cretinism.

While I take your points, and agree with them, I must also acknowledge that there have been many gay men who've done nothing but benefit the art of men dressing well, both within and outside the menswear business. It has little to do with sexual orientation. In fact, nothing. More to my point, it is evidently believed more profitable to have men follow clothing practices formerly the province of women.

But yes, as long as maleness equals beer commercial in the publice mind, we're all lost.

 

While I take your points, and agree with them, I must also acknowledge that there have been many gay men who've done nothing but benefit the art of men dressing well, both within and outside the menswear business. It has little to do with sexual orientation. In fact, nothing. More to my point, it is evidently believed more profitable to have men follow clothing practices formerly the province of women.

But yes, as long as maleness equals beer commercial in the publice mind, we're all lost.

We're on the same page. I agree entirely that one's sexual orientation is, and should be, irrelevant to one's clothing choices. I know gay men who are terrific dressers and terrible dressers, and straight men in both categories, as well. My point was that the implicit assumption of QEFSG was that only gay men knew how to dress, and that straight men were inherently unstylish, and that this was offensive. Offensive in the same way that a show entitled Asian Math for the Causcasian Kid, or Afro-American Athletic Prowess for the Suburbanite would be deeply offensive to both groups.

And you are entirely correct that it is the corporate, mass-marketing strategy that is behind the push to make men's clothing like women's... because that means buying a whole new wardrobe every 2-3 years.

 

So, bread loaf-looking, round toed shoes are good? Don't forget the topys! :biggrin2:

 

ugh. In my mind there is nothing worse then the square toe loafer

 

Amen. That's part of a much larger trend to make men's attire more like women's attire. Men's clothing should be oriented towards dignity, power, action, self-confidence, and self-expression. Not demure-ness, subservience, luxury, delicacy, etc.

Well, neither sex should strive toward subservience in the 21st century.

 

My point was that the implicit assumption of QEFSG was that only gay men knew how to dress, and that straight men were inherently unstylish, and that this was offensive. Offensive in the same way that a show entitled Asian Math for the Causcasian Kid, or Afro-American Athletic Prowess for the Suburbanite would be deeply offensive to both groups.

haha, are you sure this is "offensive in the same way" as your examples would be? Who do you take to be the respective offended parties in your scenarios?

 

How about Well-educated Eye of Discriminating Taste Irrespective of Sexual Orientation for the Uneducated Guy of Lousy Taste?

I agree, but we're going to have to work on the title.

 

The ever-increasing domination of menswear by a feminine aesthetic, and even more importantly the wholesale incorporation of womenswear design and marketing practices into menswear, is the bane of well-dressed, and would-be well-dressed men everywhere!

Arnold Gingrich once wrote that when he first started as a kid selling clothes, he found that women could be sold with "that's what they're all wearing", whereas most men would say "good for them, now show me what I'm looking for"

You have to wonder how many pairs of those square toes, and the bowling shoes before them, were bought to the tune of "yes, dear"

To rant a bit further, I too was a little offended by the "Queer Eye" show and it's assumption that "the guys" pay no attention to clothes. And also by about half the sitcoms that show the male lead in untucked shirt with T-shirt showing, cap on at all times, and who view putting on a suit as equivalent to a trip to the dentist. (BTW, these same dorks can't seem to puzzle out the smallest repair, can't remember to pick up the kid at school, etc., but seem to afford nice houses, and their wives are bright and hot; do things work that way in your life?)

 

Although I didn't agree with every fashion choice on the show, I can't endorse beating up on QEFSG since that's what got me interested in quality men's wear.

 

Mondo Italiano?

Didn't the Italians come up with the pointy-toed shoe? There were periods of years when I couldn't find a shoe I'd even try on, let alone wear out in public. There seems a trend back to rounded toes that are not angled upward like the elf's style already noted. Those square, flat-toed monstrosities were not made for actual human feet. Must be the aliens or mutants amongst us that are buying them all up:icon_smile_big:

 

And they're wearing mantyhose, too ! :aportnoy:

 

Masc



I think this is a movement to immasculate men. There are many women that hate anything masculine, and unfortunately some of them work in the fashion industry. In the past, there were trends that had womens clothing trying to mimic mens. Now I am afraid it seems there has been a complete reversal. I see these young men wearing skinny jeans, girly haircuts, frilly scarves, etc, and sometimes I mistake them for young women, and vice versa.

 

Some of these trends are ridiculous. However, there are some traditional styles, like the gunboat, that look like Herman Munster shoes.

 

Well, neither sex should strive toward subservience in the 21st century.

I'd agree with that, but a good deal of women's clothing is still designed to play up that characteristic.

 

haha, are you sure this is "offensive in the same way" as your examples would be? Who do you take to be the respective offended parties in your scenarios?

I take all parties to be properly offended in those examples. Including gay men.